#hra #law #public
In Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30 the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. What mattered in their view was the substance of the legislative provision being interpreted rather than the particular phraseology or form of words that were used. In order to make a provision convention- compliant, a court may be required to depart form the clear and unambiguous meaning that the provision would otherwise have borne. The court can interpret the language restrictively or expansively. It can read in words which change the meaning of the legislation.
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"
pdf
cannot see any pdfsSummary
status | not read | | reprioritisations | |
---|
last reprioritisation on | | | suggested re-reading day | |
---|
started reading on | | | finished reading on | |
---|
Details