Retrospective replacement

LM Investment Management v EY [2017] QSC 73

This case (at [118]) refers to a common law rule that, where a repeal is followed by a re-enactment in substantially the same terms, the new provision ‘may be construed to apply retrospectively’11

This rule is essentially remedial in nature.  It protects the validity of things done under repealed provisions – an important thing in practice.  Legislation in most jurisdictions nowadays deals with the problem directly – for example, s 7 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, which applies since 2011 to both repeals and amendments12.  However, the common law rule can still be relevant in some state contexts.

This case is from Episode 25 of interpretationNOW!


11  SEQACLS [2005] QSC 88 (at [58]), Marquet [2003] HCA 67 (at [126]).

12  Pearce & Geddes (at [6.9]).