header-logo header-logo

04 April 2008
Issue: 7315 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

STATUTE LAW

R (on the application of Kelly and another) v Secretary of State for Justice Re Gibson [2008] EWCA Civ 177, [2008] All ER (D) 172 (Mar)

It will take very clear and unambiguous words in a statute before the courts will construe it as empowering the state to deprive an individual of his liberty.

There is no rule or principle to the effect that the courts will avoid a purposive construction on account only of the fact that the statute in question touches the criminal law. It follows that, in the context of criminal sentencing, the court may read words into a statutory instrument to correct a drafting omission.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll