Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on The Case of Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v DHSS (1981) and the Abortion Act 1967 and the Interpretation by the Judges. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 7 page paper outlines the way in which the judges of the appeal court and the House of Lords interpreted this Act, specifically the phrase “Registered Medical Practitioner”. The bibliography cites 5 sources.
Page Count:
7 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEstati1.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
is to examine the act of abortion to define the processes used in order to compare these to what is interpreted in the statue. In interpreting the statutes the student
will be aware of the need for then interpretation by normal means. Denning points out that this was a statute that was made for the direction of the medical profession,
and as such interpretation should be made as the medical profession would, this is in line with the literal rule. Denning makes
use of former statutes to ascertain the meaning of this statute. The case has been brought due to changing technology, but looking at older statutes the intention may be clearer.
Denning divides the statues into two classifications, in one group there is the wording of "by a registered medical practitioner or by a person acting in accordance with the
directions of any such practitioner", the second category are similar to the Abortion Act 1967 where the last part of this phrase is omitted, so that is just the registered
medical practitioner. The 5 Acts that are cited as medical practitioner also allowing others under the direction of the practitioner include he Radioactive Substances Act 1948, section 3 (1) (a),
the Therapeutic Substances Act 1956, section 9 (1) (a); the Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) Act 1964, section 1 (2) (g); Medicines Act 1968, section 58 (2) (b); Tattooing of
Minors Act 1969, section 1. In these it is clear that those who are acting on the instructions are also covered by the act. Therefore, it is logical to assume
that if parliament had meant that for the Abortion Act this would have been included. However, it is not, this is similar to the Human Tissues Act 1961, section 1
...