In SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) 262 CLR 362, the High Court reflected on how a court finds the meaning of a statutory provision. In particular, Kiefel CJ, Nettle and Gordon JJ observed that:

The starting point for the ascertainment of the meaning of a statutory provision is the text of the statute whilst, at the same time, regard is had to its context and purpose. Context should be regarded at this first stage and not at some later stage and it should be regarded in its widest sense. This is not to deny the importance of the natural and ordinary meaning of a word...Considerations of context and purpose simply recognise that, understood in its statutory, historical or other context, some other meaning of a word may be suggested, and so too, if its ordinary meaning is not consistent with the statutory purpose, that meaning must be rejected.

In light of the above statement from SZTAL, Explain the current approach to statutory interpretation in Australia