The statute operates through a limited set of core legal concepts and mechanisms. These are (with section references):

• Database and authorised version. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel must establish and control an electronic database of legislation (s 5(1)-(2)). The Acts and statutory rules of the State "are to be taken in all circumstances and for all purposes to be as they appear" in the authorised version on that database (s 6(1)-(2)). The database is to include certain pre-existing Acts and statutory rules with amendments incorporated and all Acts and statutory rules made after commencement (s 5(3)(a)-(d)). Copies of the database produced and held separately are to be treated as if they were the database (s 5(4)-(5)). All Acts and statutory rules on the database are to include a certificate by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel certifying the authorised status and incorporation of amendments (s 6(9)).

• Reprints and legal force. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel may authorise and cause reprints of laws to be compiled (s 9(1)). A reprint may incorporate changes permitted under Division 2 and must state the date of the reprint (s 9(2)-(3)). A reprint that includes text changes permitted by the Act "has effect as if the changes effected under this Act had been made expressly by another law" that amended the law immediately before the reprint date (s 11). Section 10 expressly forbids making any reprint change that would change the effect of a provision; that is the statutory limit on permissible editorial intervention in a reprint.

• Permitted editorial alterations. Division 2 (ss 12-31) lists a wide set of permitted changes that may be made in reprints without separate amending legislation. They include changes to citations and references (s 12); substitution where a law has been remade (s 13); gender-neutral drafting and renaming of offices without affecting office-holding (s 14); updating names and titles (s 15); replacement of bodies or offices (s 16); modernising spelling, punctuation, conjunctives/disjunctives, order of definitions, format and printing style (ss 17-24); omission of spent provisions and transitional provisions that only applied to past times (s 25); omission of unnecessary referential words and legislative history notes (s 26); renumbering and consequent amendments to cross-references (s 27); correction of numbers, dates, times and monetary expressions (s 28); correction of minor errors such as typographical, grammatical, spelling, punctuation or cross-referencing errors (s 29); and incorporation of certain savings, transitional or validation provisions from amendment Acts into the principal Act (s 30). Section 31 allows reprints to omit incorporated provisions while requiring the reprint to indicate that fact.

• Custody and archival transmission. The Act prescribes transmission of original Acts and statutory rules to the Archives Office of Tasmania by specified officers following the 2013 amendments (ss 32, 32A). The Registrar of the Supreme Court, the Clerk of the Legislative Council and responsible Department Secretaries have specific transmission duties and timelines, and the Chief Parliamentary Counsel must transmit originals of statutory rules to the Archives Office annually by 31 January for rules made in the prior year (s 32A(4)-(5)).

• Reproduction control and offences. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel may approve third parties in writing to produce copies of authorised versions or reprints (s 6(10)). Copies produced under such approval must contain a statement that the copy is produced with approval (s 6(11)). It is an offence to falsely include a certificate purporting to be that of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel on a document, to falsely represent that a copy is produced with that approval, or to falsely represent that a copy is the authorised version (s 7(1)-(3)). Each offence attracts a penalty up to 100 penalty units.

• Delegated regulation-making power. The Governor may make regulations for the purposes of the Act, including prescribing changes not otherwise permitted under the Act that are permitted in a reprint, and regulations may apply differently according to time, circumstance or other limits (s 33).

Two definitional points matter for interpretation: (1) "current legislative drafting practice" is defined by reference to the practice in use in Tasmania at any time (s 3); (2) "minor error" is expressly defined and includes typographical, grammatical, spelling, punctuation and cross-referencing errors (s 3). The Act therefore couples a wide modernising mandate with an explicit prohibition against changing legal effect (s 10), and confers legal force on permitted editorial changes by treating reprints as if changes had been made by amending legislation (s 11).

Primary decision-makers and duty-holders in the Act are explicit. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel is central: the office must establish and control the authorised database (s 5(1)-(2)), certify authorised versions on the database (s 6(9)), approve production and distribution of authorised copies (s 6(10)-(11)), authorise and cause reprints to be compiled (s 9(1)), and transmit original statutory rules to the Archives Office annually (s 32A(4)). The Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s discretion therefore determines the authorised textual source and the range of allowable editorial corrections in reprints, with the Governor’s regulations able to expand that range (s 33).

Administrative officers and institutions have specified obligations. The Registrar of the Supreme Court must transmit original Acts and any statutory rules held among the Court’s records to the Archives Office following the 2013 amendments (s 32(1); s 32A(3)). The Clerk of the Legislative Council must transmit Acts receiving Royal Assent on or after the 2013 amendment commencement and the relevant originals (s 32(2)). The Secretary of a responsible Department for the Justices Act 1959 must transmit statutory rules held by that Department to the Archives Office (s 32A(1)). These officers and departments bear the practical burden of locating, consulting the State Archivist and transmitting originals.

Third parties likely affected include publishers, legal information vendors, courts, legal practitioners, businesses and the public. The Act makes the authorised version on the database the authoritative source for "all circumstances and for all purposes" (s 6(1)), so legal practitioners, courts and businesses must rely on the database or on certified authorised copies to be certain of the text. Publishers who wish to produce printed or electronic copies of authorised versions must obtain written approval from the Chief Parliamentary Counsel (s 6(10)) and include a statement that their copy is produced with that approval (s 6(11)). That gatekeeping affects commercial publishers' ability to supply authorised texts without approval.

Archivists and the State Archivist are involved by consultation obligations embedded in the transmission duties and by the definition of "State Archivist" (s 3; ss 32, 32A). The Archives Office of Tasmania becomes the repository of original Acts and statutory rules transmitted to it.

Finally, users of legislation,businesses, regulators, compliance teams, media,are affected by the change in authoritative text and by permitted editorial modernisation. The Act permits omission of spent provisions and renumbering and allows other modernising edits that may make older legislation appear different from the historical originals; users will need to know that reprints may have incorporated such permitted changes and that the reprint has statutory effect (ss 25, 27, 11, 31).

The Act creates a set of affirmative duties for specified officers and institutions and establishes rights and controls concerning authorised versions.

Duties placed on the Chief Parliamentary Counsel:

• Establish and control an electronic database of the State’s legislation (s 5(1)-(2)).
• Ensure the database consists of certain Acts and statutory rules, including Acts with amendments incorporated and all laws enacted after the Act’s commencement (s 5(3)).
• Produce and securely hold copies of the database in a separate place (s 5(4)-(5)).
• Certify Acts and statutory rules on the database as the authorised version and state that incorporated amendments and reprint changes are included (s 6(9)).
• Authorise and cause reprints to be compiled and determine whether to incorporate permitted changes (s 9(1)-(3)).
• Approve, in writing, external persons to produce authorised copies and reprints and specify required statements on such copies (s 6(10)-(11)).
• Transmit original statutory rules to the Archives Office annually where required (s 32A(4)).

Duties placed on other officers:

• Registrar of the Supreme Court: transmit original Acts held in the Court’s records to the Archives Office after consultation with the State Archivist; transmit original statutory rules made by the judges of the Supreme Court by 31 January of the following year (s 32(1); s 32A(3), (5)).
• Clerk of the Legislative Council: transmit Acts that receive Royal Assent on or after the 2013 amendment commencement and all original Acts among the Clerk’s records to the Archives Office after consultation with the State Archivist (s 32(2)).
• Responsible Department Secretary for Justices Act matters: transmit original statutory rules held by the Department to the Archives Office after consultation with the State Archivist (s 32A(1)).
• Chief Parliamentary Counsel must consult the State Archivist when transmitting original rules or as otherwise required (s 32A(2)).

Rights and discretionary powers:

• The database and the authorised version give the public, courts and administrators the right to treat the text on the database as the authoritative text (s 6(1)).
• Chief Parliamentary Counsel has a discretionary right to authorise reprints and to approve third-party production of authorised copies (s 9(1); s 6(10)).
• The Governor may make regulations to permit changes not otherwise allowed under the Act or to apply permitted changes with qualifications (s 33). This delegates additional decision-making capacity to the executive.

Constraints and legal limits:

• Reprint changes are permitted broadly, but s 10 expressly disallows any change in a reprint that would change the effect of a provision. That is the statutory constraint on editorial intervention.
• When a provision is unshown in a reprint, the reprint must indicate that fact (s 31(2)).
• Where a law is renumbered or renumbering is ordered, cross-references and references in other laws may be changed to the new numbering (s 27(4)).

