Jump to content

Statute law revision

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statute law revision may refer to the printing of, or the editorial process of preparing, a revised edition of the statutes, or to the process of repealing obsolete enactments to facilitate the preparation of such an edition, or to facilitate the consolidation of enactments.

United Kingdom

[edit]

History

[edit]

In the United Kingdom, acts of Parliament remain in force until expressly repealed. Consolidation of the statute book has been discussed since at least the 16th-century and the reformation.

Early efforts

[edit]

In 1549, the House of Commons sent a proposal to the House of Lords that the statute law "should be digested into a body under titles and heads and put into good Latin",[1] in imitation of Roman law.[2]

In 1551, in his Discourse on the Reformation of Abuses, King Edward VI, then aged 14, wrote:[3][4][5]

"I have showed my opinion heretofore of the statutes I think most necessary to be enacted this Session. Nevertheless, I would wish that besides them and hereafter, when time shall serve, the superfluous and tedious statutes were brought into one sum together, and made more plain and short, to the intent that men might better understand them; which thing shall much help to advance the profit of the Commonwealth."

These efforts, culminating in a proposal for bringing common law into the statute law,[6] were observed by Bishop Burnet as "too great a design to be set on foot or finished under an infant king".[7][4][5]

Revision of the statutes was regarded by the Parliament of England as desirable as early as 1563. For example, the Statute of Labourers 1562/Statute of Artificers 1562 (5 Eliz. 1. c. 4), considered by Courtenay Ilbert as one of the first Consolidation Acts, gave reasons for the expediency of consolidation.[5]

"Althoughe there remayne and stande in force pntly a greate nomber of Actes and Statutes concerning the reteyning departing wages and orders of Apprentices Servantes and Labourers, as well in Husbandrye as in divers other Artes Misteries and occupacons, yet ptly for thimperfeccon and contrarietie that ys founde and doo appeare in sundrye of the sayde Lawes, and for the varyetie and nomber of them, and chiefly for that the wages and allouances lymytted and rated in many of the sayd Statutes, are in dyvers places to small and not answerable to this tyme, respecting thadvancement of Pryses of all things belonging to the sayd Servantes and Labourers, the said Lawes cannot conveniently without the greate greefe and burden of the poore Labourer and hired man, bee put in good and due execution : And as the sayd severall Actes and Statutes were at the time of the making of them thought to be very good and beneficiall for the Comon wealthe of this Realms as dyvers of them yet are, So yf the substance of as many of the said Lawes as are meet to bee continued shalbe digested and reduced into one sole Lawe and Statute, & in the same an uniforme Order prescrybed and lymitted concerning the Wages and other Orders for Apprentises Servauntes and Laborers, there ys good hope that yt will come to passe that the same Lawe, beyng duly executed, should banishe Idlenes advance Husbandrye and yeelde unto the hired pson bothe in the tyme of scarsitee and in the tyme of plentye a convenient proporcon of Wages."

Revision of the statutes was demanded by a petition of the Commons in 1610.[8]

During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, Sir Nicholas Bacon, the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, drew up a scheme for reducing, ordering, and printing the statutes of the realm:[9][5]

"First, where many lawes be made for one thing, the same are to be reduced and established into one lawe, and the former to be abrogated. Item, where there is but one lawe for one thing, that these are to remain in case as they be. Item, that all the Acts be digested into titles and printed according to the abridgment of the statutes. Item, where part of one Acte standeth in force and another part abrogated, there shall be no more printed, but that that standeth in force. The doeing of these hings maie be committed to the persons hereunder written, if it shall so please Her Majestic and her Counsell, and daye wolde be given to the committees until the first daie of Michlemass Terme next coming for the doing of this, and then they are to declare their doings, to be considered by such persons as it shall please Her Majestie to appoint."

