MODULE 4

Understandin
g a Statute
Scope of the Module

Anatomy of a statute

Canons of Interpretation

Aids to Construction of a statute

Drafting a Statute
Anatomy of a Legislation
 A statute is simply the will of
the legislature

INTRODUCTIO
N
The function of the court is to
interpret the statute
according to the intent of
them that made it
NUMBERING AND CITATIONS

01 02 03
Generally statutes are After the title the date Normally statutes are
cited by their short on which statute numbered serially
titles or more receives assent is throughout the year
precisely by the year inserted
and their passing and
their chapter
numbers.
 Different Parts of A Statute- The Title

All Acts can have both long and short titles.

The long title is set out at the head of the statute and gives a fairly full description and
general purpose of the Act.

The modern view is that the Title is an important part of the statute and can be referred to as
an aid in the construction of an act/Statute.

Long title normally starts in these word “An Act to provide security for the tenure for
occupying tenants under certain leases of residential property at low rents”

Long title though can be looked at for resolving an ambiguity yet it may not be looked at to
modify the interpretation of plain language.
Different Parts of A Statute- Preamble

It defines the main objects of the Act and are considered as an aid in
interpretation of statutes
Preambles are however, same in weight as of enacting provisions

If there are obscure or vague enacting word, it is then you have to

look into the preamble to resolve that issue
If the enacting words are able of one construction, that construction
will receive the effect even if it is inconsistent with the preamble
Different Parts of A Statute- Marginal Notes

 These are normally printed at the side of the Act with a view to help to summarize the effect
of the section
 Notes are not the part of the statute therefore, should not be considered in construction of
the statute.
Different Parts of A Statute-
• Headings
Headings are regarded as preambles of the sections
• Heading cannot control the plain words of the statute but they may
explain ambiguous words.
• A heading of one group of sections cannot be used as an aid for
interpretation of another group of sections.
Different Parts of A Statute- Schedules

01 02 03 04
They are as much They can be used Similarly, Within a schedule
part of an Act as in constructing provisions in a ambigous words
any other part can provision in the schedule will be may be
be body of the Act construed in the constructed by
light of what is reference to the
enacted in the cross-headings
sections
Section 3
Subsection 2
Paragraph (a) (b)
Sub paragraph (i)
Layout of a statute

Chapter Preliminary, Definitions S.1 to S.2

1
Chapter 2 National Council for Clinical S.3 to S.7
Establishments
Chapter 3 Registrations and Standards for S.8 to S.13
Clinical Establishments
Chapter 4 Procedure for Registration S.14 to S.36
Chapter 5 Register of Clinical Establishments S. 37 to S. 39
Chapter 6 Penalties S. 40 to S. 46
Chapter 7 Miscellaneous S.47 to S. 56
Schedule 1
 Please click the link below to access the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023:
https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20A
ct%202023.pdf

Identify the different parts of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

Organize the Layout of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 in table

Exercise
Layout of a statute

Chapter Preliminary & Definitions, S.1 to S.3

1 Application of the Act
Chapter 2 Obligations of Data Fiduciary S.4 to S.10
Chapter 3 Rights and Duties of Data Principal S.11 to S.15
Chapter 4 Special Provisions S.16 to S.17
Chapter 5 Data Protection Board of India S. 18 to S. 26
Chapter 6 Powers, Functions and Procedure to S. 27 to S. 32
be Followed by Board
Chapter 7 Penalties and adjudication S.33 to S. 34
Chapter 8 Miscellaneous S.35 to S. 44
Schedule 1
Reading a
statute
Exercise

 Let us assume that a pharmacist has come to you with a query:

1. Whether a pharmacy is required to be registered under the Clinical

Establishment Act because at times he dresses wounds of some injured
customers and checks their Blood pressure and Sugar levels whenever
they request him to do so?
Answer

 Look for Definition of a Clinical Establishment

Clinical Establishment

S. 2 (c) Clinical establishment means:

(i) hospital, Or an institution whatever name in any recognized system of
called that offers services, medicine established or
facilities requiring: maintained by any person or
Maternity Diagnosis|treatment|care for body of persons, whether
home, illness, injury, deformity, incorporated or not; or
abnormality or pregnancy
Nursing home,
Dispensary,
Clinic,
Sanatorium,
 Clinical Establishment
or (ii) a place established as an independent entity or part of an establishment referred to in
sub-clause (i) in connection with diagnosis or treatment of diseases where pathological,
bacteriological, genetic, radiological, chemical, biological investigations or other diagnostic or
investigative services with the aid of laboratory or other medical equipment, are usually
carried on, established and administered or maintained by any person or body of
persons, whether incorporated or not, and shall include a clinical establishment
owned, controlled of managed by:
The government of a department of the but does not include the clinical establishments
government; owned, controlled, or managed by the Armed
a trust, whether public of private; Forces.

