Reading words into statutes : when Homer nods

The grammatical meaning of a statutory provision may not always gel with the purpose of the statute. The court may strive to give the provision an interpretation at odds with its ordinary and natural meaning to meet the purpose of the legislation. On occasion, this may involve notionally adding words to, or substituting words in, a statutory provision. This process of “reading in” words demands that close attention be paid to the boundary between statutory construction and judicial legislation, particularly where a court is invited to carve out an exception from grammatically clear words. In Jones v Wrotham Park Settled Estates [1980] AC 74, Lord Diplock identified three pre-conditions to reading words into a statute. This article analyses the utility of those conditions within the context of the modern purposive approach to statutory interpretation and evaluates whether they remain sufficient guideposts for identifying the boundary between interpretation and legislation.

Final report on an inventory of flowing artesian wells in Florida: leading to the enforcement of sections 373.021 - 373.061 Florida Statutes 1957

This report published as Information Circular No. 21, together with the interim report published in 1957 as Information Circular No. 10, Florida Geological Survey, illustrates as completely as possible the situation that now exists among the freely flowing wells of the State. (PDF contains 40 pages.)

The Statutes of his Majesty's Province of Upper Canada in North America- Sir Isaac Brock, 1812

The Statutes of his Majesty's Province of Upper Canada in North America outlining the recruitment, administration and discipline of the militia.

Proposed statutes of the Caribbean Congress of Information Professionals

Includes bibliography

Statutes of the Caribbean Council for Science and Technology

Presenta los objetivos y estatutos del Consejo para la Ciencia y la Tecnologia del Caribe.

Spanish Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Google Search Engine... and a Flexible Reading of Copyright Statutes?

On 3 April 2012, the Spanish Supreme Court issued a major ruling in favour of the Google search engine, including its ‘cache copy’ service: Sentencia n.172/2012, of 3 April 2012, Supreme Court, Civil Chamber.* The importance of this ruling lies not so much in the circumstances of the case (the Supreme Court was clearly disgusted by the claimant’s ‘maximalist’ petitum to shut down the whole operation of the search engine), but rather on the court going beyond the text of the Copyright Act into the general principles of the law and case law, and especially on the reading of the three-step test (in Art. 40bis TRLPI) in a positive sense so as to include all these principles. After accepting that none of the limitations listed in the Spanish Copyright statute (TRLPI) exempted the unauthorized use of fragments of the contents of a personal website through the Google search engine and cache copy service, the Supreme Court concluded against infringement, based on the grounds that the three-step test (in Art. 40bis TRLPI) is to be read not only in a negative manner but also in a positive sense so as to take into account that intellectual property – as any other kind of property – is limited in nature and must endure any ius usus inocui (harmless uses by third parties) and must abide to the general principles of the law, such as good faith and prohibition of an abusive exercise of rights (Art. 7 Spanish Civil Code).The ruling is a major success in favour of a flexible interpretation and application of the copyright statutes, especially in the scenarios raised by new technologies and market agents, and in favour of using the three-step test as a key tool to allow for it.

Expanding cities and expanding waistlines: Urban sprawl and its impact on obesity, how the adoption of smart growth statutes can build healthier and more active communities

For decades, American towns and cities have expanded from their established cores into the surrounding rural areas. U.S. population has grown but the land that we use has grown at an even faster pace, and our country has now become a largely suburban nation. Americans moved and continue to move out to the suburbs in search of better lives – for clean and healthy living, for larger homes, and for better resources. In many ways and for many Americans, the suburban lifestyle has been a great success. However, there are some unintended public health consequences of urban sprawl that must be recognized. As most Americans no longer walk or bicycle, increasingly sedentary lifestyles now contribute to greater levels of obesity, diabetes and other associated chronic diseases. This thesis reviewed the impacts of urban sprawl on the public's health specifically, as sprawl relates to decreased physical activity rates and increased obesity rates. The health effects and their connection with sprawl were identified, and available evidence was reviewed. Finally, this thesis described legal and policy solutions for addressing the health effect through improving the design of our built environment and by recommending that governments adopt and implement Smart Growth statutes that incorporate a public health component and require public health involvement. ^

E. Committee to frame rules, directions, and statutes of the Boylston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory, 1804

This subseries consists of a paper notebook containing a handwritten draft of the report presented to the Harvard Corporation on April 30, 1804 by the Committee to frame Rules, Directions, and Statutes of the Boylston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory. The handwritten report provides a numbered list of rules related to the Boylston Professorship and is dated April 16, 1804. The report is followed by a certification signed May 1, 1804 from President Joseph Willard that he was unable to attend the meeting of the Corporation to discuss the professorship.

Draft of the Rules, Directions, and Statutes of the Boylston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory in Harvard College, [ca. 1804]

This original draft was probably written by Eliphalet Pearson (1752-1826) as a member of the committee charged with the task of establishing the rules, directions, and statutes for the Boylston Professorship by the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers. This draft is heavily edited and contains many cross outs through the text.