George Tanner, QC
In FAI General Insurance Co Ltd v Spannagle & Ancor (2000) QSC 002 Chesterman J said: (at para 21) “The Act and the regulations are in the modern style. No attempt has been made to articulate with any precision what the legislation intends.
cont’d
Different words are used to give
expression to the one concept and
any continuity in terminology is
avoided as is any consistency in the
treatment of the concept.
Instead one finds disjointed platitudes set forth with almost banal generality.
cont’d
In this wilderness of words two factors
appear to indicate that it is within the
power of Transport Administration to
renew registration retrospectively after
the effluxion of a period of
registration.”
cont’d
“It would have been relatively straight
forward to express the notion simply
and clearly but any requirement of
intellectual discipline is avoided by the
modern parliamentary draftsmen for
whom freedom of expression is to be
prized above comprehension.”
Drafting the Law – A Boring Job?
The Role of the Parliamentary Counsel Office
George Tanner, QC