7

Maritime law has a lot of weird rules, but the normal rule of statutory construction is that scienter requirements -- intent, knowledge, recklessness, etc. -- apply to everything that comes after them, until a new scienter requirement is stated. That would leave you with a statute looking like this: A person liable shall not be entitled to limit his ...


6

Caveat Keep in mind that words do not have uniform definitions for all times and places and contexts. Words can have different meanings in particular contexts and can be defined in a contract or statute to have a meaning different from the common meaning. "Person" Usually Includes Entities Of Any Kind This said, usually the term "person" in the law refers ...


5

The legal question is whether a tax (state or federal) constitutes a "taking" for purposes of the 5th Amendment eminent domain clause. The Courts have always held that a generally applicable tax does not constitute a taking, so the income tax is not a taking. The Court came to this conclusion because the 5th Amendment takings clause was always ...


4

The direct/indirect distinction is less important than the general/specific distinction. Common law courts like those in the United States rely on the "general–specific canon," a rule of statutory construction saying that when two laws could be read to impose conflicting rules, "the specific provision is construed as an exception to the ...


4

"Recklessly", which is an adverb, must modify a verb. It can only be sensibly construed as modifying "committed" – the action is committed recklessly. The clause "with the intent to cause such loss" is what is technically known as a "sister" of the clause "recklessly and with knowledge that such loss would ...


4

The plain meaning of "any" is "all". That does not mean that that is how the word is interpreted under current US law: that can only be determined by inspecting the case law. In US v. Alabama 443 Fed. Appx. 411 (No. 11-14532-CC), fn. 2 states "Pursuant to § 1304(e), every alien eighteen years of age and older must carry a certificate of alien registration or ...


2

The definitions (in context) are: giving: cause or allow (someone or something) to have (something, especially something abstract) authority: the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience So: giving authority: cause or allow (someone or something) to have the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience ...


2

One consequence would be that rape or robbery of a pregnant woman which resulted in the death of the fetus (not the mother) would be first degree murder, since the death arises in the commission of, or attempt to commit, arson, rape, forcible sodomy, inanimate or animate object sexual penetration, robbery, burglary or abduction Premeditated murder of ...


2

I suspect that the main problem here is that the translation is too literal and does not reflect the rules in the Indonesian language regarding when you imply an "and" v. an "or" when two clauses are present in that format. The translation is not drafted in the manner that I would draft it if I were drafting a criminal statute in English and is ambiguous on ...


2

The phrase in question is clarifying that if the wall (excluding the support) is on one person's property, and the support crosses into another person's property, then it is not a party fence wall. Why make this clarification, given that if a wall doesn't stand "on lands of different owners", it can't be a party wall anyway? Architect's Legal Handbook: The ...


2

A loose construction seeks to apply the law to carry out its intended purpose, which may be narrower than the literal language of the law if it is inartfully drafted. For example, suppose that a trespassing law prohibits "entering onto the property of another without their permission." A strict constructionist might uphold a conviction of a FedEx guy for ...


2

A loose constructionist could choose to interpret a law in a narrow manner even if the literal interpretation is more broad. An example would be interpretation of the second amendment of the United States constitution: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be ...


2

The last part “and with knowledge that …” should come after “recklessly” or after “committed with the intent”, or modify both? The element of "knowledge" qualifies only the "recklessly" premise. The alternative premise of "intent" already implies the person's knowledge --even if inaccurate-- that his act would cause the loss, ...


1

As I have been reading judgements from CJEU recently I will try to answer: In this case "in particular" means that the list a), b), c) is not exhaustive. Simply, there is some space left for some unusual cases which have not even been identified yet. Therefore, arguing that passports of third-country citizens with residence card (not Article 10, 20 ...


1

Without details of the conflict in question, in Common Law systems, when two laws are in conflict, the law that was passed most recently will super-cede the older law (the logic being it was decided more recently and while not a repeal, still changes the law to the new condition.) only in the matter of the conflict (that is if new law applies to owning cats, ...


1

On some of the nuance that exists between those definitions: Strict constructionism & textualism: not synonyms. Scalia did not consider himself a strict constuctionist. Rather, he viewed it as a lesser form of textualism and argued that the words should be construed reasonably, not leniently nor strictly. Basically, his issue is with the consideration, ...


1

Here are some general explanations of the different terms. Strict Construction / Plain Meaning / Textualism The law means exactly what it says and nothing more. There is no wiggle room for interpreting it to mean things that it doesn't explicitly say. Loose Construction When interpreting a law take into consideration what it seems the law is trying to ...


1

On proper English construction "would cause" means that the state after the event is different from the state before the event as a result of that event. This is a really, really badly drafted clause. First 10% of what? The number of people in the faculty, the number of people in the larger party or the number of people in the smaller party. A faculty 20 ...


1

One view of contracts is that they are written by lawyers, for lawyers, so this clause contains no new information. Another view of contracts is that they state what the parties are agreeing to, and an author may wish to be clear on a point, so that the customer goes into the relationship fully-informed. Drawing attention to this fact is not harmful (it is ...


1

Statutory construction is always very context specific and often tries to capture the intent of the legislature in trying to craft laws. In this case, if you have both a receipt card and a certificate, if there is a reason why carrying both is important, the courts would probably consider the term any to be inclusive. If you are wondering if you need to ...


1

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. Officials serve until they are (1) replaced (which covers until after their successor has qualified) or (2) removed from office by legal (or inevitable biological) processes. If the successor is not appointed and qualified, the successor does not start in the job. This may mean the previous person serves a bit ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible