The act was the first Statute Law Revision Act to be committed to the Joint Committee for consideration of Statute Law Revision Bills, a procedure designed to increase the accuracy of such bills.

In the United Kingdom, acts of Parliament remain in force until expressly repealed.

[2] In 1806, the Commission on Public Records passed a resolution requesting the production of a report on the best mode of reducing the volume of the statute book.

[1] In 1816, both Houses of Parliament, passed resolutions that an eminent lawyer with 20 clerks be commissioned to make a digest of the statutes, which was declared "very expedient to be done."

[1] The Board issued three reports, recommending the creation of a permanent body for statute law reform.

An alternative approach, focusing on expunging obsolete laws from the statute book, followed by consolidation, was proposed by Peter Locke King MP, who was heavily critical of the expenditure of the Commission and the lack of results.

Wood to expurgate the statute book of all acts which, though not expressly repealed, were not in force, working backwards from the present time.

[6] At the same time, on 14 March 1892, the topic of statute law revision was referred to a joint committee of both houses of Parliament,[5] on the motion of the Lord Chancellor.

[5] Upon the motion of the Lord Chancellor on 13 May 1892, the bill was committed to the Joint Committee on Statute Law Revision on 17 May 1892, following agreement by the House of Commons.

[1] As to the effect of the act, see Morse v Muir,[10] Watkins v Reddy,[11] People (Attorney General) v Murtagh,[12] Smith v Smith,[13] Robins v Robins,[14] In re M'Naul's Estate,[15] Morrison v Stubbs[16] and Huffam v North Staffordshire Railway Company.

[21] Section 1 of the act provided that repeals were subject to the standard Westbury Saving.