000			01402cab a2200205 4500
001			##L131543
008			051114n2005 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u131543
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aKnights, Philip
245	0	0	_aTension in the court
260	3		_ac2005
490		0	_aEstates Gazette _v(0544) 5 November 2005, 128(1)
520	0	0	_aJudgments should have retrospective as well as prospective consequences according to a landmark HL judgment "National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd and others" ([2005] UKHL 41, (2005) 3 WLR 58), athough retrospective effect might have unfortunate consequences as many banks found following "Spectrum". The arguments in favour of retrospective effect are recognised in the courts' approach to the interpretation of statutes. In cases such as "Spectrum" which require interpretation of a statute, the courts acknowledge that they should rarely just declare how the statute will be applied in the future. A statute applies from a specific date and the courts should not interfere with that by denying their judgments retrospective effect.
590			_aIKA221105
650	2	4	_aNATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC V SPECTRUM PLUS LTD
690			_aPROPERTY
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200506/ldjudgmt/jd050630/nat-1.htm _zView the judgment free of charge at www.parliament.uk...
942			_n0
999			_c76153 _d76153