Offences and protective duties:

• Persons are prohibited from falsely including certificates or falsely representing that a copy is produced with the approval of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel, and from falsely representing a copy as the authorised version (s 7(1)-(3)). Each offence carries a penalty of up to 100 penalty units.

In short, the Act centralises editorial control and certification in the office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel, imposes archival transmission duties on court and parliamentary officers, and limits third-party reproduction of authorised copies to those approved by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel. At the same time, it gives users a single source they are entitled to treat as authoritative.

The Act sets out a discrete enforcement regime focussed on the misrepresentation of authorised status and unauthorised certification. Section 7 creates three related offences:

• Falsely including a certificate purporting to be a Chief Parliamentary Counsel certificate in a document purporting to be an Act or statutory rule (s 7(1)). Penalty: fine not exceeding 100 penalty units.

• Falsely representing that a copy of an Act or statutory rule is produced with the approval of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel (s 7(2)). Penalty: fine not exceeding 100 penalty units.

• Falsely representing that a copy of an Act or statutory rule is the authorised version of that Act or statutory rule (s 7(3)). Penalty: fine not exceeding 100 penalty units.

The Act does not itself specify which prosecuting authority will bring proceedings for these offences. The structural design is that these are criminal offences punishable by fine; enforcement would therefore proceed under the general criminal prosecution framework applicable in Tasmania, using the courts and processes that handle fine-only offences. The Act does not state particular enforcement procedures, powers of search or seizure, or civil remedies tied to misuse of the authorised mark beyond the monetary fines.

The specification of the maximum penalty as "100 penalty units" centralises the sanction at a single statutory level rather than setting graduated penalties. The Act does not create alternative civil offences or direct contractual remedies for misuse of an authorised copy; it focuses on penal deterrence against false certification and false claims of authorised status.

Other enforcement mechanisms are administrative rather than penal. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel controls authorisation and certification (s 6(9)-(11)), and has the administrative power to approve in writing third parties to produce authorised copies. That approval process functions as an administrative control on who may produce authorised materials. The Governor’s regulation-making power under s 33 can be used to prescribe additional permitted changes or administrative processes related to reprints, which may in turn create regulatory compliance duties enforceable under statutory rules.

There are also implicit enforcement consequences tied to the legal effect of the authorised version. Section 6(1) requires that Acts and statutory rules "are to be taken in all circumstances and for all purposes to be as they appear" on the authorised database. Thus, reliance on a copy that is not the authorised version may carry a legal risk in litigation or regulatory compliance, though the statute does not itself prescribe civil sanctions tied to reliance on unauthorised copies.

The Act does not provide a private right of action for misuse of an authorised certificate, nor does it provide for injunctive remedies in the text provided. Practical enforcement will therefore be through prosecution of the s 7 offences by relevant prosecuting authorities and through administrative controls exercised by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel and through certification requirements that shape commercial reproduction of the authorised text.

The Act explicitly references and interfaces with a number of other statutes and archival arrangements. Those interactions are textual and procedural, and the Act makes specific cross-references.

• Archives Act 1983. The definition of "State Archivist" in s 3 refers to the person appointed under s 7 of the Archives Act 1983. Transmission duties under ss 32 and 32A are to be carried out "after consultation with the State Archivist". The Act therefore integrates custody and archival practices with the Archives Act framework.

• Rules Publication Act 1953. The definition of "statutory rule" in s 3 adopts the same meaning as under the Rules Publication Act 1953. That links the Act’s treatment of statutory rules and their authorised versions to the pre-existing legislative publication framework.

• Acts Reprinting Act 1979. Section 6(8) treats reprints made under the Acts Reprinting Act 1979 as the authorised version for dates before the commencement of this Act where relevant. The Act thereby respects earlier reprints where those reprints were lawfully printed and used.

• Evidence Act 1910 and other named Acts. The Act includes historical notes that certain amendments effected by the Act were incorporated into authorised versions of older statutes, such as the Evidence Act 1910, and into Acts Custody Act 1858 and Acts Reprinting Act 1979 (see notes to ss 34 and 36). These notes indicate that the Act’s amendments have been folded into authorised versions of specified statutes.

• Administrative Arrangements Act 1990. Section 38 assigns administration of this Act to the Premier and the Department of Premier and Cabinet until administrative arrangements under the Administrative Arrangements Act 1990 provide otherwise. That links responsibility for administration to the central executive until formal machinery changes.

• Interaction with legislative drafting practice. The Act repeatedly references "current legislative drafting practice" (s 3 definition and many Division 2 provisions). That concept is not defined in the Act beyond being the practice "for the time being in use in Tasmania." The effect is that permitted reprint changes are measured against an external, evolving standard of drafting practice. This gives a dynamic relationship between the Act and existing or future drafting conventions that may be reflected in other statutes or in office practice.

Interpretive interactions with other laws arise from the legal effect the Act gives to reprints. Section 11 provides that a reprinted law incorporating permitted changes "has effect as if the changes effected under this Act had been made expressly by another law that amended the law immediately before the reprint date." That provision translates editorial changes into the same legal effect as formal amendments. It therefore affects how other statutes, regulations and legal arrangements refer to and rely on statutory text. For example, cross-references, numbering changes, or omissions permitted under this Act will be treated as though an amending statute had made them.

Finally, the Act leaves scope for the Governor to make regulations to prescribe additional permitted changes for reprints (s 33). Those regulations would themselves be statutory rules with the usual interaction with the Rules Publication Act and other statutes governing subordinate legislation.

Overall, the Act is designed to be read and operated in the context of existing rules on statutory publication, archive custody and drafting practice, and it grants legal primacy to the authorised database when conflicts would otherwise arise.

The text provided includes embedded amendment annotations that identify two named amendment instruments and earlier changes. The principal annotations in the provided text show:

• No. 63 of 1997: Several subsections and sections were amended by No. 63 of 1997, applied 23 March 1998. Those amendments are noted in multiple places, including the definition entries in s 3 (reprint definitions), s 5(3) and (4), s 6 subsections, s 7(3), s 30, s 34, s 36 and annotations indicating earlier repeals (for example s 35 and s 37 were repealed by No. 63 of 1997, s 9 and s 10 respectively). The Act’s text shows bracketed references noting the application dates and amendment numbers for these changes.

• No. 18 of 2013: Several subsections in s 3 and s 6, and sections 32 and 32A were substituted or inserted by No. 18 of 2013, applied 20 June 2013. The custody sections (ss 32 and 32A) have explicit substitution and insertion annotations identifying the 2013 amendments. The 2013 amendments also affected the definition of "original Act" and "original statutory rule" and related subsections in s 6 concerning authorised versions that are not on the database.

Embedded incorporation notes:

• Sections 34 and 36 in the "Miscellaneous" Part include statements that the amendments effected by those sections have been incorporated into authorised versions of specific Acts, namely the Acts Custody Act 1858, Acts Reprinting Act 1979 and the Evidence Act 1910.

Repeals:

• Section 35 and Section 37 are recorded as repealed by No. 63 of 1997. The Act’s text retains the header for s 35 and s 37 with the bracketed note indicating repeal.

Procedural timing:

• Several amendments reference the commencement of the Legislation Publication Amendment Act 2013 and timeframes tied to that commencement for transmission duties (ss 32, 32A). The text therefore reflects staged implementation for archival transmission following the 2013 amendments.

What the source does not supply:

• The provided text does not include the original enactment date beyond the short title or a consolidated list of every amending instrument. It contains the key amendment annotations within the text. The text does not provide a history of policy debates, explanatory memoranda, second reading speeches or implementation guidance that might have accompanied the amendments. It also does not show any subsequent amendments after 2013 aside from the applied dates noted.

For practical purposes, users should cross-check the Act as presented here against the official Tasmanian legislative database for any amendments after 2013. The embedded annotations in the provided extract are the only amendment history data contained within this source, and they document the 1997 and 2013 amendment packages as applied.

The provided statute text does not record any case law, judicial decisions or litigation history. There are no cases named in the text, and no annotated references to judicial consideration of the Act’s provisions. The Act does not itself list reported decisions, did not include an express schedule of transitional judicial interpretations, and the annotation fields relate only to amendments.

