Presumptions

Presumptions

1. The presumption against legislation having extraterritorial effect. This means that an Act normally applies only to NZ unless clearly stated otherwise.

2. The presumption against infringement of international law, i.e. that Parliament did not intend to breach its obligations under international law.

3. The presumption that the Crown is not bound. If parliament intends an Act to apply to the state the phrase "This Act shall bind the Crown" is used,

4. A weak presumption against alteration of the Common law. When legislation introduces new rules, they are presumed to be in addition to common law principles rather than in substitution for them.

5. The presumption against a statute having retrospective effect. This means simply that a statute is not intended to affect things which have been done prior to the Act becoming law.

6. The presumption against imposing criminal liability unless (guilty mind) is proved.

7. The presumption that penal statutes are to be strictly construed. Today this is reflected in the standard of proof required in criminal cases, called 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

8. The presumption against deprivation of property. If Parliament is to empower the compulsory acquisition of property it must make that intention clear. Also, the court will imply that compensation be paid.

9. The presumption against exclusion of the court's jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is jealously guarded by the courts. If a citizen is to be denied access to the courts, this must be made very clear indeed.

10. The presumption against interference with the personal liberty of an individual. Examples are the rules which govern a citizen's search and arrest.

11. The presumption against implied repeal of an earlier statute by a later inconsistent statute. If a statute is in total conflict with an earlier one, the court must decide which one prevails. If it is at all possible the statutes will be interpreted so the two can coexist (The later Act may be seen to modify the eearlier Act rather than repeal it.) The courts prefer to do this because it is presumed that Parliament does not intend to repeal legislation merely by implication.