LWZ115 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: Children'S Book Council Of Australia, Nsw Law Reports, Shingles
‘Natural meaning’ and ‘ambiguity’
Repatriation Commission v Vietnam Veterans’ Association of Australia NSW Branch
(2000) 48 NSWLR 548
“The use of the word "ambiguity" in the context of statutory interpretation is not
restricted to lexical or verbal ambiguity and syntactic or grammatical ambiguity. It
extends to circumstances in which the intention of the legislature is, for whatever
reason, doubtful” [at 578 per Spigelman CJ]
The Ombudsman v Commissioner of Police (1987) 11 NSWLR 386
‘where a person complains..’
“the speeches of the Minister … cannot be used to create doubt where none exists”
[at 396 per Lee J]
s15AB(1)(b) and s62B(1)(b) ‘determine the meaning’
(ii) where the ordinary meaning…leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or
unreasonable
Re Shingles and Director- General of Social Security (1984) 6 ALD 568
– did the carer provide ‘constant care and attention’ to the child?
- was that ‘constant care and attention’ interrupted by the child’s attendance at
school?
- SM- Sought clarification from the second reading speech.
Limitations of the use of extrinsic materials
Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (Northern
Territory) (2009) 239 CLR 27
Re Bolton; Ex Parte Beane (1987) 162 CLR 514:
“The words of a Minister must not be substituted for the text of the law.
Particularly is this so when the intention stated by the Minister but unexpressed in the
law is restrictive of the liberty of the individual. It is always possible that through
oversight or inadvertence the clear intention of the Parliament fails to be translated
into the text of the law. However unfortunate it may be when that happens, the task
of the Court remains clear. The function of the Court is to give effect to the will of
Parliament as expressed in the law. .” [at 517-518 per Mason CJ, Wilson and
Dawson JJ]
Extrinsic Materials at Common Law
s15AB of the Acts Interpretation Act (Cth)and s62B of the Interpretation Act (NT) co-
exist with the common law.
CIC Insurance Ltd v Bankstown Football Club (1997) 187 CLR 384 at 408:
“It is well settled that at common law, apart from any reliance upon s15AB of the Acts
Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) the court may have regard to reports of law reform
bodies to ascertain the mischief which a statute is intended to cure….”
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Repatriation commission v vietnam veterans" association of australia nsw branch (2000) 48 nswlr 548. The use of the word ambiguity in the context of statutory interpretation is not restricted to lexical or verbal ambiguity and syntactic or grammatical ambiguity. It extends to circumstances in which the intention of the legislature is, for whatever reason, doubtful [at 578 per spigelman cj] The ombudsman v commissioner of police (1987) 11 nswlr 386. The speeches of the minister cannot be used to create doubt where none exists . (ii) where the ordinary meaning leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or unreasonable. Re shingles and director- general of social security (1984) 6 ald 568. Sm- sought clarification from the second reading speech. Limitations of the use of extrinsic materials. Alcan (nt) alumina pty ltd v commissioner of territory revenue (northern. Re bolton; ex parte beane (1987) 162 clr 514:
