The Continued Use of Private Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom

The published reports of 88 cases mentioning Private Acts of Parliament (PAs), heard in the higher courts of England and Wales and Scotland were analysed to assess the courts’ current approach to PAs. Fifty-six English and eight Scottish cases were considered suitable for further assessment. Encyclopaedias and textbooks stress the application of contractual approaches, the contra proferentem rule and the judicial use of the preamble when the courts interpret PAs. These texts also suggest that the approach to cases promoted by public bodies differs to that where the promoter is a corporation and that there is a different approach to PAs involving London which are regarded as Public/General Acts of Parliament. The validity of these suggestions was assessed. English and Scottish judges approached the interpretation of PAs similarly. It was of interest that a number of cases dealt with Acts that were confirming provisional orders, a type of legislation still used in Scotland. Although the judges often considered contractual principles of interpretation or applying the contra proferentem rule, in practise they were not invariably applied and when used there was no apparent difference to those Acts promoted by public bodies or in the case of “London” PAs. The preamble was used to confirm the judges construction of the PA and to establish its purpose. The general principle however seemed to be that the courts adopted the method best suited to give the Act efficacy. The numbers of PAs enacted has declined over the period studied reflecting the passing of Public General Acts whose provisions rendered the further enactment of some types of PA unnecessary.