Bacon named twenty committees, each consisting of four members (one judge and three counsel) with an assigned title or division of the statute law.[9] This was considered for penal laws in 1584 (27 Eliz. 1), by Sir Edward Coke and Sir Francis Bacon in 1593 (35 Eliz. 1) and 1597 (39 & 40 Eliz. 1),[8] and 1601 (43 Eliz. 1).[9]

A letter from Lord Bacon, dated 27 February 1608, held amongst the papers of William Petyt, Keeper of the Records in the Tower of London and Treasurer of the Inner Temple, proposed a plan for consolidation using a manuscript collection of the statutes kept by Michael Heneage, Keeper of the Tower Records, which have since been lost.[9]

Speaking in Parliament in 1609, King James I, proposing reform to the statutes, speaking from the throne of:[10][11][12][4][5]

"divers cross and cuffing statutes, and some so penned that they may be taken in divers, yea, contrary senses... therefore would I wish both these statutes and reports, as well in the Parliament as common law, to be once maturely reviewed and reconciled ; and that not only all contrarieties should be scraped out of our bookes, but even that such penal statutes as were made but for the use of the time (from breach whereof not man can be free) which dos not now agree with the condition of this our time, might likewise be left out of our bookes, which under a tyrannous or avaricious king could not be endured. And this reformation might (me thinkes) bee made a worthy worke, and well deserves a Parliament to be set of purpose for it"

In 1610, the House of Commons, with permission of the House of Lords on 23 July 1610, petitioned the crown to appoint a commission to "make a diligent Survey of all the Penal Statutes of this Realm, to the End that such as are obsolete or unprofitable may be repealed; and that, for the better Ease and Certainty of the Subject, all such as are profitable, concerning One Matter, may be reduced into One Statute, to be passed in Parliament."[13][9]

In 1616, Sir Francis Bacon, then Attorney General, submitted to King James I a proposal "touching the compiling and amendment of the laws of England".[5][9] Bacon recommended a reform of all the statute law (and penal laws in particular), proposing that "the work to be done consisteth of two parts, the digest or recompiling of the common laws, and that of the statutes".[14][5]

For the common law, Bacon proposed three steps:[14][5]

  1. The compiling of a book De antiquitatibus juris.
  2. The reducing or perfecting of the course or corps of the common laws.
  3. The composing of certain introductive and auxiliary books touching the study of these laws.

For the statute law, Bacon proposed four steps:[14][5]

  1. "The first is to discharge the books of those statutes whereas the case by alteration of time is vanished, as Lombards, Jews, Gauls, halfpence, &c. Those may, nevertheless, remain in the libraries for antiquities, but no reprinting of them. The like of statutes long since expired and clearly repealed ; for if the repeal be doubtful, it must be so propounded to Parliament."
  2. The next is to repeal all statutes which are sleeping and not of use, but yet snaring and in force. In some of those it will perhaps be requisite to substitute some more reasonable law instead of them, agreeable to the time; in others a simple repeal may suffice."
  3. "The third, that the grievousness of the penalty in many statutes may be mitigated, though the ordinance stand."
  4. "The last is the reducing of convenient statutes heaped one upon another to one clear and uniform law."

The work to reduce the statutes into one clear and uniform law had been progress by himself, the Lord Chief Justice Sir Henry Hobart, 1st Baronet, Serjeant Henry Finch, William Noy, and others, by the King’s Command,[5] was described by Bacon as making considerable progress.[9][5] Bacon described this as "An excellent Undertaking, of Honour to His Majesty's Times, and of good to all Times",[14] and, as done in the Ecclesiastical Canons Act 1535 (27 Hen. 8. c. 15), and Canon Law Act 1549 (3 & 4 Edw. 6. c.11), recommended the appointment of commissioners to examine and establish ecclesiastical laws, named by both houses of parliament, to prepare bills for the purpose of consolidation.[9]

The commission most likely published a list based on this work by Sir Francis Bacon, held in the British Museum, of the statutes from 3 Edw. 1 to 2 Jas. 1, describing repealed or expired statutes, as well as suggestions for further repeals, changes, and consolidation bills to replace them, with detailed reasons for each included in table form.[9][5]

Lord Bacon's fall from grace in 1621, as well as other more immediate priorities on the parliamentary agenda, meant that his attempts at the revision of the statute law were not pursued.[9]

Commonwealth

[edit]

During the Commonwealth, in 1650 a committee was appointed, "to revise all former statutes and ordinances now in force and consider, as well, which are fit to be continued, altered or repealed, as how the same may be reduced into a compendious way and exact method for the more base and clear understanding of the people."[15][9][4] The membership of the committee included the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England, Bulstrode Whitelock.[9][5] The committee was empowered "to advise with the Judges, and to send for and to employ and call to their Assistance therein any other Persons whom they should think fit, for the better effecting thereof, and to prepare the same for the further Consideration of the House, and to make Report thereof".[9][5] On 26 December 1651, Lord General Fairfax, John Carew, Lieutenant General Charles Fleetwood, Major General Thomas Harrison, Thomas Westrow, Alderman Francis Allein, Colonel Algernon Sidney, Lord Commissioner Bulstrode Whitelocke, Lord Commissioner John Lisle, the Lord Chief Baron, Richard Lane, Sir Walter Ralegh, Colonel Henry Bennet, Walter Strickland, Augustine Garland, John Dove, Sir John Corbet, Sir Henry Heyman, Robert Dormer, 1st Earl of Carnarvon, William Bond, Sir Gilbert Pickering, Colonel Philip Jones, Sir Henry Mildmay, Colonel John Feilder, Colonel Nathaniel Rich, Sir Arthure Hesibrig, Colonel Richard Norton and John Cook.[16] On 17 January 1651, Colonel Thomas Blunt, Sir Henry Blunt, Josias Berners, Major General John Desboroe, Samuel Moyer, Colonel Matthew Tomlinson, John Fountaine, Alderman John Fowke, Hugh Peters, Major William Packer, Sir William Roberts, William Methold, John Mansell, John Rushworth, John Sparrow, Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, Sir Matthew Hale, William Steele, Recorder of London, Charles George Cock, Thomas Manby, John Sadler and John Berners were added to the committee.[16] They reported a revised system of the law to the House of Commons that year.[9] The committee reported on 20–21 January 1652.[16]

On 19 December 1653, a second committee was appointed to consider a new model or body of the law, consisting of Colonel Edmund West, Praise-God Barebone, Sir Charles Wolseley, 2nd Baronet, William Spence, Nathaniel Taylor, Arthur Squib, Samuel Highland, William Kenrick, Colonel Thomas Blunt, Sir Gilbert Pickering, 3rd Baronet, Augustine Wingfield, Samuel Moyer and Major General Thomas Harrison, with a quorum of five and the power to send for "papers, persons and records".[9][16]

Records of both committee, including proceedings and reports, were lost.[9][4][5]

Restoration

[edit]

After the Stuart Restoration, a committee was appointed in 1666 to "confer with such of the Lords, the Judges, and other Persons of the Long Robe, who have already Taken Pains and made progress in perusing the Statute Laws; and to consider of repealing such former Statute Laws as they had to be repealed; and of Expedients for reducing all Statute Laws of one Nature under such a Method and Head as may conduce to the more ready Understanding and better Execution of such Laws."[9] The committee consisted of the Solicitor General, Heneage Finch, Serjeant John Maynard, Sir Robert Atkins, William Prynne and others.[9]

Nothing came of the work of the committee, and this was the last recorded effort of statute law revision by Parliament for some time.[9]

18th-century

[edit]

Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the late 18th-century, raised questions about the system and structure of the common law and the poor drafting and disorder of the existing statute book.[17]

On 12 April 1796, the Select Committee on Temporary Laws, Expired or Expiring was appointed to inspect and consider temporary laws, expired or expiring.[18] The committee reported on 12 May 1796, resolving that it was "highly expedient for the honour of the nation and the benefit of all His Majesty's subjects that a complete and authoritative edition of all the statutes should be published", and publishing a Register of Expiring Laws and a Register of Expired Laws.[19][18]

On 2 November 1796, the Select Committee on the Promulgation of the Statutes was appointed to consider the promulgation of the statutes of the United Kingdom. The committee reported on 5 December 1796, making recommendations for the increased printing and distribution of public acts and for the improved drafting of temporary law.[20]

The work of both committees drew attention to the unsatisfactory state of the statute book. Following a resolution of the House of Commons on 20 March 1797 that "His Majesty's Printer should also be authorized to class the general and the special statutes (viz. the public, local, and private acts) of each session in separate volumes, and to number the chapters of each volume, together with a general table of all the acts passed in that session", the King's Printer adopted the classification for acts passed from the next session (38 Geo. 3) onwards.[21] This led to the distinction now recognised between public general acts, local and personal acts and private acts.[18]

