{"title":"COVID-19 and the Rule of Law","authors":"D. Greenberg","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab024","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44319435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has posed myriad brain-wracking questions to decision-makers at all levels. Viet Nam managed to curb mortality and morbidity to praiseworthy levels in the past COVID-19 waves, however, has now had its back against the wall amidst the recent exponential infection cases and draining medical resources. For swiftly flattening the curve, the legislature authorized the Government to take bolder steps where needed, even different from the laws. This article argues that while the empowerment comes from the goodwill of the legislature for the purpose of containing the raging outbreak, there remain procedural irregularities. This should garner more attention from the state authority to ensure the rule of law and legality of all state actions during the time of public health emergency.
{"title":"‘Authorized to Depart from the Law’","authors":"D. Nguyen","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab022","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has posed myriad brain-wracking questions to decision-makers at all levels. Viet Nam managed to curb mortality and morbidity to praiseworthy levels in the past COVID-19 waves, however, has now had its back against the wall amidst the recent exponential infection cases and draining medical resources. For swiftly flattening the curve, the legislature authorized the Government to take bolder steps where needed, even different from the laws. This article argues that while the empowerment comes from the goodwill of the legislature for the purpose of containing the raging outbreak, there remain procedural irregularities. This should garner more attention from the state authority to ensure the rule of law and legality of all state actions during the time of public health emergency.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48806272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the Cayman Islands, a British Overseas Territory, the proper understanding of the plain meaning rule (or literal rule) of statutory interpretation remains unclear. In its most basic iteration, the rule states that, where a statute is clear and unambiguous, the words must be given their natural and ordinary signification; there is no room for interpretation. That notwithstanding, to this day, even the meaning of the rule, as opposed to its application, still sometimes sparks debate in the Commonwealth. In 2015, a judge of the Grand Court in Cayman held that once a provision in a statute is clear and unambiguous, a court does not need to read the provision in its broader context. In a subsequent case, in 2018, a court of coordinate jurisdiction disagreed. It ruled that, even where a provision appears to be clear and unambiguous, a court must still read the statute in its fuller context in order to decipher the legal meaning in that particular context. This article discusses the plain meaning rule with a view to elucidating its proper understanding while questioning the appropriateness of its continuing nomenclature especially in light of developments in recent decades.
{"title":"The Plain Meaning Rule: A Quibble about Nomenclature and a Lot More","authors":"B. H. Simamba","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab021","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the Cayman Islands, a British Overseas Territory, the proper understanding of the plain meaning rule (or literal rule) of statutory interpretation remains unclear. In its most basic iteration, the rule states that, where a statute is clear and unambiguous, the words must be given their natural and ordinary signification; there is no room for interpretation. That notwithstanding, to this day, even the meaning of the rule, as opposed to its application, still sometimes sparks debate in the Commonwealth. In 2015, a judge of the Grand Court in Cayman held that once a provision in a statute is clear and unambiguous, a court does not need to read the provision in its broader context. In a subsequent case, in 2018, a court of coordinate jurisdiction disagreed. It ruled that, even where a provision appears to be clear and unambiguous, a court must still read the statute in its fuller context in order to decipher the legal meaning in that particular context. This article discusses the plain meaning rule with a view to elucidating its proper understanding while questioning the appropriateness of its continuing nomenclature especially in light of developments in recent decades.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44951493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The focus of this article is the well-known statutory construction principle ‘a statute is always speaking’. This principle has a long history and has been applied in numerous cases. It has always been said that social changes are rapid, and the judges may need to give an ‘updated’ reading to a statute because legislative drafters just did not (and could not) foresee everything. However, as time goes by, the ways in which the courts apply this principle do not seem to be exactly the same. Also, the range of factors that the courts will consider seems to be expanding as the case law shows. In particular, in the 21st century, the need to use this principle is reinforced in technology advancement cases due to the unprecedented speed of technological improvements. Illustrative examples are therefore needed to provide certainty and predictability to the application of the principle. This article aims to accomplish this task. It will scrutinize three types of technology advancement cases to understand how the principle has been applied in recent years in technology context.
