R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) [2002] 1 AC 45, a case concerning the admissibility of evidence in a rape trial, the law lords arguably seemed prepared to transform the meaning of the relevant legislation through use of the very strong interpretive power given to them by the HRA 1998, s 3(1). Lord Steyn, giving the main judgment, stated:

'After all it is realistic to proceed on the basis that the legislature would not if alerted to the problem have wished to deny the right to an accused to put forward a full and complete defence … It is therefore possible under section 3 to read section 41 … as subject to the implied provision that evidence or questioning which is required to ensure a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention should not be treated as inadmissible.'