Commission on Public Records

[edit]

The Parliament of the United Kingdom, formed in 1800, following the Acts of Union 1800 devoted much attention to the consolidation of public records.[18] On 18 February 1800, the Select Committee on the State of Public Records was appointed to inquire into the state of public records in England, Scotland and Ireland.[22]

Following the report of the committee and humble address to the Sovereign from the House of Commons, the first Record Commission was established on 19 July 1800.[18] Successive commissions were issued in 1806, 1817, 1821, 1825, 1831 and 1837.[23]

In 1806, the Commission on Public Records passed a resolution requesting the production of a report on the best mode of reducing the volume of the statute book.[18] From 1810 to 1825, The Statutes of the Realm was published, providing for the first time the authoritative collection of acts.[5] In 1816, both Houses of Parliament, passed resolutions that an eminent lawyer with 20 clerks be commissioned to make a digest of the statutes, which was declared "very expedient to be done." However, this was never done.[1]

Criminal Law Commissions

[edit]

In 1822, Sir Robert Peel entered the cabinet as home secretary and in 1826 introduced a number of reforms to the English criminal law, to modernise, consolidate and repeal provisions from a large number of earlier statutes. These acts, known as Peel's Acts, included:[17]

In 1828, Henry Brougham MP made a famous six-hour speech in the House of Commons, considered to be the longest in the history of Parliament, which paid tribute to Bentham and set in motion reform of the British legal system.[24] Following the fall of Wellington's administration, Brougham became Lord Chancellor and made codification a matter of official policy.[25]

The Royal Commission on the Criminal Law was established in 1833 and issued its final report in 1845, proposing a draft bill digesting criminal law and procedure.[18] However, the ambition for such a comprehensive legal was dissipating.[17] Lord Brougham introduced a bill embodying the digest, but it was withdrawn on an undertaking by Brougham's opponent, Lord Lyndhurst, that a second Commission would be appointed to revise it.

The Royal Commission on Revising and Consolidating the Criminal Law was established in 1845 and issued its final report in 1849.[18] In autumn of 1852, the Lord Chancellor, Edward Sugden, 1st Baron St Leonards, directed James John Lonsdale and Charles Greaves to prepare Bills for the codification of criminal law based on the reports of the Criminal Law Commissioners.[18] Two major Bills based on the work of the Commission covering offences against the person and larceny were introduced in 1853 and continued under Lord Cranworth. The bills made no progress, principally because of the unanimously unfavourable judicial reaction to the prospect of the common law being embodied in statutory form.[26]

The first Statute Law Revision Act

[edit]

At the start of the parliamentary session in 1853, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cranworth announced his intention to the improvement of the statute law, remarking that:[27]

"I think it may be safely said that it is not creditable to any country that its statutes should be in such a condition. ... The great number is of itself a circumstance that affords an irresistible argument for the necessity of doing something, but independently of their enormous quantity, there are other reasons which suggest themselves. They are in a most repulsive form: there is no classification, but they are huddled together in the most complex fashion."

Lord Cranworth went further, proposing steps towards a Code Victoria:[27]

"The mere enumeration of the statutes that have been repealed would be something; the consolidation of some of the statutes more easy to be dealt with would be something. To simplify our statutes and improve their style would be something,—would be a great deal. But I look further: I conceive there is no reason why this proposed step should not at some future time, some years hence, constitute the formation of that which I have always looked forward to as the most desirable, though hereto I have feared to be unattainable, a Code Victoria."

In March 1853, Lord Cranworth appointment of the Board for the Revision of the Statute Law to repeal expired statutes and continue consolidation, with a wider remit that included civil law.[18] The Board issued three reports dated 18 August 1853, 31 January 1854 and 2 June 1854, recommending the creation of a permanent body for statute law reform.

In 1854, Lord Cranworth appointed the Royal Commission for Consolidating the Statute Law to consolidate existing statutes and enactments of English law.[18] The Commission made four reports dated 10 July 1855, 5 March 1856, 11 June 1857 and 21 June 1859.

