Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Interpretation of Statutes

While interpreting an ambiguous provision of an Act, a court looks at the Statement of Objects and Reasons attached to the Bill when it was introduced in Parliament. What is the settled position on the use of this material?

The Statement of Objects and Reasons may be consulted to understand the background and purpose of a law, but it is not conclusive. It is not part of the enacted text, so it cannot override the clear words of the provision.

  1. AIt can be used to understand the background and circumstances of the legislation, but it is not conclusive of the meaning of the provisionCorrect
  2. BIt is binding on the court and overrides the language of the section
  3. CIt can never be looked at by any court under any circumstances
  4. DIt can be used only to enlarge the powers of the executive

Explanation

The Statement of Objects and Reasons is an external aid that explains the background and the mischief aimed at. It is not part of the Act and cannot override the plain words of the section. The option calling it binding is wrong because the enacted text prevails.

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