Interpretation of Lexh.C.1.3.1

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Lexh.C.1.3.1. The Scribe of Abbavilla shall maintain all laws in L'Anuntzia dels Legeux, insofar as possible, with the same content that was approved by the Ziu, except that amending acts that refer to section numbers in pre-existing statutes that were changed by the Scribery shall be construed as referring to the equivalent section numbers in the amended statutes as originally enacted.

I would like to have a confrontation in the interpretation of this passage, which is a bit complex.

Am I correct in interpreting this passage as authorising me to proceed with a renumbering required by a law but never carried out, and to consider subsequent laws amending the text of the Lexhatx absent of renumbering as referring to the equivalent section in the then published non-renumbered text?

Example:

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3. Dog
4. Banana
5. Whale

Law 1: remove 3 and renumbers the following.
The renumbering wasn't carried out.

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3.
4. Banana
5. Whale

Law 2: amends 4 in "Dolphin

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3.
4. Dolphin
5. Whale

Now: oh, the renumbering wasn't carried out, I can do it now and Lexh.C.1.3.1. says to me "it's ok, you are authorised to consider Law 2 as refereing to 3. even if it says 4.

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3. Dolphin
4. Whale

That part allows me now to do that? Otherwise, I must also include these cases in the maintenance bill.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Lexh.C.1.3.1. The Scribe of Abbavilla shall maintain all laws in L'Anuntzia dels Legeux, insofar as possible, with the same content that was approved by the Ziu, except that amending acts that refer to section numbers in pre-existing statutes that were changed by the Scribery shall be construed as referring to the equivalent section numbers in the amended statutes as originally enacted.

I would like to have a confrontation in the interpretation of this passage, which is a bit complex.

Am I correct in interpreting this passage as authorising me to proceed with a renumbering required by a law but never carried out, and to consider subsequent laws amending the text of the Lexhatx absent of renumbering as referring to the equivalent section in the then published non-renumbered text?

Example:

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3. Dog
4. Banana
5. Whale

Law 1: remove 3 and renumbers the following.
The renumbering wasn't carried out.

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3.
4. Banana
5. Whale

Law 2: amends 4 in "Dolphin

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3.
4. Dolphin
5. Whale

Now: oh, the renumbering wasn't carried out, I can do it now and Lexh.C.1.3.1. says to me "it's ok, you are authorised to consider Law 2 as refereing to 3. even if it says 4.

1. Cat
2. Mouse
3. Dolphin
4. Whale

That part allows me now to do that? Otherwise, I must also include these cases in the maintenance bill.

I agree with your interpretation.