Before you speak, let your words pass through three gates: Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind?
Idea Transcript
Searching: 1 Databases
MY SEARCH HISTORY
MANAGE MY ALERTS
LOGIN
Welcome, guest
searching Humanities & Social Sciences Collection CHANGE DATABASES
Limit Search:
This Issue
This Publication
Anywhere
CLEAR SEARCH
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
Melbourne University Law Review Volume 35 Issue 1 (2011) Kirby, Michael Abstract: Statutory interpretation has replaced the analysis of judicial reasons about the common law as the most important task ordinarily performed by Australian lawyers. This was inevitable as the amount of law made by, or under, legislation increased and the room for the residual common law narrowed. The development has, or should have, important consequences for legal education and professional training. The basic principles governing statutory interpretation are repeatedly stated, without apparent disagreement, in decisions of the High Court of Australia. According to the author, they involve deriving meaning from close consideration of the text, context and purpose (policy) of any contested provisions. But the process is an art and not a science, as illustrated by reference to the divided decision of the High Court in Carr v Western Australia. The author accepts Professor James Raymond's challenge that judges should 'dig deeper' in explaining their real reasons for preferring one available interpretation over another. Without venturing into 'pop psychology', the author considers that deep-lying legal values can often be revealed and that any reversion to the former error of textual literalism needs to be resisted.
Peer Reviewed Citation only
More information about this publication
FULL TEXT PDF (BUY NOW - AU$4.00 + GST (187KB) )
Institutional users Login to access article
To cite this article: Kirby, Michael. Statutory interpretation: The meaning of meaning [online]. Melbourne University Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011: 113-133. Availability: ISSN: 0025-8938. [cited 18 Apr 18]. Personal Author: Source: Document Type: ISSN: Subject: Peer Reviewed:
Our products
Help and FAQ
News
Disclaimer
Kirby, Michael; Melbourne University Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2011: 113-133 Journal Article 0025-8938 Law--Interpretation and construction; Yes Database: HUMANITIES & SOCIAL SCIENCES COLLECTION