Differences and similarity of wording

- Presumption that different words are used to denote a different meaning

"[71] A relevant aid to statutory interpretation in this case is the presumption that different words are used to denote a different meaning. If different words are used then the court has to do its best to find those different meanings: see Bennion, Bailey and Norbury on Statutory Interpretation, 8th ed (2020), section 21.3.

...

[80] Thirdly, regulation 28(3)(c) uses different words ("in pursuance of" and "in connection with" the arrangement) thereby indicating that they have different meanings. In pursuance of the arrangement has the meaning of providing funds under or in accordance with the arrangement whose object or effect is making restricted goods or restricted technology available to a person connected with Russia or for use in Russia. As the Court of Appeal held, at para 55, the use of the phrase "in connection with" in "conjunction with 'in pursuance of' indicates a clear intention to cast the net more broadly than financial services or funds provided under or in accordance with the terms of the relevant arrangements (which would be covered by the natural sense of 'in pursuance of')." I agree. The words "in connection with" are far broader than "in pursuance of". In conjunction with the phrase "in pursuance of" they mean anything which factually connects the provision of the funds to the arrangement. The phrase does not require there to be any causal connection." (Unicredit Bank GmbH v. Constitution Aircraft Leasing (Ireland) 3 Ltd [2026] UKSC 10)