Maxim of generalia specialibus non derogant - Indian Laws - General

Maxim of generalia specialibus non derogant It is well established that when a general law and a special law dealing with some aspect dealt with by the general law are in question, the rule adopted and applied is one of harmonious construction whereby the general law, to the extent dealt with by the special law, is impliedly repealed. This principle finds its origins in the latin maxim of generalia specialibus non derogant, i.e., general law yields to special law should they operate in the same field on same subject. (Vepa P. Sarathi, Interpretation of Statutes, 5th Ed., Eastern Book Company; N. S. Bindra s Interpretation of Statutes, 8th Ed., The Law Book Company; Craies on Statute Law, S.G.G.Edkar, 7th Ed., Sweet Maxwell; Justice G.P. Singh, Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 13th Ed., LexisNexis; Craies on Legislation, Daniel Greenberg, 9th Ed., Thomson Sweet Maxwell, Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Ed., Lexis Nexis). Generally, the principle has found vast application in cases of there being two statutes: general or specific with the latter treating the common subject matter more specifically or minutely than the former. Corpus Juris Secundum, 82 C.J.S. Statutes 482 states that when construing a general and a specific statute pertaining to the same topic, it is necessary to consider the statutes as consistent with one another and such statutes therefore should be harmonized, if possible, with the objective of giving effect to a consistent legislative policy. On the other hand, where a general statute and a specific statute relating to the same subject matter cannot be reconciled, the special or specific statute ordinarily will control. The provision more specifically directed to the matter at issue prevails as an exception to or qualification of the provision which is more general in nature, provided that the specific or special statute clearly includes the matter in controversy. (Edmond v. U.S., 520 U.S. 651, Warden, Lewisburg Penitentiary v. Marrero, 417 U.S. 653) The maxim generalia specialibus non derogant is dealt with in Volume 44 (1) of the 4th ed. of Halsbury's Laws of England at paragraph 1300 as follows: The principle descends clearly from decisions of the House of Lords in Seward v. Owner of The Vera Cruz , (1884) 10 App Cas 59 and the Privy Council in Barker v Edger, [1898] AC 748 and has been affirmed and put into effect on many occasions.... If Parliament has considered all the circumstances of, and made special provision for, a particular case, the presumption is that a subsequent enactment of a purely general character would not have been intended to interfere with that provision; and therefore, if such an enactment, although inconsistent in substance, is capable of reasonable and sensible application without extending to the case in question, it is prima facie to be construed as not so extending. The special provision stands as an exceptional proviso upon the general. If, however, it appears from a consideration of the general enactment in the light of admissible circumstances that Parliament's true intention was to establish thereby a rule of universal application, then the special provision must give way to the general. [Commercial Tax Officer, vs M/S. Binani Cements Ltd.- 2014 (3) TMI 905 - SUPREME COURT]