4.5 THE EFFECT OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION KEY CONCEPT Judges will often be required to interpret a statute in the process of arriving at a decision in a case before them. When they do so, that interpretation becomes part of the common law and is likely to be considered in future cases. If a government does not agree with a court's interpretation of legislation, it needs to amend the legislation to ensure a different interpretation in future.

Creation of precedent When a judge interprets a statute, that decision creates a new precedent and the principles of stare decisis will apply to that precedent. Courts are expected to adhere to precedents when dealing with the same sections of the same statute in future cases, but this does not mean that a precedent is created for similar sections in other statutes. Each piece of legislation should be interpreted according to its own wording and purpose. Statute law will always override common law, so judges must always ensure that the interpretation of one section of a statute does not contradict any other sections of that statute, or any other legislation. Any precedent arising from the interpretation of a statute remains in force on the assumption that, if parliament has not made any changes to a statute after a court ruling, the parliament must be satisfied that the ruling is consistent with its intentions. A precedent created through statutory interpretation in one case can have an influence on whether a litigant will choose to take action on a different issue in the future, as the following case illustrates.

Words are brought to life The interpretation of a word or phrase in a statute does not change the actual Act; it merely clarifies the meaning of the word or phrase for future reference. When a generic word such as ‘weapon’ is used in legislation, it may be necessary to determine what types of items are included within this broad term.

Parliamentary action Decisions by the courts will sometimes result in parliament taking action to clarify an issue, or act to limit the powers of the courts to apply an interpretation that is not considered appropriate in today's society.