Abstract
Abstract Values and beliefs pertaining to the best approach to drafting legislation change over time. It is therefore inevitable that, when engaged in the replacement of older legislation, drafters will seek to change the style to better reflect current values and beliefs. But how easy is it for courts to distinguish between a change that simply represents an evolution of drafting style and a change of substance? This article explores that question through the lens of two recent cases and asks whether drafters, in their zeal to modernize and improve, may underestimate the risk that their changes will cause confusion.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
