Where amending legislation abolishes an institution referred to in a statutory provision but fails to amend that provision, the court cannot substitute the name of the successor institution for the abolished one unless the third condition from Jones v Wrotham Park is satisfied — namely, that it is possible to state with certainty what words Parliament would have used. Where multiple alternative amendments are possible (e.g., substituting 'District Court', 'Commission', or abolishing the requirement altogether), the condition is not met and the provision must be applied according to its terms, even if this renders part of it inoperative. The distinction between reading down words of general application (as in Cooper Brookes) and reading up or expanding statutory operation remains fundamental.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 20 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.