Enforcement of the Act of ParliamentIt could be argued that the general perception of the general public is that once a case has been brought to court, all that is required of the judge is to seek out the relevant statute information and adjust accordingly. In this essay I intend to dispel this myth and suggest that the reality is not so simple. I propose to examine the reasons why interpreting laws is not as simple as one might expect, and to explain the way in which courts have circumvented this fact, by considering the aids that courts use when doing so. As Britain is now a member of the European Community, I will also highlight some of the changes that have been necessary in the interpretation of our statutes, and finally consider some possible reforms to combat the problems, which I will now identify. Despite how expert drafters carefully draft the Acts of Parliament, there are many occasions when courts find that the implications of a law for the case before them are not entirely clear. FAR Bennion (Statute Law, 1990) identified a number of factors, which may cause this uncertainty:1. The draftsman may refrain from using certain words which he considers necessarily implicit. The problem here is that users may not realize this is the case.2. A broad term has been used, leaving the user free to decide what to include.3. An ambiguous word or phrase was used on purpose, perhaps because the provision is politically controversial.4. The events of the case before the court were not foreseen at the time the legislation was produced.5. The wording is inadequate due to the press... middle of paper..., our membership of the EC has somewhat compromised this principle. Having considered how judges apply these statutes, it would be fair to say that "all a court can do with an Act of Parliament is apply it", but we have identified many difficulties encountered in doing so. Throughout his judicial career, Lord Denning was at the forefront of efforts to establish a more focused approach, aiming to produce decisions that put the spirit of the law into practice, even if this meant paying less than usual respect to the letter of the law. While some might see this as a threat to the sovereignty of Parliament, it would arguably lead to fewer absurd decisions, such as those which occurred in the case of London and North Eastern Railway Co v Berriman and would also bring the UK more in line with the thoughts of our European counterparts..