Rules of language

Question 1

Ejusdem generis

Answer 1

‘things of the same kind’

two or more specific words followed by a general word is interpreted to be of the same kind

Question 2

Ejusdem generis case and facts

Answer 2

Powell v KPR co:

man was taking bets outside of the racecourse but the Act implied buildings inside not outside so wasn’t guilty

Question 3

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius

Answer 3

‘the mention of one thing excludes another’

if it isn’t said it doesn’t apply

Question 4

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius alterius case and facts

Answer 4

Inhabitants of Sedgeley:
limestone worker, tax was being increased on ‘lands, houses and coal mines’ but didn’t use a general word so didn’t have to increase the tax as limestone was excluded

Question 5

Noscitur a sociis

Answer 5

‘known by the company it keeps’

common sense, what fits the scenario

Question 6

noscitur a sociis case and facts

Answer 6

Pengelly v BP co:
got injured by a storage cupboard, so sued but the act implied it was places where people passed by, whereas the floor was used for purely storage and no one went through there so didn’t receive compensation