Because the Act alters the legal weight of reprints and creates an authoritative database, one would expect litigation over questions of textual authority or interpretation could arise in practice. However, within this source, there is no recorded litigation history to cite. Any case law addressing:

• the interpretation of "authorised version" under s 6(1);
• the limits of permissible reprint changes under s 10;
• the legal effect of reprint changes under s 11 when they modify numbering, omit provisions or adjust references; or
• prosecutions under s 7 for false certification or false representation

is absent from the text provided.

Consequently, readers seeking reported judicial treatment must consult external case law databases or Tasmanian court reports. This deep dive does not invent cases or claim judicial treatment; it notes solely that the Act as provided contains no litigation annotation or recorded court decisions. Where interpretation issues arise in practice, courts may be asked to determine questions such as what constitutes a change that "would change the effect of the provision" for s 10 purposes, or how strictly s 6(1) binds courts when the authorised database conf licts with an archival original. Those are empirical litigation questions outside the text supplied here.

The Act contains several provisions that create practical traps or sources of uncertainty for users, publishers, administrators and lawyers. The following are concrete "gotchas" grounded in the statute’s language.

Authorised database is dispositive. Section 6(1) requires that Acts and statutory rules "are to be taken in all circumstances and for all purposes to be as they appear" in the authorised version. That language makes the authorised database dispositive. Reliance on printed or vendor copies that are not the authorised version may carry legal risk, and a printed copy lacking the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s certificate and approval statement will not carry the statutory imprimatur (s 6(9), (10)-(11)). Do not assume a commonly used commercial text is authoritative unless it carries the required certification or approval.

Reprints can alter appearance and structure while remaining "authorised." Division 2 lists broad powers for modernising drafting and format: renumbering (s 27), omission of spent provisions and transitional provisions that only apply to past events (s 25), style and punctuation changes (ss 17-19, 24), omission of historical notes (s 26), and correction of minor errors (s 29). Because s 11 gives a reprint effect "as if" changes were made by another amending law, the authorised reprint may legally differ in form from the historical original. Users should check reprint notes and the certificate date to know what has been altered (s 9(3); s 31(2)).

Tension between "no change to effect" and broad permitted edits. Section 10 prohibits any reprint change that "would change the effect of the provision." But many permitted changes, including renumbering, omission of provisions, and updating references, have the potential to influence statutory interpretation in close cases. The Act leaves the assessment of whether an editorial change "changes effect" to the office producing the reprint. That creates implementation risk where a disputed interpretation of whether an editorial edit was effect-changing arises.

"Current legislative drafting practice" is an external and shifting standard. Division 2 frequently authorises changes that are "consistent with current legislative drafting practice" (see s 3 definition and many subsections). The Act does not define that practice beyond its Tasmanian locus. That dependency creates uncertainty for users about what editorial approaches will be applied and may mean that reprint conventions change over time without requiring amendment of this Act.

Uncertainty about which pre-commencement Acts are on the database. Section 5(3)(a) states the database is to consist of "certain Acts for the time being in force" with amendments incorporated. The Act does not list those "certain Acts" in the text provided. Practitioners should therefore verify whether a particular pre-commencement Act is included, and what the authorised version date is.

Approval gate for reproduction creates transactional friction. The Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s power to approve in writing persons to produce authorised copies (s 6(10)) means commercial vendors need approval to market authorised texts. Copies produced under approval must carry a statement that the copy is produced with the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s approval (s 6(11)). That approval process may impose administrative burden and potential delay for publishers.

Omissions must be indicated but content may be missing. Section 31 allows omission of incorporated provisions but requires the reprint to indicate omissions in a "suitable place" (s 31(2)). Practically, readers relying on reprints need to check whether an omitted provision might be relevant to historical rights, obligations or interpretation even when the reprint indicates omission.

Transmission duties have deadlines and consultative steps. Sections 32 and 32A require specified officers to transmit originals to Archives Office "as soon as practicable" after the 2013 amendment commencement and to do so "after consultation with the State Archivist." The requirement to consult and the vagueness of "as soon as practicable" can complicate implementation and record-keeping.

