Rules of Language Rules of language allow judges to look at other words in the Act in order to make the meaning of words and phrases clear

Ejusdem generis “In a list, general words that follow specific words are limited to the same type as the specific ones”. E.g. – if an Act uses the phrase “dogs, cats and other animals” – this would include other domestic animals, but not wild animals Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse – court concluded that “house, office or other place for betting” could not include open-air betting on the racecourse itself, because places specified in the list were all indoors

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius “Express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another” If an Act specifically referred to Labrador dogs, it would not include any other breeds of dog R v Inhabitants of Sedgeley – Act referred in a list to coal mines therefore it could not apply to other types of mines

Noscitur a sociis “A word draws meaning from other words around it” Inland Revenue Commissioners v Frere – a section of an Act referred to “interest, annuities or other annual interest”. Because it referred to “other annual interest”, the court decided that the first use of “interest” must be restricted to annual interest (not daily or monthly)