Chapter-4 The English Law and Parliamentary Debates Part-4-18

Chapter-4

The English Law and Parliamentary Debates

Part-4-18

The English common law rule against the use of parliamentary debates in the interpretation of a statute was considerably eroded by the case of Pepper v Hart . The House of Lords in that case ruled that, where the statute was ambiguous or led to an absurdity, parliamentary material, such as ministerial statements, could be used as an aid to interpretation, where the parliamentary materials relied on were clear.

The House of Lords considered that the move from an absolute literal approach to interpretation to a more purposive one, had created a climate in which the old rule of the exclusion of material from Hansard could be modified.

However, it seems clear that Pepper v Hart did not herald any sweeping aside of all exclusions of parliamentary materials. In a practice direction issued by the House of Lords in 1993, the limits of the rule in Pepper v Hart were emphasised, and it was stated that "supporting documents, including extracts from Hansard , will only be accepted in exceptional circumstances."