{"title":"How Do Statutes ‘Speak’ in Recent Technology Advancement Cases?","authors":"Samuel Yee Ching Leung","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab020","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The focus of this article is the well-known statutory construction principle ‘a statute is always speaking’. This principle has a long history and has been applied in numerous cases. It has always been said that social changes are rapid, and the judges may need to give an ‘updated’ reading to a statute because legislative drafters just did not (and could not) foresee everything. However, as time goes by, the ways in which the courts apply this principle do not seem to be exactly the same. Also, the range of factors that the courts will consider seems to be expanding as the case law shows. In particular, in the 21st century, the need to use this principle is reinforced in technology advancement cases due to the unprecedented speed of technological improvements. Illustrative examples are therefore needed to provide certainty and predictability to the application of the principle. This article aims to accomplish this task. It will scrutinize three types of technology advancement cases to understand how the principle has been applied in recent years in technology context.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45011525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Epilogue","authors":"T. Curr","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab019","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42821790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This is an unprecedented Bill to deal with an unprecedented crisis. Over the coming months, every aspect of the way that we do things in Britain will come under strain. As in wartime, we will have to change the way that we do things, and when it is all over things will not revert to business as usual. Some things will have changed forever, and the way that we do business here will assuredly fall into that category. I am sure that everyone in your Lordships’ House wishes the Government well as they grapple with coronavirus. But democracies never give the Executive a blank cheque. As a Parliament, we must retain our critical faculties and, if we do so, it will help the Government and the country to get through this crisis together (Hansard HL Deb, vol 802, col 1659, 24 March 2020).
这是一项前所未有的法案，旨在应对前所未有的危机。在接下来的几个月里，我们在英国做事的每一个方面都将面临压力。就像在战时一样，我们将不得不改变我们做事的方式，当一切结束时，事情不会恢复到以前的样子。有些事情将永远改变，我们在这里做生意的方式肯定会属于这一类。我相信上议院的每个人都希望政府在与冠状病毒的斗争中一切顺利。但民主国家从不给行政部门一张空白支票。作为议会，我们必须保留我们的批判能力，如果我们这样做，它将有助于政府和国家共同度过这场危机(Hansard HL Deb, vol 802, col 1659, 2020年3月24日)。
{"title":"Of Landlords and Tenants: Property in the Midst of a Pandemic","authors":"Edward S W Ti","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab018","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This is an unprecedented Bill to deal with an unprecedented crisis. Over the coming months, every aspect of the way that we do things in Britain will come under strain. As in wartime, we will have to change the way that we do things, and when it is all over things will not revert to business as usual. Some things will have changed forever, and the way that we do business here will assuredly fall into that category. I am sure that everyone in your Lordships’ House wishes the Government well as they grapple with coronavirus. But democracies never give the Executive a blank cheque. As a Parliament, we must retain our critical faculties and, if we do so, it will help the Government and the country to get through this crisis together (Hansard HL Deb, vol 802, col 1659, 24 March 2020).","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41765272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Case for and against (Re-)arming Parliament","authors":"D. Greenberg","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47725817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Dei, Iryna S. Skliar, Anatolii Shevchenko, Andriy P. Cherneha, O. V. Tavolzhanskyi
Overcoming corruption is extremely important, as it is a danger to the state, society, and the individual. Of particular note is the experience of European Union member states that have implemented anti-corruption programs, achieved the necessary positive results, and laid the foundations for sustainable socio-political development, in particular in the context of guaranteeing national security. The aim of the study can be described as the analysis and detailed characterization of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the European Union. The methodological basis of the work is scientific methods based on the requirements of objective and comprehensive analysis of social phenomena of a legal nature. A number of general scientific research methods were used in this study. The following methods can be distinguished: semantic and system analysis, discourse, methods of induction and deduction, historical-legal and formal-legal methods, and others. The article offers a detailed overview and thorough consideration of legal instruments of the Member States of the European Union on corruption and the relevant anti-corruption legislation of the European Union Member States.