Following the Commission's second report, which recommended the appointment of an officer or board to revise and improve current legislation, the House of Commons resolved on 25 April 1856, requesting a "Copy of the Memorandum of the Attorney-general as to the plan of proceeding in Consolidation of the Statutes".[28] The memorandum, dated 2 April 1856, was published on 9 May 1856.[28] Attorney General, Alexander Cockburn, proposed a plan of proceeding for the consolidation of the statutes, remarking that:[29]

"In order to form a correct judgment as to the course of proceeding which it is expedient to adopt in the Consolidation of the Statutes, it is, in the first place, necessary to have a clear view of what is the true nature and extent of the work which the Commission is called upon to execute. It will then be seen how far what has hitherto been proposed is adequate to the magnitude and importance of the work to be accomplished. To me, I must acknowledge, it appears that the view which has been taken of the object has been too limited and narrow, and that the mode of proceeding has, in consequence, been far from commensurate to the magnitude of the undertaking.

It can scarcely be denied that the state of the law of this country is discreditable to us as a great and enlightened people. Partly written, partly unwritten, that part of our law which is unwritten, is to be gathered from the decision sand dicta of judges, dispersed over many hundreds of volumes of reports, or from the opinions of text writers, of various degrees of authority, contained in innumerable works; while the written law is scattered over thousands of statutes, strung together without any attempt at order or arrangement, and forming no less than forty ponderous volumes; the whole body of the law thus consisting a chaotic mass, to which the 'many camel-loads' of jurisprudence, of which the Roman jurists complained, hardly afford a parallel. A life of labour scarcely suffices to the professional lawyer to master, even imperfectly, this vast amount of legal learning; while to the body of the people, whose rights and duties are to be determined, and whose conduct is to be regulated by the law, that law is practically a sealed book.

The time is at length come for remedying, at least in part, this mighty grievance. Although it is still deemed too difficult a task to attempt to embody, in the more tangible form of writing, the floating rules of the unwritten law, we are called upon by the high authority of the Crown to devise means for reducing into shape and order the heterogeneous mass of written laws which now swell and encumber our Statute Book."

The Attorney General criticised the course of action proposed by the Commission, which recommended selecting particular sets or bundles of the statutes for consolidation, for not wholly digesting the statute book and for not expurgating the statute book of obsolete, spent, unnecessary or superseded enactments.[29] The Attorney General proposed alternative aims to the Commission:[29]

  1. To collect all statutes in force under appropriate heads, i.e., to consolidate.
  2. To arrange these heads under the different branches into which the whole body of law divides itself, i.e., to digest.
  3. To do this as a great, entire and comprehensive whole into a consolidated and digested body of statute law to be published at once.

To do so, the Attorney General proposed a plan of proceeding, which he suggested would be able to be done in 12-months:[29]

  1. To survey the whole body of the law under branches, divisions and subdivisions.
  2. To set aside and omit statutes repealed expressly or by implication, or which have expired.
  3. To present consolidating statutes to Parliament with a provision that all statutes not included be expressly repealed (with the exception of the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights, seen as a "profanation" to repeal).

An alternative approach, focusing on expunging obsolete laws from the statute book, followed by consolidation, was proposed by Peter Locke King MP, who was heavily critical of the expenditure of the Commission and the lack of results.[30] On 29 April 1856, Locke King introduced the Sleeping Statutes Bill, which implemented some recommendation for repeals made by the Commission.[28] This led to the passing of the Repeal of Obsolete Statutes Act 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 64), described by Halsbury's Laws,[31] and Courtenay Ilbert,[18] as the first act for statute law revision (in the sense of repealing enactments which are obsolete, spent, unnecessary or superseded, or which no longer serve a useful purpose).

In 1857 a Select Committee was appointed to consider the Commissioner's second report to improve the manner and language of current legislation. The Committee took evidence from Coulson, Ker, and Coode, but their proceedings were interrupted by the dissolution of Parliament before they had time to make a report.[18]

In April 1859, the Attorney General, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, introduced a series of bills to consolidate the criminal law, which had been prepared by the Commission.[18] The bills became Charles Greaves' Criminal Law Consolidation Acts 1861. Speaking in Parliament, Kelly said:

"A plan had been proposed to the Commission which had been to a considerable extent acted upon, and in accordance with which ninety- three Bills were then ready, or nearly ready, which would consolidate the whole of the criminal statute law, the whole of the mercantile statute law, and the whole of the real property statute law."

