Explain the following principles involved in statutory interpretation A The Ejusdem generis principle B The Expressio
... This consists of statutory assistance i. ... , the interpretation act, interpretation sections of acts, preambles or long titles to acts and side notes. Statutory Interpretation is mainly about how the judiciary interprets the statute to be used in the court. ... This consists of statutory assistance i. ... , the interpretation act, interpretation sections of acts, preambles or long titles to acts and side notes. They also generally use the following general principles i. ... the literal rule, the golden rule, the contextual rule and the mischief rule, together with language rules such as the eiusdem generis rule, the expressio unius est exclusio alterius rule, and the noscitur a sociis principle. This paper will seek to explain with the aid of examples, case law and also opinions of judges; the mischief rule and the three language rules mentioned SOME OF THE PRINCIPLE INVOLVED IN STATUTORY INTERPRETATION "Ejusdem (or eiusdem) generis" Literally of the same kind - is directed at the situation where an Act lists a number of specific items then adds a more general one. ... CASELAW in which the Ejusdem generis principle was applied: Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse [1899] AC 143. ... DC Pearce in Statutory Interpretation in Australia gives as an example: If a ferry is allowed to carry horses, cows, sheep and other animals, it may be argued that other animals should be read down to include only domestic farm animals and e. ... It is this construction, which results in the ejusdem generis rule. ... But if this intention is lacking, ejusdem generis will not apply, since like all presumptions, it reflects only one possible view of Parliaments intention. The ejusdem generis rule is a more specific application of the noscitur a sociis principle, (explained on pg. ... In a piece of legislation relating to road safety where the following enumeration appears: “automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and all other vehicles”, following the nocitur a sociis rule, it is clear that in the context of road safety legislation, the ‘vehicles’ referred to are those which travel on roads and not in air or water. In accordance with the ejusdem generis rule, the general term ‘all other vehicles’ should be interpreted restrictively as meaning ‘all other road vehicles’. Certain conventions govern the application of ejusdem generis: 1. ... Even if more than two items are specifically listed, they must be ejusdem generis among themselves for them to be ejusdem generis with the others. ... Another example of the application of ejusdem generis is Evan v Cross [1938], where it was held that road markings were not ejusdem generis with traffic signs. ... The substance of his appeal; which was successful; was that white lines were not explicitly mentioned along with the other items to be obeyed, and were not ejusdem generis (of the same class) with them. ... This case is an example of the principle of ejusdem generis being applied against precedent, presumably in order that the intention of the legislature could be given effect. ... Application of ejusdem generis according to precedent (e. ... , Evan v Cross [1938]) would say that electricity is not ejusdem generis with noxious gasses and liquids, and therefore not caught by that clause in the legislation. ... The issue of whether electricity is ejusdem generis with noxious liquids or gasses was raised again in a similar case; R v Muongo [1996] CLY 1497, which concerned an electric anti-theft device fitted to a briefcase. ... "Expressio unius alterius est" This means an express reference to one thing is an exclusion of others; therefore the expressed mention of things in a list excludes those things not mentioned. Expressio unius operates in situations where some of the things, which could be implied, are, in fact, spelt out, e. ... CASELAW in which the Expressio unius principle was applied: Temptest v Kilner (1846) 3 CB 247, A statute required that contracts for the sale of “goods, wares and merchandise” of ten (10) pounds or more had to be evidenced in writing. ... Expressio unius operates in situations where some of the things that could be implied are, in fact, spelt out. ... There is no room for the application of this principle where some reason other than the intention to exclude certain items exists for the express mention in question.