{"title":"Preventing and Combating Corruption in the European Union: The Practice of Member States","authors":"M. Dei, Iryna S. Skliar, Anatolii Shevchenko, Andriy P. Cherneha, O. V. Tavolzhanskyi","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Overcoming corruption is extremely important, as it is a danger to the state, society, and the individual. Of particular note is the experience of European Union member states that have implemented anti-corruption programs, achieved the necessary positive results, and laid the foundations for sustainable socio-political development, in particular in the context of guaranteeing national security. The aim of the study can be described as the analysis and detailed characterization of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the European Union. The methodological basis of the work is scientific methods based on the requirements of objective and comprehensive analysis of social phenomena of a legal nature. A number of general scientific research methods were used in this study. The following methods can be distinguished: semantic and system analysis, discourse, methods of induction and deduction, historical-legal and formal-legal methods, and others. The article offers a detailed overview and thorough consideration of legal instruments of the Member States of the European Union on corruption and the relevant anti-corruption legislation of the European Union Member States.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49620380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Self-driving cars, also referred to as connected and autonomous vehicles, are not only in vogue among technology and car enthusiasts (among others) but they have been broadly considered to form a new and disruptive means of transport. The benefits of self-driving cars are replete with stories of inclusivity, safety, environmental benefits, and social connectivity. However, the reality of the words ‘self-driving’ and ‘autonomous’ in the designation of this form of transport are not only inadequately defined, they appear to be actively misleading individuals as to the capabilities of the vehicle and the responsibility that they as driver or person behind the wheel have when in use. Tesla is at the forefront of this debate given that it not only sells an option for its vehicles of full self-driving capability, but it also uses terms such as autopilot which, we argue, lead to misunderstandings by the public and may have resulted, directly or indirectly, to fatal car crashes. We conclude this paper with a recommendation that legislative change is enacted through use of an existing international Standard which will provide the definition and guidance that is necessary for the benefit of all stakeholders.
{"title":"The Lexicon of Self-Driving Vehicles and the Fuliginous Obscurity of ‘Autonomous’ Vehicles","authors":"James Marson, K. Ferris","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Self-driving cars, also referred to as connected and autonomous vehicles, are not only in vogue among technology and car enthusiasts (among others) but they have been broadly considered to form a new and disruptive means of transport. The benefits of self-driving cars are replete with stories of inclusivity, safety, environmental benefits, and social connectivity. However, the reality of the words ‘self-driving’ and ‘autonomous’ in the designation of this form of transport are not only inadequately defined, they appear to be actively misleading individuals as to the capabilities of the vehicle and the responsibility that they as driver or person behind the wheel have when in use. Tesla is at the forefront of this debate given that it not only sells an option for its vehicles of full self-driving capability, but it also uses terms such as autopilot which, we argue, lead to misunderstandings by the public and may have resulted, directly or indirectly, to fatal car crashes. We conclude this paper with a recommendation that legislative change is enacted through use of an existing international Standard which will provide the definition and guidance that is necessary for the benefit of all stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41833503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Parliamentary intention is a central aspect of statutory interpretation despite the many questions that exist concerning its normative role and desirability. In Lacey v. Attorney-General (Qld) and Zheng v. Cai, the High Court of Australia sought to diminish the role of objective parliamentary intention in statutory interpretation by alluding to a need for interpretive principles to be based on an understanding of the broader constitutional framework. This article argues that parliamentary intention has an important role to play within the modern statutory interpretation approach as adopted in Australia. Particularly, it is argued that an over-reliance upon statutory interpretation presumptions as a proxy for interpreting the legal meaning of statutes as opposed to an inquiry to discern parliamentary intention as informed by text, context, and purpose, leads to questionable interpretive results. Parliamentary intention is also consistent with the broader constitutional constraints as alluded by the High Court with respect to constitutional values such as the separation of powers between the judicial and legislative branch, and statutes being a product of an exercise of legislative power by democratically elected members of Parliament.
{"title":"Parliamentary Intention: Deciphering Its Role in Statutory Interpretation in the Australian Constitutional Context","authors":"Kira Wong","doi":"10.1093/SLR/HMAB011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/SLR/HMAB011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Parliamentary intention is a central aspect of statutory interpretation despite the many questions that exist concerning its normative role and desirability. In Lacey v. Attorney-General (Qld) and Zheng v. Cai, the High Court of Australia sought to diminish the role of objective parliamentary intention in statutory interpretation by alluding to a need for interpretive principles to be based on an understanding of the broader constitutional framework. This article argues that parliamentary intention has an important role to play within the modern statutory interpretation approach as adopted in Australia. Particularly, it is argued that an over-reliance upon statutory interpretation presumptions as a proxy for interpreting the legal meaning of statutes as opposed to an inquiry to discern parliamentary intention as informed by text, context, and purpose, leads to questionable interpretive results. Parliamentary intention is also consistent with the broader constitutional constraints as alluded by the High Court with respect to constitutional values such as the separation of powers between the judicial and legislative branch, and statutes being a product of an exercise of legislative power by democratically elected members of Parliament.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2021-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48107713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：