I have got one quick question :
Section 3 of 2009 Act provides that " Provisions of this Act is not to be amend or repeal unless the consent of the British organisation is obtained.
The Amendment 2012 was passed and abolish all the fees from their previous Act. Although the British organisation was not consulted and it did not give consent to the changes.
Which Act in this case shall prevail ?
I am so confused of that. Both of Act went through Parliament.
Doktrine of implied repeal say's that later Act should be repeal but what if the new Act did fullfil requirements of the past Act ?
Turn on thread page Beta
Statute Law watch
- Thread Starter
- 30-12-2012 15:46
- 31-12-2012 18:44
The 2012 Act would prevail. The consent might have been obtained. Kind of hard given you haven't specified which act you're referring to, but the later act would prevail - Parliament can't entrench legislation and make it impossible/difficult for future Partliaments to alter or remove the old act.