Abstract
The recent High Court decision in Palgo Holdings Pty Ltd v Gowans¹ considers the long standing distinction between a security in the form of a pledge or pawn and a security in the form of a chattel mortgage. The decision in Palgo demonstrates that, despite the purposive approach to statutory interpretation, general law definitions may be adopted by the courts unless a different definition is included in the relevant statute. Palgo may represent a case where the court, as Lord Diplock described it, declares that Parliament has missed its target.²
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 83-89 |
| Journal | University of New England Law Journal |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 31 Dec 2006 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The Hit and Miss of Statutory Interpretation: Palgo Holdings Pty Ltd v Gowans (2005) 221 CLR 249'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver