Social:Interpretation Act 1978
| Act of Parliament | |
 | |
| Long title | An Act to consolidate the Interpretation Act 1889 and certain other enactments relating to the construction and operation of Acts of Parliament and other instruments, with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission. |
|---|---|
| Citation | 1978 c. 30 |
| Territorial extent | United Kingdom |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 20 July 1978 |
| Commencement | 1 January 1979[lower-alpha 2] |
| Other legislation | |
| Amends | Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 |
| Repeals |
|
| Amended by |
|
Status: Amended | |
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
| Text of the Interpretation Act 1978 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk. | |
| Revised text of statute as amended | |
The Interpretation Act 1978[lower-alpha 1] (c. 30) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The act makes provision for the interpretation of acts of Parliament,[1] Measures of the General Synod of the Church of England, Measures of the Church Assembly,[2] subordinate legislation,[3] "deeds and other instruments and documents",[4] acts of the Scottish Parliament and instruments made thereunder (added 1998),[5] and Measures and acts of the National Assembly for Wales and instruments made thereunder.[6] The act makes provision in relation to: the construction of certain words and phrases, words of enactment, amendment or repeal of Acts in the Session they were passed, judicial notice, commencement, statutory powers and duties, the effect of repeals, and duplicated offences.
The Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954[7] applies in the same way to Acts of the Parliament of Northern Ireland or Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Section 7
Section 7 of the act, concerned with service of documents by post, replaced section 26 of the Interpretation Act 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63).[8] It states that
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.[9]
Interpretation of the words unless the contrary is proved is discussed in the case of Calladine-Smith v Saveorder Ltd, as to whether the "contrary" means the contrary of the allegation that the letter was properly addressed, prepaid and posted, or whether it refers to the contrary of the deeming provision that the letter in question was delivered in the ordinary course of post. In this particular case, a letter was shown to have been properly addressed, pre-paid and posted, but not received. On a balance of probabilities the court accepted that the "contrary" to the deemed provision had been proved, the letter was not received, and therefore the deemed provision could not hold.[10]
Section 16 – General savings
The following cases are relevant to this section:
- Hough v Windus (1884) 12 QBD 224, CA
- R v Fisher (Charles) [1969] 1 WLR 8, CA
- R v West London Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Simeon [1983] AC 234, HL
Section 18 – Duplicated offences
Section 18 of the act provides:
Where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more Acts, or both under an Act and at common law, the offender shall, unless the contrary intention appears, be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either or any of those Acts or at common law, but shall not be liable to be punished more than once for the same offence.[11]
This section replaces section 33 of the Interpretation Act 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63).[12] Humphreys J. said that that section did not add anything to the common law, or detract anything from it.[13]
"... shall not be liable to be punished more than once for the same offence"
The words "same offence" at the end of section 18 of the act do not mean "same act" or "same cause". A person may be punished more than once for the same act.[14] Two prosecutions for a single false statement in a brochure is not oppressive.[15]
See also Williams v Hallam (1943) 112 LJKB 353, (1943) 59 TLR 287, (1943) 41 LGR 165.
Notes
References
- Halsbury's Statutes. Fourth Edition. 2008 Reissue. Volume 41. Page 796.
- Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice. 1999. Appendix A.
- Current Law Statutes Annotated 1978
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 22(1)
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 22(3)
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 23(1)
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 23(3)
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 23A
- ↑ The Interpretation Act 1978, section 23B
- ↑ The Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954
- ↑ Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 4-209
- ↑ Interpretation Act 1978: Section 7, The National Archives, 1978 c. 30 (s. 7), http://legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/7/enacted
- ↑ Calladine-Smith v Saveorder Ltd [2011] EWHC 2501 (Ch), [2011] 44 EG 108 (5 July 2011), High Court (England and Wales)
- ↑ Copy of section 18 from Legislation.gov.uk
- ↑ Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 4–123
- ↑ R v Thomas [1950] 1 KB 26 at 31 to 33, 33 Cr App R 200 at 204, CCA
- ↑ R v Thomas [1950] 1 KB 26, 33 Cr App R 200, [1949] 2 All ER 662, CCA
- ↑ R v Thomson Holidays Ltd [1974] QB 592, [1974] 2 WLR 371, [1974] 1 All ER 823, 58 Cr App R 429, CA
External links
- The Interpretation Act 1978, as amended from the National Archives.
- The Interpretation Act 1978, as originally enacted from the National Archives.
- Hutton, Sir Noel THE BRITISH INTERPRETATION ACT.
 |  |