Pursuant to an order of the House of Lords dated 5 July 1859, the Register of Public General Acts, which had been prepared by the Commission and consisted of two volumes from 1800 to the end of 1858, was published.[18]

Further Statute Law Revision Acts

[edit]

By 1859, efforts of statute law revision faced wide criticism from politicians, legal academics and commentators, who focused on the high expenditure to date by various Commissions and Boards (£768,438 since 1830—1859), especially on the salary and motivations of the Commissioners and draftsmen, including Charles Henry Bellenden Ker, the proposed approach taken by the Board to proceed with consolidation before expurgation, and the lack of results to show for it.[27]

On 17 February 1860, the Attorney General, Sir Richard Bethell told the House of Commons that he had engaged Sir Francis Reilly and A. J. Wood to expurgate the statute book of all acts which, though not expressly repealed, were not in force, working backwards from the present time.[18]

This led to the passing of the Statute Law Revision Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 101), which repealed or amended over 800 enactments, the Statute Law Revision Act 1863. (26 & 27 Vict. c. 125), which repealed or amended over 1,600 enactments for England and Wales and the Statute Law Revision Act 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 59) was passed, which repealed or amended over 1,380 enactments.

Preparation etc. of revised editions of the statutes

[edit]

O. Hood Phillips defined statute law revision as "the reprinting of statute law with the omission of obsolete matter".[32]

Legislation.gov.uk uses the terms "revise", "revised" and "revision" to refer to the editorial process of incorporating amendments and carrying through other effects into legislation.[33]

Repeal of obsolete enactments

[edit]

The Law Commission said that statute law revision originally referred to the repeal of enactments which had become inoperative, in order to facilitate the preparation of a revised edition of the statutes. They said that they intended to adopt a more forceful approach by also repealing enactments which no longer served a substantial purpose, and that they hoped that this would also facilitate consolidation.[34]

Duty to prepare programmes of statute law revision

[edit]

It is the duty of the Law Commission to prepare from time to time at the request of the Lord Chancellor comprehensive programmes of statute law revision, and to undertake the preparation of draft Bills pursuant to any such programme approved by the Lord Chancellor.[35]

It is the duty of the Scottish Law Commission to prepare from time to time at the request of the Scottish Ministers comprehensive programmes of statute law revision, and to undertake the preparation of draft Bills pursuant to any such programme approved by the Scottish Ministers.[36]

What legislation effects statute law revision

[edit]

In 1971, the Law Commission said that not all statute law revision was being done by Statute Law Revision Bills or Statute Law (Repeals) Bills. They said that an example of this was the statute law revision effected by the Theft Act 1968.[37]

Ireland

[edit]

