BENNION ON STATUTORY INTERPRETATION ... - Francis Bennion
BENNION ON STATUTORY INTERPRETATION ... - Francis Bennion
BENNION ON STATUTORY INTERPRETATION ... - Francis Bennion
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>BENNI<strong>ON</strong></strong> <strong>ON</strong> <strong>STATUTORY</strong> INTERPRETATI<strong>ON</strong><br />
Fifth Edition Updating Notes (Version 24, 25 Mar 2010)<br />
This principle was applied by the Federal Court of Australia in Switzerland Insurance Australia<br />
Ltd v Mowie Fisheries Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 231 and in Minister of State for Employment<br />
Workplace Relations and Small Business v Community and Public Sector Union [2001] FCA<br />
316„. It was also applied by the Supreme Court of Norfolk Island in Minister for Immigration &<br />
Community Services v Summerscales [2000] NFSC 4 at [37].<br />
Section 389. Expressum facit cessare tacitum<br />
Pages 1249-1250 Relevant Index entry: expressum facit cessare tacitum<br />
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry gave a good example of this principle in Kay v Commissioner of Police<br />
of the Metropolis [2008] UKHL 69 at [42]: „Where the Act contains a specific provision prohibiting<br />
certain processions, there is no room for implying into another provision a requirement which would<br />
have the effect of prohibiting a different type of procession by exposing the organisers to a criminal<br />
conviction and fine‟.<br />
Section 390. Expressio unius principle: description<br />
Page 1250 Relevant Index entry: expressio unius principle:nature of<br />
Code s 390 was relied on in Perrin and another v Northampton Borough Council and others<br />
[2008] EWCA Civ 1353, [2008] 4 All ER 673, at [32].<br />
Section 393. Expressio unius principle: words of extension<br />
Page 1254-1255 Relevant Index entry: reasons, duty to give [New entry, not in fifth edition]<br />
There is no general duty at common law to give reasons for an administrative decision,<br />
especially where statutory duties such as those imposed by the Freedom of Information Act<br />
2000 apply: Hasan v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [2008] EWCA Civ 1311, [2009]<br />
3 All ER 539.<br />
Page 1255 Relevant Index entry: expressio unius principle:extending words and<br />
Code s. 393 was applied by the Federal Court of Australia in Re David Harold Eastman v<br />
Commissioner of Superannuation [1987] FCA 188 at [29]-[30].<br />
Section 397. Implication where statutory description only partly met<br />
Page 1262 Section 397(1) Relevant Index entry: implication:statutory description, partially met, and<br />
See comments on Code s 397(1) by Arden LJ in Roberts v Secretary of State for Social Security<br />
[2001] EWCA Civ 910 at paragraphs 11-14.<br />
Page 1262 Section 397(2) Relevant Index entry: implication:statutory description, partially met, and<br />
Code s 397(2) was applied by the Federal Court of Australia in Switzerland Insurance Australia<br />
Ltd v Mowie Fisheries Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 231.<br />
Division Seven. Europe<br />
Part XXIX. Community law and the European Court<br />
Section 404. Legitimate expectation<br />
Pages 1278-1279 Relevant Index entry: decision-making rules:legitimate expectation<br />
„ . . . a claim to a legitimate expectation can be based only upon a promise which is “clear,<br />
unambiguous and devoid of relevant qualification”: see Bingham LJ in R v Inland Revenue<br />
www.francisbennion.com/5th-edn<br />
63