Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 1
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 1-13 (2026)

  Official languages

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §1-13  Official languages.  English and Hawaiian are the official languages of Hawaii.  Whenever there is found to exist any radical and irreconcilable difference between the English and Hawaiian version of any of the laws of the State, the English version shall be held binding.  Hawaiian shall not be required for public acts and transactions. [L 1864, p 68; RL 1925, §26; RL 1935, §9; RL 1945, §8; RL 1955, §1-16; HRS §1-13; am L 1979, c 97, §2]

 

Law Journals and Reviews

 

  "Officially" What?  The Legal Rights and Implications of ‘Ōlelo Hawai‘i.  30 UH L. Rev. 243.

 

Case Notes

 

  Originally, Hawaiian version prevailed.  1 H. 402; 1 H. 457.  Beginning with cc 1859, English version prevailed.  8 H. 478; 41 H. 358, 366.

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1966–2006 · leading case: Pub. Access Shoreline Hawaii ex rel. Rothstein v. Hawai'i Cnty. Plan. Comm'n ex rel. Fujimoto, 903 P.2d 1246 (Haw. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pub. Access Shoreline Hawaii ex rel. Rothstein v. Hawai'i Cnty. Plan. Comm'n ex rel. Fujimoto, 903 P.2d 1246 (Haw. 1995). · cites it 2× “2d 1146 (1974) (Levinson, J„ dissenting) (suggesting the need for comparative analysis of bilingual statutes because the English version is binding under HRS § 1-13 only when there is a "radical or irreconcilable difference” between the two versions); In re Ross, 8 Haw.”
Bremer v. Weeks, 85 P.3d 150 (Haw. 2004). “314, 322 (1940); Section 1-13 HRS (“English and Hawaiian are official languages of Hawai'i”).”
Mcbryde Sugar Co., Ltd. v. Robinson, 517 P.2d 26 (Haw. 1973). · cites it 6× “” 28 While it is true that *289 “[w]henever there is found to exist any radical or irreconcilable difference between the English and Hawaiian version of any of the laws of the State, the English version shall be held binding,” HRS § 1-13 (emphasis added), 29 the difference…”
Chang v. Plan. Com'n of Cnty. of Maui, 643 P.2d 55 (Haw. 1982). “permit application, gave the date, time and place of the hearing, mentioned that information relating to Makena Surfs application was available for public inspection at the county planning department, and advised that “[a]ny person seeking to be admitted as a party must do so at…”
Makila Land Co., LLC v. Kapu, 156 P.3d 482 (Haw. App. 2006). “RELEVANT STATUTE Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 1-13 (1993) states: Official languages.”
Application of Robinson, 421 P.2d 570 (Haw. 1966). · cites it 2× “1955, § 1-13. [14] We do not have before us the question of whether a waiver of the mineral rights reservation, by omission of the same from the patent, would have been authorized after the date of the repeal.”
Pub. Access Shoreline v. Hawaii Cty Plan. Comm'n, 903 P.2d 1246 (Haw. 1995). · cites it 2× “, dissenting) (suggesting the need for comparative analysis of bilingual statutes because the English version is binding under HRS § 1-13 only when there is a "radical or irreconcilable difference" between the two versions); In re Ross, 8 Haw.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.