Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    IOS Abstract

    Uploaded by

    Rohan Vijay
    Vijay Rohan Krishna's paper examines the extent and scope of the legislature's power to create legal fictions in statutes. It defines legal fictions as assumptions of facts that are not true or probably false. While the legislature is competent to create legal fictions, courts must interpret them narrowly and not extend them beyond their intended purpose. Courts are bound to ascertain the purposes and applicability of any statutory fiction. The paper aims to clearly define the legislature's power to create legal fictions and the courts' duty to check that power and ensure compliance with the constitution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    IOS Abstract

    Uploaded by

    Rohan Vijay
    25 views1 page
    Vijay Rohan Krishna's paper examines the extent and scope of the legislature's power to create legal fictions in statutes. It defines legal fictions as assumptions of facts that are not true or probably false. While the legislature is competent to create legal fictions, courts must interpret them narrowly and not extend them beyond their intended purpose. Courts are bound to ascertain the purposes and applicability of any statutory fiction. The paper aims to clearly define the legislature's power to create legal fictions and the courts' duty to check that power and ensure compliance with the constitution.

    Original Description:

    ssup

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Vijay Rohan Krishna's paper examines the extent and scope of the legislature's power to create legal fictions in statutes. It defines legal fictions as assumptions of facts that are not true or probably false. While the legislature is competent to create legal fictions, courts must interpret them narrowly and not extend them beyond their intended purpose. Courts are bound to ascertain the purposes and applicability of any statutory fiction. The paper aims to clearly define the legislature's power to create legal fictions and the courts' duty to check that power and ensure compliance with the constitution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    25 views1 page

    IOS Abstract

    Uploaded by

    Rohan Vijay
    Vijay Rohan Krishna's paper examines the extent and scope of the legislature's power to create legal fictions in statutes. It defines legal fictions as assumptions of facts that are not true or probably false. While the legislature is competent to create legal fictions, courts must interpret them narrowly and not extend them beyond their intended purpose. Courts are bound to ascertain the purposes and applicability of any statutory fiction. The paper aims to clearly define the legislature's power to create legal fictions and the courts' duty to check that power and ensure compliance with the constitution.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    NAME: VIJAY ROHAN KRISHNA

    SEMESTER: V’ A
    ROLL NUMBER: 543

    LEGAL FICTION IN STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: THE EXTENT AND


    SCOPE OF THE LEGISLATURE’S POWERS

    Legal fiction is defined as:-

    1. A legal assumption that a thing is true which either not true, or which is probably
    false.
    2. An assumption of law that something which is false is true.
    3. A state of facts exists which has never really existed.

    A legal fiction is a devise by which the law deliberately departs from the truth of things for
    some reason. The legislature is quite competent to create a legal fiction, in other words, to
    enact a deeming provision for the purpose of assuming existence of a fact which does not
    really exist provided the declaration of non-existent facts as existing does not offend the
    constitution.

    In interpreting a provision creating a legal fiction, the court is to ascertain for what purpose
    the fiction is created, and after ascertaining this, the Court is to assume all those facts and
    consequences which are incidental and inevitable corollaries to the giving effect of the
    fiction. But in so construing the fiction it is not to be extended beyond the purpose for which
    it is created, or beyond the language of the section by which it is created. It cannot also be
    extended by importing another fiction. A legal fiction can also be interpreted narrowly to
    make the statute workable. The principles stated above ate “well settled”. But it must be
    remembered that what can be deemed to exist under a legal fiction are facts and not legal
    consequences which do not flow from the law as it stands. For example, a legal fiction
    created by the legislature in an Act cannot be widened by the rules made under the Act.

    The duty of the Courts in interpreting and ascertaining the nature of legal fiction has been
    beautifully articulated by James L.J. in State of Trav-Co v. Shanmugha Vilas Cashewnut
    Factory: “When a statute enacts that something shall be deemed to have been done, which in
    fact and in truth was not done, the court is entitled and bound to ascertain for what purposes
    and between what person the statutory fiction is to be resorted to”.

    The present paper is aimed at clearly defining the power that rests with the legislature in
    creating legal fictions in statutes and the extent of this power. Furthermore, the paper shall
    also deal with the duty of the Courts in keeping a vigilant check on these powers of the
    legislature and to ascertain whether the legal fiction devised by the legislature would be
    applicable; or valid with regards to the provisions of the Constitution. To that end, the author
    shall analyse the precedents set by the Supreme Court in its judgements and the principles of
    statutory interpretation prevalent in the Indian legal spectrum.

    You might also like