What happens when the courts interpret a law in a way that leads to a different result from what Parliament intended? CNA looks at this question in a recent feature. Our disputes Partner Stephanie Chew shares her views in it.

The feature follows a recent High Court ruling that overturned deterrent sentences for four young scam mules. After the ruling, the Government proposed changes to the law.

Stephanie explained that lawmakers cannot foresee every situation that will come before the courts when they write a law.

“So it’s parliament that makes the laws, but it’s the courts’ job to interpret those statutes, and apply them to real cases based on the facts,” she said.

For this reason, she said, courts look at both the purpose and the wording of a law.