a corporation (including a society) Explanation: For the purpose of this clause

registered under a Central, Provincial or “Armed Forces” means the forces constituted
State Act, whether or not owned by the under the Army Act, 1950, the Air Force Act,
Government; 1950 and the Navy Act, 1957
a local authority; and
Single doctor,
 Exercise 2: Knives Act 1997

Unlawful Marketing of Knives

1. (1) A person is guilty of an offence if he markets a knife in a way which—
(a) indicates, or suggests, that it is suitable for combat; or
(b) is otherwise likely to stimulate or encourage violent behaviour involving the use of the knife as a
weapon.
(2) ‘Suitable for combat’ and ‘violent behaviour’ are defined in section 10.
(3) For the purposes of this Act, an indication or suggestion that a knife is suitable for combat may, in
particular, be given or made by a name or description—
(a) applied to the knife;
(b) on the knife or on any packaging in which it is contained; or
(c) included in any advertisement which, expressly or by implication, relates to the knife.
(4) For the purposes of this Act, a person markets a knife if—
(a) he sells it or hires it;
(b) he offers, or exposes, it for sale or hire; or
(c) he has it in his possession for the purposes of sale or hire.
Exercise 3: The Wild Mammals
(Protection) Act 1996

1. Offences
If, save as permitted by this Act, any person mutilates, kicks, beats, nails,
or otherwise impales, stabs, burns, stones, crushes, drowns, drags, or
asphyxiates any wild mammal with intent to inflict unnecessary suffering
he shall be guilty of an offence.
[2. . . . omitted here]
3. Interpretation
In this Act ‘wild mammal’ means any mammal which is not a domestic or
captive animal within the meaning of the Protection of Animals Act 1911 . .
.
Exercise 5: Digital Personal Data
Protection Act

4. (1) A person may process the personal data of a Data Principal only in accordance with the provisions of this
Act and for a lawful purpose,—
(a) for which the Data Principal has given her consent; or
(b) for certain legitimate uses.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the expression “lawful purpose” means any purpose which is not expressly
forbidden by law.
5. (1) Every request made to a Data Principal under section 6 for consent shall be accompanied or preceded by a
notice given by the Data Fiduciary to the Data Principal, informing her,—
(i) the personal data and the purpose for which the same is proposed to be processed;
(ii) the manner in which she may exercise her rights under sub-section (4) of section 6 and section 13; and
(iii) the manner in which the Data Principal may make a complaint to the Board, in such manner and as may be prescribed.
Illustration for Exercise 5

X, an individual, opens a bank account using the mobile app or website of Y, a bank. To complete the Know-Your-
Customer requirements under law for opening of bank account, X opts for processing of her personal data by Y in
a live, video-based customer identification process. Y shall accompany or precede the request for the personal data
with notice to X, describing the personal data and the purpose of its processing.
(2) Where a Data Principal has given her consent for the processing of her personal data before the date of
commencement of this Act,—
(a) the Data Fiduciary shall, as soon as it is reasonably practicable, give to the Data Principal a notice informing
her,––
(i) the personal data and the purpose for which the same has been processed;
(ii) the manner in which she may exercise her rights under sub-section (4) of section 6 and section 13; and
(iii) the manner in which the Data Principal may make a complaint to the Board, in such manner and as may be
prescribed.
Questions related to Exercise 5

 Who is a Data Fiduciary?

 Who is a Data Principal?
 What does S. 6(4) and S. 13 mean?
Answer

 Who is a Data Fiduciary?

S.2 (i) “Data Fiduciary” means any person who alone or in conjunction with other persons
determines the purpose and means of processing of personal data;
 Who is a Data Principal?
“Data Principal” means the individual to whom the personal data relates and where such
individual is—
(i) a child, includes the parents or lawful guardian of such a child;
(ii) a person with disability, includes her lawful guardian, acting on her behalf;
 What does S. 6(4) and S. 13 mean?

