Welcome to Lazarus

Please register to view all features

[Discussion] Definitions Act

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 13, 2018
Messages
626
Feather
ƒ4,126
In the process of legislating, it becomes necessary to stipulate what certain terms mean, and while they can largely be contained in the act in which they are used, it may become the case that they are used in multiple instances across a wide spectrum of acts.

Therefore, rather than repeat them, and/or face an eventuality whereby we would seek to redefine a particular term and in so doing, require multiple amendments to all acts which contain said-term, would it be more logical to write a Definitions Act
 
I don't think there is a need for this. If one wants definitions, put it into the act that the definition is being used in.
 
^ what Constie said.

Besides, what a definition is may be context sensitive. For example, the Mandate may refer to a participating nation in region as a "member", while an act regulating, say, the CLS, may refer to a "member" meaning a member of the CLS. It behooves us to just write good laws.
 
Archived at the request of the author.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top