Territory Resources v Secretary  NTSC 12
Interpretation statutes invariably say something like, where a word or phrase is defined, ‘other parts of speech and grammatical forms of that word or phrase have corresponding meanings’8 – s 18A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, for example9.
This case (at [56-57]) describes how the Northern Territory provision10 works in practice. One, it extends to a noun where the verb is defined. Two, it yields to contrary intent. Three, it does not apply where the derivative word ‘is being used in a different sense’11 (three is merely a subset of two). iTip – it will usually be context and purpose which demonstrates a contrary intent or different usage.
This case is from Episode 37 of interpretationNOW!
8 cf Catterall  AATA 691 (at ).
9 Terms like ‘cognate expressions’ and ‘derivatives of definitions’ are used.
10 s 23 of the Interpretation Act (NT).
11 Treloar  1 VR 447 (at 464), Pearce & Geddes (at [6.66]) referred to.