{"title":"Lord Burrows on Legislative Intention, Statutory Purpose, and the ‘Always Speaking’ Principle","authors":"Jeffrey Goldsworthy","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmaa019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In his 2017 Hamlyn Lectures, Professor (now Lord) Burrows set out his opinions about statutory interpretation. Given his recent appointment to the UK Supreme Court, these opinions now have more practical importance than those of most academic theorists. One of his main theses is that the modern approach to statutory interpretation, which focuses on text, context and purpose, should not include any reference to legislative intention. He dismisses this as ‘an unhelpful fiction or mask that should be avoided altogether’. I show that this thesis is mistaken, internally inconsistent, and might in practice undermine sound interpretation based on fundamental constitutional principles.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/slr/hmaa019","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statute Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmaa019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In his 2017 Hamlyn Lectures, Professor (now Lord) Burrows set out his opinions about statutory interpretation. Given his recent appointment to the UK Supreme Court, these opinions now have more practical importance than those of most academic theorists. One of his main theses is that the modern approach to statutory interpretation, which focuses on text, context and purpose, should not include any reference to legislative intention. He dismisses this as ‘an unhelpful fiction or mask that should be avoided altogether’. I show that this thesis is mistaken, internally inconsistent, and might in practice undermine sound interpretation based on fundamental constitutional principles.
期刊介绍:
The principal objectives of the Review are to provide a vehicle for the consideration of the legislative process, the use of legislation as an instrument of public policy and of the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The Review, which was first established in 1980, is the only journal of its kind within the Commonwealth. It is of particular value to lawyers in both private practice and in public service, and to academics, both lawyers and political scientists, who write and teach within the field of legislation.