Offences are monetary and not graduated. Section 7 aggregates three separate misrepresentation offences and sets a single maximum penalty. The Act does not provide for graduated or alternative remedies or for injunctive relief within its text.

Taken together, these features mean that reliance on an authorised text requires confirming the database version and certificate, understanding that authorised reprints may not look like archival originals, and being cautious about editorial changes that, while authorised, could have interpretive significance in litigation or regulatory compliance.

Compliance under this Act is principally about reliance on authorised versions, procedural steps for institutions holding originals, and controls around reproduction. The following operational checklist and practices align directly with the statutory duties and constraints.

For legal practitioners, regulators and businesses relying on statutory text:

• Always check the authorised database controlled by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel as the primary source for legislative text (s 5(1)-(3); s 6(1)-(2)). Treat the database version as authoritative "in all circumstances and for all purposes" per s 6(1).
• Verify the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s certificate date that is to accompany every Act and statutory rule on the database (s 6(9)). Where interpretive questions depend on wording, note the certificate date to determine which amendments and permitted reprint changes were incorporated as of that date.
• Where you use printed copies, ensure the copy is approved in writing by the Chief Parliamentary Counsel or is a legitimate reproduction of an authorised copy. Approved copies must contain the statement required by s 6(11).
• If quoting or filing legislative text in legal proceedings or compliance reports, cite the authorised database version and include the reprint or certificate date to avoid reliance on an outdated or unauthorised text.

For publishers and information vendors:

• Seek written approval from the Chief Parliamentary Counsel under s 6(10) before producing or distributing authorised versions or reprints. Include the explicit statement required by s 6(11) on the product.
• Maintain version control and metadata that records the reprint date, the certificate date, any omissions indicated under s 31(2), and whether permitted reprint alterations (e.g. renumbering, omission of spent provisions) have been applied.
• Establish quality controls to ensure that reproductions do not falsely present unauthorised or uncertified copies as authorised; breaches attract the s 7 fines.

For custodians of original Acts and statutory rules (Registrars, Clerks, Department Secretaries):

• Implement record-search and transfer protocols to comply with ss 32 and 32A. Transmit originals to the Archives Office of Tasmania, after consultation with the State Archivist, "as soon as practicable" following the stipulated commencement events and annually as required (s 32(1)-(2); s 32A(1)-(5)).
• Record consultations with the State Archivist and retain evidence of transmission dates to demonstrate compliance if required.
• Coordinate with the Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel to ensure the database accurately reflects those originals and any subsequent reprint activity.

For the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s office:

• Establish secure production and backup procedures for the database and for the separate copies required by s 5(4). Ensure those copies are held in a place separate from the primary database location and that they are treated "for all purposes as if they were the database" (s 5(4)-(5)).
• Maintain a transparent approval process for third-party producers of authorised copies under s 6(10). Keep written records of approvals and ensure approved copies contain the statement required by s 6(11).
• Document criteria and internal guidance for determining when a permitted editorial change would or would not "change the effect" of a provision under s 10. Because the standard is legal, maintain a rationale for editorial decisions to reduce litigation risk.

Cross-cutting compliance recommendations:

• Where a reprint omits a provision (s 31), ensure the reprint indicates the omission conspicuously and provide source references to the originating instrument or its archival location. Practitioners should retain access to archival originals when research requires historical wording.
• Where renumbering or consequential changes are made (s 27), publish mapping tables from old to new citations and ensure cross-jurisdictional references are updated where permitted by the Act (s 12, s 27(4)). This reduces confusion when other laws or contracts cite former numbering.
• Maintain an internal log of the drafting practice standard applied when implementing "current legislative drafting practice" changes. Because that standard is dynamic, a record of the practice and the date will help explain editorial choices and defend against claims that an edit changed substantive effect.
• Train compliance, legal and publishing staff on the s 7 offences. Avoid representations that a copy is authorised unless authorised and certified. Treat misrepresentations as potentially criminal.

Finally, because the Act gives the authorised reprint effect "as if" the changes were made by an amending law (s 11), any user whose rights or obligations turn on wording should treat reprint changes as legally operative and not merely cosmetic. For borderline interpretive questions, consider obtaining an official confirmation from the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s office or seeking declaratory relief through the courts when high-stakes statutory interpretation is involved.