Judiciary-Poetry-Logo
JPoetry

WE SHOULD AVOID INTERPRETATION WHICH WOULD REDUCE THE LEGISLATIVE TO FUTILITY

Dictum

Nokes v. Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries, Limited (1940) A,C, 1014, Viscount Simon, L.C, staled at page 1022: “If the choice is between two interpretations, the narrower of which will fail to achieve the manifest purpose of the legislation, we should avoid a construction which would reduce the legislation to futility and should rather accept the bolder construction based on the view that Parliament would legislate only for the purpose of bringing about an effective result.”

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

SEVERAL PARTS OF A WRITTEN INSTRUMENT MUST BE INTERPRETED TOGETHER TO GET THE INTENTION

I agree with Mr. Sofola, S.A.N., in his submission that the court below was in error to have relied on clauses 3 and 6 of the lease agreement only and limited itself in the construction of the lease agreement to the construction of these clauses alone. The approach adopted by the court below is in...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

INTERPRETATION OF THE WORD “MAY”

In ADESOLA V. ABIDOYE (1999) 14 NWLR (Pt. 637) 28 @ p. 56, where the Supreme Court per Karibi-Whyte J.S.C., “The construction of the word “may” in provisions of statutes has always raised difficulties. This is not because of the impression of the word … because the word “may” assumes a technical meaning depending upon...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

GENERAL PROVISION VS SPECIFIC PROVISION: SPECIFIC TAKES PRECEDENCE

There is also the related issue and it is that where a Court of law is exposed to two provisions; one general and the other specific, the Court will fall upon the specific provision, in the event of an apparent conflict. – T.N. Orji-Abadua, JCA. Kabau v. Rilwanu (2013) – CA/K/179/2001 Was this dictum helpful?...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

SECTIONS OF STATUTE BE READ TOGETHER

One of the important principles in the interpretation of statutes is that the clauses or sections of the Act or statute should be construed together. – Nnamani, JSC. Savannah v. Ajilo (1989) Was this dictum helpful? Yes 0 No 0...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

MEANING OF “SUBJECT TO”

Megarry J in Clerk Ltd. v. Inland Revenue Commissioners (1973) 2 All E.R.513 at 520: “The phrase ‘subject to’ is a simple provision which merely subjects the provisions of the subject subsection to the provisions of the master subsections. Where there is no clash, the phrase does nothing; if there is collision the phrase shows what is to prevail.”

Was this dictum helpful?

“MAY” MEAN “SHALL” WHERE THERE IS AN OBLIGATION IMPOSED

OMOMZUAWO & ANOR v. UGBODAGA & ORS (2021) JELR 107021 (CA): “it is now trite in law that where the word ‘may’ is used but a right or obligation is thereby conferred, then the word ‘may’ is to be interpreted as ‘shall’ and is taken as mandatory. In the instant appeal looking holistically at the...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
No more related dictum to show.