Web18 de out. de 2015 · Higgon v O’Dea [1962] WAR 140, a provision badly drafted which on a literal reading it meant that anyone who ran a shop or amusement arcade could not let a 16 year old enter their premise; leading to an absurd result. WebHiggon v O’Dea [1962] WAR 140 In that case the Supreme Court of Western Australia had to interpret s 84 of the Police Act 1892 (WA), which penalised every person who knowingly allowed children under the age of 16 years to enter and remain in any ‘shop or other place of public resort’ that they own The underlying aim of the statute was to …
Assignment Question 2 - Question 2 – Statutory ... - StuDocu
WebLiteral rule –reading the text of act in context ---Higgon v O’Dea [1962] WAR 140--Illustration of the application of this strict approachPolice Act 1892 (WA)An offence to … Web23 de set. de 2015 · This week I have read about how common law approaches which are still being used by the Courts because the statutory rules have not be codified by the Acts of Interpretation. Common law and statutes Originally in English law there were few statutes and Court decisions formed precedents which other Courts followed; thereby, building up… insulated lunch totes with shoulder strap
George Higginson - Wikipedia
WebThe words mean what they are and we apply them, however inconvenient is the Amalgamated Society of Engineers v Adelaide Steamship Co ltd 1920 Major defect is … http://www.lapphap.vn/pages/tintuc/printpage.aspx?tintucID=207849 Webmeaning (Higgon v O’Dea) o Public is entitled to conduct themselves on the basis that law’s commands have meaning and effect according to ordinary grammar and usage (Alcan) - Golden Rule: It’s permissible to depart from the grammatical and ordinary meaning to extent that it removes the absurdity/inconsistency (Grey v Pearson) job outlook for technical writer