Two Victorian cases make key points on remedial and beneficial legislation. In the first, Croft J (at [39-41]) notes that, while remedial laws ‘should be given a beneficial construction’9, this does not allow a court ‘to transcend express words … or to disregard the fundamental structure and approach of legislation’10.
In the second, Engelfield JR (at [38-40]) says that, while the overall purpose may be remedial, the ‘particular purpose of each provision must be identified’11. A provision of limitation does ‘not call for artificial extensions’. iTip – that remedial legislation is to be read beneficially in line with purpose confers no open licence on the interpreter.
This principle is from Episode 85 of interpretation NOW!