Template:Generalia specialibus non derogant capsule: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "A Latinism that dates back at least to 1884, if not necessarily all the way to Petranch, Caesar and Virgil, the canon of interpretation “generalia specialibus non..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A [[Latinism]] that dates back at least to 1884, if not necessarily all the way to | A [[Latinism]] that dates back at least to 1884, if not necessarily all the way to Ovid, Caesar and Virgil, the [[canon of interpretation]] “[[generalia specialibus non derogant]]” holds that a later, but more general, statutory provision does not override an earlier, more specific one, unless the later one goes out of its way to say so. The Earl of Selbourne LC, in {{citer|Seward|The Vera Cruz|1884|10AC|59}} put it this way: | ||
:''“Now if anything be certain it is this, that where there are general words in a later Act capable of reasonable and sensible application without extending them to subjects specially dealt with by earlier legislation, you are not to hold that earlier legislation indirectly repealed, altered, or derogated from merely by force of such general words, without any evidence of a particular intention to do so.”'' | :''“Now if anything be certain it is this, that where there are general words in a later Act capable of reasonable and sensible application without extending them to subjects specially dealt with by earlier legislation, you are not to hold that earlier legislation indirectly repealed, altered, or derogated from merely by force of such general words, without any evidence of a particular intention to do so.”'' | ||
Lawmakers — and | Lawmakers — and contractual counterparties updating [[relationship contract]]s — should be explicit if they intend to squish an earlier agreement. <br> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:47, 3 November 2020
A Latinism that dates back at least to 1884, if not necessarily all the way to Ovid, Caesar and Virgil, the canon of interpretation “generalia specialibus non derogant” holds that a later, but more general, statutory provision does not override an earlier, more specific one, unless the later one goes out of its way to say so. The Earl of Selbourne LC, in Seward v The Vera Cruz (1884) 10AC 59 put it this way:
- “Now if anything be certain it is this, that where there are general words in a later Act capable of reasonable and sensible application without extending them to subjects specially dealt with by earlier legislation, you are not to hold that earlier legislation indirectly repealed, altered, or derogated from merely by force of such general words, without any evidence of a particular intention to do so.”
Lawmakers — and contractual counterparties updating relationship contracts — should be explicit if they intend to squish an earlier agreement.