Davis v Johnson: CA 1978

The court had to consider whether the Act protected cohabitees as well as wives. In doing so the court looked at whether it could look to parliamentary debates.
Held: Lord Denning MR said: ‘Some may say, and indeed have said, that judges should not pay any attention to what is said in Parliament. They should grope about in the dark for the meaning of an Act without switching on the light. I do not accede to this view . . It is obvious that there is nothing to prevent a judge looking at these debates himself privately and getting some guidance from them. Although it may shock the purists, I may as well confess that I have sometimes done it. I have done it in this very case. It has thrown a flood of light on the position. The statements made in committee disposed completely of counsel for the respondent’s argument before us.’ but (Cumming-Bruce LJ) ‘I am not alarmed by the criticism that I am a purist who prefers to shut his eyes to the guiding light shining in the reports of parliamentary debates in Hansard.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Cumming-Bruce LJ

Citations:

[1978] 1 All ER 841

Statutes:

Domestic Violence and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromDavis v Johnson HL 2-Jan-1978
The court was asked to interpret the 1976 Act to see whether its protection extended to cohabitees as well as to wives. In doing so it had to look at practice in the Court of Appeal in having to follow precedent.
Held: The operation of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Constitutional

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.200596