When statutory language is re-enacted in a different form, it is generally taken to indicate a different meaning13. This is a natural and common-sense presumption of ordinary usage. Insertion of the word ‘undue’ before ‘hardship’ in the statute, the court said (at ), showed parliament’s determination to impose a ‘greater stringency’.
In some jurisdictions (but not Victoria), however, provisions aim to preserve existing meaning where a ‘clearer style’ is used14. A provision of this kind would not have changed the outcome in this case. iTip – always check for ‘clearer style’ provisions where laws are re-enacted in different language15.
This case is from Episode 44 of interpretationNOW!
13 Baini  HCA 59 (at [42-43]), Hunter (1990) 31 SCR 7 (at 10).
14 s 15AC of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, cf s 1–3(2) of ITAA97.