7/25/2019 Extrinsic Materials

1/3

Extrinsic materials and statutory interpretation:

- Extrinsic materials are documentary materials that exist outside the statute

being interpreted.- Such materials are part of the background, or context, of legislation.- The materials may be relevant in providing insights into the purpose or object

of an Act.- Statutory provisions and principles developed by the courts have led to

further increases in the use of such materials in the interpretation of

legislation.- ourts and tribunals no! routinely rely on these common la! principles to

justify referring to extrinsic materials as part of the process of interpretation.

Use of extrinsic materials at common law:

- There are several di"erent types of materials that are #extrinsic$ or external

to the legislation under scrutiny but closely related to it. These include%

reports of parliamentary debates, executive documents, commission and

committee reports and international agreements referred to or relating to thelegislation.

Parliamentary and related materials at common law:

- &n Commissioner for Prices and Consumer Aairs (SA) v Charles Moore (Aust)

Pty Ltd '()**+ () //), the 0igh ourt a1rmed the rule that the courts

!ould not refer to reports of parliamentary debates for any purpose as an aid

to the construction of a statute.- 0o!ever, the 0igh ourt decisions in Wacando v Commonwealth '()2(+

( and Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) v Whitfords each Pty Ltd '()23+ (45

44 marked a departure from that traditional approach.

- &n those cases, 6ason 7 suggested 'at 34 in Wacando and * in Whitfordseach) that !hen a 8ill !as introduced to remedy a mischief there !ere

grounds for making an exception to the general rule that reports of

parliamentary debates !ere not admissible.- The 0igh ourt$s use of convention debates and referendum materials in the

interpretation of the Commonwealth Constitution has been considered in

several cases e.g. Cole v Whit!eld '()22+ (94 95, 24.

International agreements at common law:

- &f an Act purports to give e"ect to an international agreement, the court is at

liberty to refer to the agreement to resolve any ambiguity in the Act.

- 0o!ever, an agreement may be referred to although it is not mentioned inthe Act.- &t may also be referred to !hen the statute has been enacted before

rati:cation of the agreement.- Sometimes an international convention or treaty or part thereof is enacted

into domestic la!. egislation may also provide that a particular !ord or

phrase contained in it shall have the same meaning as it has in an

international convention or treaty. &n these circumstances, Australian courts

have taken the vie! that ;arliament has intended such legislation to be

7/25/2019 Extrinsic Materials

2/3

interpreted by reference to the rules applicable to the interpretation of

treaties, the principles governing the interpretation of legislation giving !ay

to those rules.-

7/25/2019 Extrinsic Materials

3/3

- The #threshold test$ described above is a limitation on the operation of s (4A8

compared !ith s (4AA. Section (4AA al!ays operates, !hereas s (4A8 can

operate to change an interpretation only if one of the conditions identi:ed in

sub-s '(+'b+ is met.- To this extent, s (4A8 represents a >uali:cation of the proposition, discussed

in the next chapter, that #context$ must be considered in the :rst instance.- Another di"erence bet!een the sections is that, although a court is re>uired

to apply s(4AA, the language of s(4A8 merely permits a court to refer to

extrinsic materials placed before it.

Bote% Cou can only use common la! to determine the mischiefDpurpose of the

legislation in >uestion. Cou can do this under the common la! !ithout the need for

uncertainty or ambiguity. ule% C#C #nsurance Ltd v an'stown ,oot/all Clu/ Ltd

'())*+ (2* 2/, /52. etermining the ordinary meaning of the statute is done

in relevance to s (4A8 of theActs #nter"retation Act *. Bote s(4A8 also allo!s

for the use of extrinsic materials in order to determine the mischiefDpurpose of

legislation.

Bote% Extrinsic materials cannot be used to re!rite the provision in >uestion. ule

from% +e olton- %x "arte eane '()2*+ (93 4(/, 4(*-4(2% The !ords of a

6inister must not be substituted for the text of the la!. ;articularly is this so !hen

the intention stated by the minister but unexpressed in the la! is restrictive of the

liberty of the individual. &t is al!ays possible that through oversight or inadvertence

the clear intention of the ;arliament fails to be translated into the la!. 0o!ever

unfortunate it may be !hen that happens, the task of the court remains clear. The

function of the court is to give e"ect to the !ill of ;arliament as expressed in the

la!.

Bote !hen referring to the case using extrinsic materials due to s (4A8'(+'b+'ii+- Act

leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or is unreasonable. Cou can cite case% eShingles and irector-?eneral of Social Security '()2/+ 9 A 492.