So in a relevant context,
the ordinary meaning of a phrase would be the legal meaning?
In one early Charter decision, Re B.C. Motor Vehicles Act, 28 a unanimous Supreme Court used the living tree doctrine to expand
the ordinary meaning of the phrase «principles of fundamental justice.»
Not exact matches
These interpreters hold that Jesus used the
phrase only in its
ordinary sense
of «man,» and that some community in which the Gospel tradition was being formed, itself thinking
of Jesus as the apocalyptic Son
of Man, read that
meaning back into Jesus» words.
Yet it remains a misleading
phrase to those who, lacking a technically precise knowledge
of Whitehead's vocabulary, understand the term «mental pole» by analogy to the
ordinary meaning of «mental.»
Read in isolation, Miller's
phrase «part
of ordinary military equipment» could
mean that only those weapons useful in warfare are protected.
Exposing stats illusions Shalizi warns «causal - sounding
phrases... encourage confusion» in many analyses
of variance studies (where «due to,» «explained by,» «account for» don't have
ordinary meanings).
«King excels in his disturbing portrait
of Brady, a genuine monster in
ordinary human form who gives new
meaning to the
phrase «the banality
of evil.»
In his view, since both tests are set using
ordinary English words that can have a range
of meaning depending on their context, they can «be said to be «chameleon»
phrases or words».
The original
meaning should also be construed in broad enough terms to accommodate new phenomena that accord with the
ordinary meaning of the text (for example, interpreting the
phrase «freedom
of the press and other media
of communication» in section 2 (b)
of the Charter to include internet publications, which did not exist at the time
of the enactment).
In interpreting, for example, fair and equitable treatment provisions, an interpretation
of the
ordinary meaning may replace the terms «fair and equitable» with similarly vague and empty
phrases such as «just,» «even - handed,» «unbiased,» or «legitimate,» but does not succeed in clarifying the standard's normative content, nor does it indicate what is required
of States in specific circumstances.
In this context, the
phrase refers to knowledge or reckless lack
of investigation, rather than its
ordinary meaning of malicious intent.