Judgment No. CCZ 6/2015 8 Const Application No. 02/14 The principles set out in the dicta cited above can aptly and instructively be summarized as follows: i) the Legislature is presumed not to intend an absurdity, ambiguity or repugnancy to arise out of the grammatical and ordinary meaning of the words that it uses in an enactment. ii) therefore, in order to ascertain the true purpose and intent of the Legislature, regard is to be had, not only to the literal meaning of the words, but also to their practical effect. iii) In this respect, a) the words in question must be capable of an interpretation that is ‘consistent’ with the rest of the instrument in which the words appear; b) the state of the law in place before the enactment in question, is a useful aid in ascertaining the legislative purpose and intention, and c) where an earlier and later enactment (or provision) deals with the same subject matter, then, in the case of uncertainty, the two should be interpreted in such a way that there is mutual consistency.