In the law of the Republic of Ireland, the Law Reform Commission (LRC) is involved in several types of statute law revision: consolidation of dispersed statutes, repeal of dead statutes, and "restatement" (publication of revised, current versions) of amended statutes. As regards consolidation and repeal, the LRC only makes recommendations, which are implemented by act of the Oireachtas (parliament). The LRC's remit under the Law Reform Commission Act 1975 is to make proposals for law reform, defined as "its development, its codification (including in particular its simplification and modernisation) and the revision and consolidation of statute law".[38][39] The Statute Law (Restatement) Act 2002, modelled on the schemes in New South Wales and Queensland,[40] empowers the Attorney General to authorise official restatements, which do not have force of law but are prima facie evidence of the state of the law.[41] After four pilot restatements, responsibility for restatements was transferred from the Attorney General's office to the LRC in 2006.[42] The Attorney General's electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB) includes the text of all statutes as enacted, each of which links to the LRC's corresponding revised version where available;[43] as of 12 April 2021 the LRC has restated 408 acts and two statutory instruments.[44] Repeal of dead statutes falls under the Statute Law Revision Programme, begun in 2003 in the Attorney General's office, transferred in 2012 to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, and retransferred in 2020 to the LRC.[45]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  • Law Reform Commission (July 2008). Statute law restatement. LRC reports. Vol. LRC 91-2008. Ireland. ISSN 1393-3132.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Gerald Gardiner, Baron Gardiner (5 June 1967). "Consolidation Bills". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Vol. 283. Parliament of the United Kingdom: House of Lords. col. 177–185.
  2. ^ Reeves, John; Finlason, William Francis (1869). Reeves' History of the English Law: From the reign of Edward IV to the reign of Elizabeth. Reeves & Turner. pp. 154–155.
  3. ^ Edward VI, King of England; Potts, Robert (1874). King Edward the Sixth on the supremacy : the French original and an English translation. With his discourse on the reformation of abuses ; and a few brief notices of his life, education, and death. Princeton University. Cambridge : William Metcalfe. p. 8.
  4. ^ a b c d e "Consolidation Bills". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Vol. 283. Parliament of the United Kingdom: House of Lords. 5 June 1967. col. 177–184.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Ilbert, Courtenay (1901). Legislative methods and forms. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 43–76. Retrieved 9 September 2024. Public Domain This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  6. ^ Burnet, Gilbert (1705). The Abridgment of the History of the Reformation of the Church of England ... The Fourth Edition Corrected. Richard Chiswell. p. 331.
  7. ^ Burnet, Gilbert (1820). Bishop Burnet's History of the Reformation of the Church of England. R. Priestley.
  8. ^ a b  One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Williams, James (1911). "Statute". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 25 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  9. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s Great Britain, Record Commission. Statutes Of The Realm Volume 1, 1101 - 1377. Vol. 1. pp. xxvi–xxvii.
  10. ^ England), James I. (King of (1681). Vox Regis: or, the difference betwixt a King ruling by Law and a Tyrant by his own will ... In two speeches of King James; to the Parliaments in 1603 and March 21, 1609 and in his Basilicon Doron. p. 4.
  11. ^ The Harleian Miscellany, Or A Collection of Scarce, Curious, and Entertaining Pamphlets and Tracts, as Well in Ms. as in Print, Found in the Earl of Oxford's Library: Interspersed with Historical, Critical and Political Notes. 1744. p. 12.
  12. ^ A seventh collection of papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England ... Printed, and are to be sold by Richard Janeway in Queen's-head-Court in Pater-noster-Row. 1689. p. 31.
  13. ^ Journal of the House of Lords. Vol. 2. H. M. Stationery Office. 1767. p. 661.
  14. ^ a b c d Bacon, Francis (1872). The Works of Francis Bacon. Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer. pp. 61–73.
  15. ^ The Journals of the House of Commons. Vol. 6. H. M. Stationery Office. 1802. p. 427.
  16. ^ a b c d The Journals of the House of Commons. Vol. 7. H. M. Stationery Offiuce. 1802. pp. 58, 74, 249, 250, 304.
  17. ^ a b c Farmer, Lindsay (2000). "Reconstructing the English Codification Debate: The Criminal Law Commissioners, 1833-45". Law and History Review. 18 (2): 397–425. doi:10.2307/744300. ISSN 0738-2480. JSTOR 744300.
  18. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Ilbert, Courtenay (1901). Legislative methods and forms. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 43–76. Retrieved 9 September 2024. Public Domain This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
