1-5 of 5 results for subject:"Pepper v Hart"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.191 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.001 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Pepper v Hart"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Pepper v Hart"
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Following the decision in Pepper v Hart in 1993, if primary legislation is ambiguous or obscure the courts may in certain circumstances take account of statements made in Parliament by Ministers or other promoters of a Bill in construing that legislation. Until that decision, using Hansard in that way would have been regarded as a breach of Parliamentary privilege.
Following the decision in Pepper v Hart in 1993, if primary legislation is ambiguous or obscure the courts may in certain circumstances take account of statements made in Parliament by Ministers or other promoters of a Bill in construing that legislation. Until that decision, using Hansard in that way would...
Debate on a motion for the adjournment on parliamentary privilege. Motion withdrawn. (Inc ref to HC 214).
Debate on a motion for the adjournment on parliamentary privilege. Motion withdrawn. (Inc ref to HC 214).
What assessment he has made of the implications of the legal case Pepper v. Hart for the interpretation of the Landfill Tax (Contaminated Land) Order 1996 in the context of previous correspondence with the construction industry. - (Holding answer 30 January 1997).
What assessment he has made of the implications of the legal case Pepper v. Hart for the interpretation of the Landfill Tax (Contaminated Land) Order 1996 in the context of previous correspondence with the construction industry. - (Holding answer 30 January 1997).
What assessment he has made of the application of the principles of Pepper v. Hart to ministerial comments (a) in the Official Report, (b) in Ministerial correspondence and (c) outside the House. - (Holding answer 30 January 1997).
What assessment he has made of the application of the principles of Pepper v. Hart to ministerial comments (a) in the Official Report, (b) in Ministerial correspondence and (c) outside the House. - (Holding answer 30 January 1997).
What changes, if any, have been made in governmental and parliamentary practice and procedure in the light of the decision in Pepper v Hart, enabling the courts to have regard to statements made in Parliament when interpreting the meaning of ambiguous statutory provisions.
What changes, if any, have been made in governmental and parliamentary practice and procedure in the light of the decision in Pepper v Hart, enabling the courts to have regard to statements made in Parliament when interpreting the meaning of ambiguous statutory provisions.