Talk:Statute Law (Repeals) Act

Proposed merge of Statute Law Revision Act with Statute Law (Repeals) Act

These articles cover the same type of law, though in the UK the title was changed in the 1960s. I wonder if it would be better to have a single article for acts of both titles. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:03, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. They are absolutely not the same type of law. Statute Law Revision Acts expressly repeal enactments that are either (a) no longer in force because they have already been impliedly repealed etc or (b) redundant because they have been superseded by a later enactment that duplicates their provisions or effect etc. Statute Law (Repeals) Acts repeal Acts that are still in force and are not redundant. The different name reflects a paradigm shift in the approach adopted. Statute Law (Repeals) Acts are not Statute Law Revision Acts because they have a much wider scope than Statute Law Revision Acts.

They cannot be merged just because they both contain repealing enactments (amongst other types of enactment). There are many other types of repealing enactment. An example would be the repealing provisions of the Theft Act 1968. These are very similar to the type of repeals that would be effected by a Statute Law Revision Act. But the Theft Act 1968 is obviously not a Statute Law Revision Act. And neither are the Statute Law (Repeals) Acts. "Statute Law Revision Act" is not a synonym for "repealing enactment". What is proposed here would be like merging Lion into Tiger on grounds that they are both cats. James500 (talk) 07:35, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I'll withdraw. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 04:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]