AFTER. WOLFENDEN SIR,—Mr. Thorpe has it that Lord Parker had
the discrction to take judicial notice of the appropriate recommendation of the Wolfenden Report in inter- preting the Street Offences Act. But. had he?
Such Reports arc admissible as evidence of the former state of the law and of the mischiefs which were to be corrected (Odgers—Construction of Deeds and Statutes, 3rd Edition. p. 238). It is also true that reference to such Reports as a guide to the meaning of a subsequent statute was permitted, albeit re- luctantly, in one case where the Court in any case 'decided the Report had not been implemented (Weatherley 1947 A.C. 628).
The general rule, however, has been that such Reports are not admissible as aids to construction since the Bill as drafted does not always accept all the recommendations included in a Report and Parliament sometimes amends a Bill so as to exclude some provisions which were inserted on the basis of a Report.
Recommendation XXIX of the Wolfenden Report was, no doubt, grist to Lord Parker's mill. But was he, in law, entitled to refer to it, even obliquely?—Yours faithfully, 16 Forest Way, Ayr JAMES M. MILLER
Previous page
