Skip to content

CA Intermediate · Corporate and Other Laws · Interpretation of Statutes

Mehta & Co. LLP was registered with a partner, Kavita, as one of its designated partners. A dispute arises as to whether a clause in the LLP agreement conflicts with a provision of the LLP Act that is a mandatory section. A lawyer relies on the principle that a specific statute prevails over a general one only where the two cannot stand together. Which principle correctly describes the approach a court takes when two provisions in the same enactment appear to conflict?

The court applies harmonious construction. When two provisions in one enactment appear to conflict, they are read together so that each is given effect and neither is made redundant. The other maxims listed do not provide a rule that one provision automatically overrides another.

  1. AHarmonious construction, giving effect to both provisions where possible so that one does not make the other redundantCorrect
  2. BExpressio unius est exclusio alterius, so the earlier provision always overrides the later one
  3. CNoscitur a sociis, so the longer provision overrides the shorter one
  4. DContemporanea expositio, so the provision that was drafted first is ignored

Explanation

When two provisions in the same statute seem to conflict, courts adopt harmonious construction and try to give effect to both so that neither is rendered useless. The other options misuse Latin maxims. Expressio unius means mention of one thing excludes others, noscitur a sociis means a word is known by its company, and contemporanea expositio relates to contemporary understanding. None of these makes the earlier or longer provision override the other.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Interpretation of Statutes shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Interpretation of StatutesFree diagnostic mock

More Interpretation of Statutes questions