(1) In the interpretation of a provision of an Act, the interpretation that
will best achieve the purpose of the Act is to be preferred to any other
interpretation.
(2) Subsection (1) does not create or extend criminal
liability, but applies whether or not the Act ’s purpose is expressly stated
in the Act .
(3) To remove any doubt, it is declared that this section
applies to an Act passed after 30 June 1991 despite any presumption or rule of
interpretation.
Example—
There is judicial authority for a rule of
interpretation that taxing legislation is to be interpreted strictly and in a
taxpayer’s favour (for example, see Partington v AG (1869) LR 4 HL 100 at
122). Despite such a possible rule, this section requires a provision imposing
taxation to be interpreted in the way that best achieves the Act ’s purpose,
whether or not to do so would be in a taxpayer’s favour.
