Implied Repeal is a legal doctrine under which an earlier law is considered repealed not by express words, but by implication, when a later statute is so inconsistent or contradictory with the earlier one that both cannot stand together. In such cases, the newer statute overrides the older one, to the extent of the inconsistency.
This doctrine is based on the presumption that the legislature does not intend to contradict itself, and therefore, the most recent expression of legislative will must prevail. However, implied repeal is not favored in statutory interpretation. Courts follow the principle that repeal by implication should not be presumed lightly, and such a repeal will only be inferred where there is clear and irreconcilable conflict between the two laws.
If both statutes can be reasonably interpreted to coexist, courts will make every effort to give effect to both statutes. Implied repeal is considered a last resort, used only when harmonious construction is impossible.
When Implied Repeal Applies:
- The later statute covers the entire subject matter of the earlier statute in a comprehensive way.
- The two statutes are inconsistent and contradictory, such that both cannot be applied simultaneously.
- The legislative intent behind the new law is to replace or override the earlier law, even though it is not stated explicitly.
Example:
Suppose an earlier law allows public meetings with prior permission from authorities, and a later law prohibits all public meetings in certain areas without exception. If both laws apply to the same area and situation, the later law may impliedly repeal the earlier one to the extent of conflict, especially if they cannot logically function together.
Judicial Position:
In Municipal Council, Palai v. T.J. Joseph (1963), the Supreme Court of India held that repeal by implication is not to be favored, and courts must strive to reconcile the provisions of both statutes unless the conflict is irreconcilable.
Code to Remember the Answer: “REPEAL”
| Letter | Stands For | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| R | Recent Law Prevails | The newer law takes precedence over the older one. |
| E | Express Repeal Absent | There are no express words of repeal; it happens by implication. |
| P | Presumption Against Repeal | Courts do not easily presume repeal; it must be clearly necessary. |
| E | Entirely Inconsistent Laws | The conflict must be irreconcilable or total. |
| A | Apply Only if Necessary | Used only when both laws cannot logically coexist. |
| L | Legislative Intent Matters | Repeal is implied only if intent to override is clear from the context. |