2-4-302. Repeal of a repealing statute.

Statute text

The repeal of a repealing statute does not revive the statute originally repealed.

History

Source: L. 73: R&RE, p. 1425, 1. C.R.S. 1963: 135-1-302.

Annotations

 

ANNOTATION

Annotations

Annotator's note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this section.

When any law or part of a law is repealed, it is not revived by a subsequent repeal of the repealing law. Heinssen v. State, 14 Colo. 228, 23 P. 995 (1890); Sanders v. Hendrick, 93 Colo. 512, 27 P.2d 493 (1933).

However, when the suspension of a general law within a municipality results from a city ordinance passed in pursuance of a special charter, the repeal of the ordinance will leave the general law in force within the city. Heinssen v. State, 14 Colo. 228, 23 P. 995 (1890).

And the repealing clause of an unconstitutional legislative law falls with the rest of the law. Armstrong v. Mitten, 95 Colo. 425, 37 P.2d 757 (1934).

Also, the rule against implied revival applies only where the statute itself is repealed, and not where it is left in force. Terminal Drilling Co. v. Jones, 84 Colo. 279, 269 P. 894 (1928).

But certain cases are impliedly excepted from the rules operation by the effect of a subsequent enactment. Terminal Drilling Co. v. Jones, 84 Colo. 279, 269 P. 894 (1928); Heinssen v. State, 14 Colo. 228, 23 P. 995 (1890).

And the difference between a repealed and a suspended law is that a repeal puts an end to the law and a suspension holds it in abeyance. Heinssen v. State, 14 Colo. 228, 23 P. 995 (1890).