Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    Statutes Are Valid

    Uploaded by

    BHUVANA THANGAMANI
    - Statutes are presumed to be valid and constitutional unless proven otherwise. There is a strong presumption in favor of upholding the validity of laws enacted by the legislature. - The burden of proving a law is unconstitutional lies with the person challenging it. Courts will strive to interpret laws in a way that upholds their constitutionality through reasonable construction. - If a law is open to two interpretations, the court will prefer the interpretation that validates the statute and avoids unconstitutionality.

    Copyright:

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

    Statutes Are Valid

    Uploaded by

    BHUVANA THANGAMANI
    12 views10 pages
    - Statutes are presumed to be valid and constitutional unless proven otherwise. There is a strong presumption in favor of upholding the validity of laws enacted by the legislature. - The burden of proving a law is unconstitutional lies with the person challenging it. Courts will strive to interpret laws in a way that upholds their constitutionality through reasonable construction. - If a law is open to two interpretations, the court will prefer the interpretation that validates the statute and avoids unconstitutionality.

    Original Description:

    presumption

    Original Title

    Statutes are valid

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Statutes are presumed to be valid and constitutional unless proven otherwise. There is a strong presumption in favor of upholding the validity of laws enacted by the legislature. - The burden of proving a law is unconstitutional lies with the person challenging it. Courts will strive to interpret laws in a way that upholds their constitutionality through reasonable construction. - If a law is open to two interpretations, the court will prefer the interpretation that validates the statute and avoids unconstitutionality.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    12 views10 pages

    Statutes Are Valid

    Uploaded by

    BHUVANA THANGAMANI
    - Statutes are presumed to be valid and constitutional unless proven otherwise. There is a strong presumption in favor of upholding the validity of laws enacted by the legislature. - The burden of proving a law is unconstitutional lies with the person challenging it. Courts will strive to interpret laws in a way that upholds their constitutionality through reasonable construction. - If a law is open to two interpretations, the court will prefer the interpretation that validates the statute and avoids unconstitutionality.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 10

    Statutes are Valid

    - Every statute enacted by the legislature is


    considered to be valid.
    - There is strong presumption in favor of the
    validity of the an enactment.
    - It is presumed that every law is able to pass the “
    Test of Constitutionality”.
    - Therefore a law which Is inconsistent with the
    constitution cant survive and the court shall not
    hesitate to strike down such law.
    - While interpret ting a statute or a provision thereof.
    The courts have to proceed with the presumption that a
    particular law is ultra wires and does not confront the
    constitution.
    - Therefore the court shall not invalidate a law on the
    ground:
    a. Of unconstitutionality unless strong reasons exist to do
    so.
    - The burden of proving that a law is ultravires the
    constitution lies on the person who challenges the
    constitutionality of that law
    - unless, the contrary is established beyond doubt,
    the court shall uphold the law.
    - But it would be totally wrong if the court pre
    determines that the impugned law is bad and then
    proceed to interpret it.
    - It is also to be presumed that the power conferred
    shall be exercised for the purpose for which It has
    been conferred and shall be exercised reasonably
    although they may not be the guidelines in the Act
    in this respect.
    - If the words used in the language of an
    enactment are capable of bearing more than one
    meaning and as a result, the language gives out 2
    different interpretations, then such an
    interpretations shall be adopted by the court
    which will uphold the validity of the statute.
    - The construction which would lead to
    unconstitutionality of a statute must be avoided.
     Where 2 alternative constructions are reasonably
    possible one which validates the statutes should
    be preferred.
     If some one challenges the constitutionality of a
    law the burden of proof lies on him to show that
    there is clear violation of the constitutional
    provision.
    Case Laws

    1. K . Anjainah v Chandraiah K
    - The apex court held that it is a cardinal principle of
    construction that the statute and the rule or
    regulation must be held to be constitutionally
    valid unless and until it is established that they
    isolate any specific provision of the constitution .
    2. In U.P Power Corporation Ltd v Ajodhya Prasad
    Mishra.
    - It was held that a court of law by applying
    doctrine of reasonable construction than
    accepting an interpretation which may make such
    provision unsustainable and ultravires the
    constitution.
    3. In M Rathinaswami v State of T.N
    - It was held that the court should make every
    effort to save a statute from becoming
    unconstitutional.
    - A restricted or extended interpretation of the
    statute has to be given to save a statutory
    provision form the vice of the constitutionality of
    the available interpretations, court must prefer
    the one which makes the statute constitutional.
    4. In Modern Dental College & Research Centre v
    State of M.P
    - It was held that if literal interpretation make
    statute unconstitutional being contrary to laid
    down the law, reading down the statute to sustain
    its validity is permissible.

    You might also like