  19. ^ Commons, Great Britain Parliament House of (1803). Reports from Committees of the House of Commons which Have Been Printed by Order of the House: And are Not Inserted in the Journals [1715-1801. pp. 34–118.
  20. ^ Commons, Great Britain Parliament House of (1803). Reports from Committees of the House of Commons which Have Been Printed by Order of the House: And are Not Inserted in the Journals [1715-1801. pp. 119–150.
  21. ^ Lords, Great Britain Parliament House of (1853). Reports from Commissioners. p. 197.
  22. ^ Commons, Great Britain House of (1799). Journals of the House of Commons. H.M. Stationery Office. pp. 201, 215, 410, 411, 701, 729, 752–753, 764, 790, 792.
  23. ^ Mullett, Charles F. (1964). "The "Better Reception, Preservation, and More Convenient Use" of Public Records in Eighteenth-Century England". The American Archivist. 27 (2): 195–217. doi:10.17723/aarc.27.2.c823476506851642. ISSN 0360-9081. JSTOR 40290358.
  24. ^ Vaux, Henry Brougham Baron Brougham and (1828). Present State of the Law: The Speech of Henry Brougham, Esq., M.P., in the House of Commons, on Thursday, February 7th, 1828. Carey, Lea & Carey.
  25. ^ Wright, Barry (2007). "Self-Governing Codifications of English Criminal Law and Empire: The Queensland and Canadian Examples" (PDF). The University of Queensland Law Journal. 26 (1): 39–65.
  26. ^ "Criminal Law: Codification of the Criminal Law: A Report to the Law Commission" (PDF). Law Commission. p. 7. Retrieved 10 September 2024.
  27. ^ a b c The Westminster Review. Vol. 67. J. Chapman. 1857. pp. 73–98.
  28. ^ a b c Comons, Great Britain House of (1856). The Journals of the House of Commons (PDF). Vol. 111. pp. 158, 190.
  29. ^ a b c d Commons, Great Britain Parliament House of (1856). Accounts and Papers of the House of Commons. Vol. 50. Ordered to be printed.
  30. ^ "Supply—Miscellaneous Estimates". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Vol. 142. Parliament of the United Kingdom: House of Commons. 2 June 1856. col. 865–880.
  31. ^ Halsbury's Laws of England. Fourth Edition. Reissue. Butterworths. London. 1995. Volume 44(1). Note 3 to paragraph 1227 at page 725.
  32. ^ O. Hood Phillips. A First Book of English Law. Fourth Edition. Sweet & Maxwell. 1960. Page 90.
  33. ^ Legislation.gov.uk. Glossary.
  34. ^ The Law Commission. Law Commission's First Programme on Consolidation and Statute Law Revision. HMSO. London. 1966. Paragraph 14 at page 6.
  35. ^ The Law Commissions Act 1965, section 3(1)(d) (as read with section 6(2))
  36. ^ The Law Commissions Act 1965, section 3(1)(d) (as read with section 6(2) as amended by articles 1(2) and 4 of, and paragraph 36(6) of Part I of Schedule 2 to, the Scotland Act 1998 (Consequential Modifications) (No. 2) Order 1999 (SI 1999/1820)).
  37. ^ The Law Commission. Law Commission's Second Programme on Consolidation and Statute Law Revision. Law Com 44. HMSO. London. Ordered to be printed 20 April 1971. Paragraph 16 at page 6.
  38. ^ "Law Reform Commission Act 1975". Revised Acts. Law Reform Commission. 5 March 2019. §§1, 4(1). Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  39. ^ Law Reform Commission 2008, p.6 §1.03
  40. ^ Hanafin, Mary (15 June 2000). "Statute Law (Restatement) Bill, 2000: Second Stage". Seanad Éireann (21st Seanad) debates. Houses of the Oireachtas. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  41. ^ "Statute Law (Restatement) Act, 2002". electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB). Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  42. ^ Law Reform Commission 2008, p.1 §2; p.103 §4.35
  43. ^ "Frequently Asked Questions". electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB). Tracking amendments to legislation > Where can I find the text of an Act with the amendments included (Revised Act)?. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  44. ^ "Alphabetical List of Pre and Post 2006 Revised Acts". Dublin, Ireland: Law Reform Commission. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  45. ^ "LRC takes over scrutiny of obsolete laws". Gazette. Law Society of Ireland. 19 Mar 2020. Retrieved 12 April 2021.

Further reading

[edit]
  • Jowitt. Statute Law Revision and Consolidation. 1951.
  • Strickland, P. English Statute Law Revised. Analysis of the effect of the Legislation of 1895 and 1896. 2 vols. 1896 - 1897.
  • Marshall, "Statute Law Revision in the Commonwealth" (1964) 13 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 1407
  • Carrington, "Statute Law Revision" (1890) 4 Timehri 226
  • Francis Savage Reilly. Statute Law Revision: Observations on the New Edition of the Statutes in Preparation under the Authority of Her Majesty's Government. James Ridgway. Picadilly, London.1862. "Method of Legislation". Papers and Discussions on Jurisprudence: Being the Transactions of the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science. London Meeting, 1862. Butterworths. Fleet Street, London. 1862. pp 23 to 29.
[edit]
Wikiversity has learning resources about Statute law revision
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Statute_law_revision&oldid=1259667340"