Inland Revenue Commissioners v Garland
[1981] STC 46419811 min read
The case in brief30-second read
- Facts
- Statute provided exemption for a specified list of items. Garland claimed exemption for an item not in the list but arguably of similar character. Revenue relied on expressio unius to deny the claim.
- Issue
- Whether an item omitted from a statutory list of exemptions can be read in by analogy.
- Held
- Expressio unius est exclusio alterius: the express mention of specific items implies deliberate exclusion of unlisted items.
- Principle
- The expressio unius est exclusio alterius maxim (expression of one thing implies exclusion of another) applies where a statute lists specific items and omits others. The omission is presumed deliberate. However, the maxim is merely an aid and cannot override clear legislative intent shown by context.
Facts
- Statute provided exemption for a specified list of items
- Garland claimed exemption for an item not in the list but arguably of similar character
- Revenue relied on expressio unius to deny the claim
Issue
- Whether an item omitted from a statutory list of exemptions can be read in by analogy.
Held
- Expressio unius est exclusio alterius: the express mention of specific items implies deliberate exclusion of unlisted items
- Parliament's list is treated as exhaustive, not illustrative
- In a taxing statute, this presumption is particularly strong
- Exemption denied
Ratio decidendi
Where a statute expressly enumerates certain things, the omission of others is presumed deliberate (expressio unius est exclusio alterius). This maxim operates with particular force in taxing statutes where exemptions are to be strictly construed.
Exam use
How to use it in an answer
- Authority for expressio unius in statutory interpretation
- Applicable in both taxing and general statutes
- Key line: "In IRC v. Garland (1981), the court applied expressio unius est exclusio alterius, holding that Parliament's express listing of specific exemptions implies deliberate exclusion of unlisted items."
Cite this
Citation
Inland Revenue Commissioners v. Garland [1981] STC 464Reported: [1981] STC 464. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.