Rules of Language

1) Ejusdem Generis - if you have a list of specific words, followed by general words, the general words are limited to mean the same as the specific words.

e.g. cats, dogs, hamsters, or other animals. (Italics = specific, underlined = general).

Powell V Kempton Park Racecourse - charged with keeping a "house, office, room or other place for betting".

- Not guilty as 'other place' had to refer to some place indoors, but he had been operating a Tattersall's Ring outside.

RULE ONLY APPLIES WHEN THERE ARE 2 OR MORE SPECIFIC WORDS.

Allen V Emmerson - Interpret 'theatres and other places of amusements'. See if it applied to funfair, only one specific word, so funfair cam eunder the general word even though it was different to a theatre.

2) Expressio Unius - where there is a list of words which is not followed by general words, the Act appplies to those in the list.

Tempest V Kilner - specific words, 'goods, wares, merchandise'. No general words so the Act is limited to specific words, stocks and shares are not covered.

R V Inhabitants of Sedgley - Rates charged on 'land titles and coal mines'. Therefore rates couldn't be charged on any oyher mines as there were no general words.

3) Noscitur A Sociis - a word is known by the company it keeps.

Inland Revenue Commissioners V Frere - meaning of 'interest' - meant annua interest.

Pengelley V Bell Punch Co. Ltd - The court had to decide whether a part of the factory floor used for storage fell within s28 of the Factories Act 1961, which stated that 'All floors, steps, stairs, passages and gangways must be kept free of obstruction'. - The Act didn't apply as a factory needs stuff within it and all words in the Act were places people needed to walk through.