Original Meaning

• Author: Ruth Sullivan
• Profession: Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa
• Pages: 100-111

CHAP TER 6

ORIGINAL MEA NING

A. THE ORIGINAL MEA NING RULE

It is generally assumed t hat the meaning of a legi slative text is stable.

Unless there is a reason to suppose that the meani ng has changed, the

current understandi ng of legislation is assumed not to di ffer from the

understanding that would have prevailed when the legislat ion was f‌irst

enacted. However, when this assumption is challenged, the courts must

decide whether to insist on the origi nal meaning of the legislation, which

is the meaning t he enacting legislature would have had in mind, or to

adopt the current meaning, which is t he meaning relied on by those

whose conduct or interests are currently governed by t he legislation.

In responding to this problem, Canadian cour ts disti nguish be-

tween ordi nary legislat ion, which (in pri nciple) is easi ly amended,1

and constitutional text s, which are not. In the interpretat ion of ordin-

ary legislat ion, the original mea ning rule prevails. It assumes th at the

meaning of legislat ion is f‌ixed when the legi slation is f‌irst enacted and,

once f‌ixed, nothing short of amendment or repeal can change it. In

the interpretation of the Charter and other constitutional documents,

the courts adopt a “dynamic” or “organic” approach. Under this ap -

proach, meaning is not tied to t he framer’s origina l understanding but

1 In fact, it is often ve ry diff‌icult to get amendment s on the legislative agenda,

which tends to be cont rolled by short-term political c onsiderations.

100