Consequential Analysis

• Author: Ruth Sullivan
• Profession: Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa
• Pages: 209-217

209

CHAP TER 11

CONSEQUENTIAL

ANALYSIS

A. INTRODUCTION

In resolving problems in st atutory interpretation, courts appropriately

take into account the consequences of applying legi slation to particular

facts. Consequences that are judged to be good are generally presumed

to be intended and are regarded as par t of the legislative pur pose. Con-

sequences that are judged to be absurd or other wise unacceptable are

presumed not to have been intended. As much as pos sible, interpreta-

tions that lead to unaccept able consequences are avoided.

Two questions arise in the context of consequential analysis which

are diff‌icult to answer. First, when is a court entitled to label a particu-

lar consequence absurd or unaccept able? In other words, what sorts of

consequences are bad? And how bad do they have to be? Second, as-

suming consequences a re absurd or unacceptable, what is a permiss ible

response? How far may courts go in t heir efforts to avoid absurdity?

B. WHEN MAY CONSEQUENCES BE LABELLED

ABSURD?

In testing whether the cons equences of an interpretation are acceptable,

the courts work with norm s of reasonableness, fairness, and plausibil-

ity derived from the culture to which they belong. This includes legal