S. 6(4): Where consent given by the Data Principal is the basis of processing of personal data, such Data
Principal shall have the right to withdraw her consent at any time, with the ease of doing so being
comparable to the ease with which such consent was given.
S. 13: (1) A Data Principal shall have the right to have readily available means of grievance redressal
provided by a Data Fiduciary or Consent Manager in respect of any act or omission of such Data Fiduciary
or Consent Manager regarding the performance of its obligations in relation to the personal data of such Data
Principal or the exercise of her rights under the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.
(2) The Data Fiduciary or Consent Manager shall respond to any grievances referred to in sub-section (1)
within such period as may be prescribed from the date of its receipt for all or any class of Data Fiduciaries.
(3) The Data Principal shall exhaust the opportunity of redressing her grievance under this section before
approaching the Board.
Interpretation of a
Statute
CANONS OF INTERPRETATION
Stat Interpretation -
What is it?

cases come before the courts because there is

a disagreement between the parties and court
has to figure out
WHAT HAS HAPPENED (FACT) or
WHAT RULES APPLY TO SITUATION (POINT OF
LAW).
Courts have 2 roles – to decide issues of fact
AND…?…to decide points of law!
INTERPRETATION OF A
STATUTE

However, at times there may

be confusion as to what
certain laws are mean when
they were passed, and this is
where judges need to interpret
the statute accordingly.
Problems of interpreting statutes…
1. Language is not a precise tool.
“It shall be a criminal offence for any vehicle to enter the park”
about a vehicle for a disabled person?
 What is a vehicle?
 what uld it be an offence if such a vehicle enters parks, or
 a child rides a bicycle in the park
 what about roller skates, Segway, is it a vehicle?
These are open to debate depending on our interpretation of the word
‘vehicle’ therefore words often take their meaning from their context.
 Problems of interpretation

2. The meaning of words changes over time.

Similarly, prior to 2010, broadcasting meant transmission through

airwaves, however post 2010, you can sit at home and listen to
music or watch a live match through streaming.
Does definition of broadcasting include streaming?
The drafting of the legislation
might have been hurried.

3 Sometimes there is a need to pass a new law quickly through

parliament. Nobody challenges the wording because everyone is happy
with the purpose of the legislation.

Example: In the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, the phrase “dangerous dog
breeds” is unclear. The Act prohibits keeping of these 4 dog breeds:
Pit Bull Terrier |Japanese Tosa |Dogo Argentino|Fila Brasileiro

What about breeds like Pakistani Bull Mastiff, Turkish Kangal Shepherd
Dog, what about mixed breed dogs.
Problems of interpretation
4. Unlike a conversation between two people, there is
no recourse to the original speaker when the problem
arises.
There is no opportunity to say, ‘Excuse me, but I didn’t quite
follow.
What exactly did you mean by that?’
However, court will not be able to refer or have conversation
with the Parliament to know the meaning of certain sections
in a legislation. They are forced to make up their own
extensions to interpret the statute.
 Tools to interpret

courts
have The literal rule
developed
rules to
assist
The golden rule
judges in
interpretin The mischief rule
g statutes.
The purposive approach
Literal Rule
 Methods of Interpretation – Literal Rule

1. The intention of Parliament is best achieved by giving the words

their ordinary natural meaning wherever such words are capable
of a literal meaning.
2. Lord Esher: “If the words of the Act are clear then you must
follow them. The court has nothing to do with the question
whether the legislature has committed an absurdity.”
 Is Bloxham liable using literal rule?

Apply the literal rule to this case:

The Law:
 S22 (1) Theft Act 1968: “A person handles stolen goods if …
 he dishonestly undertakes or assists in their …
 disposal by or for the benefit of another person.”
Case:
R v Bloxham:

Bloxham paid £500 for a car and promised a further £800 once the log-book was delivered.
The log-book was not delivered and Bloxham realised the car must have been stolen.
Eventually he sold the car for £200.

Is Bloxham liable for theft?

 A literal approach to R v Bloxham

 S22 Theft Act 1968 (1) “A person handles stolen goods if he dishonestly undertakes or
assists in their disposal by or for the benefit of another person”.

Answer:
X is another person who benefited from buying a cheap car, therefore Bloxham is guilty.
London & North Eastern
Railway Co v Berriman (1946)

 Widow tries to claim compensation after

husband was killed while oiling railway tracks.
 Fatal Accidents Act gave compensation to those
killed while ‘relaying’ or ‘repairing’ the track.
 Her husband was actually ‘maintaining’ it.
 So, she got nothing.
 Restricts the role of the judge

Advantag Provides no scope for judges

to use their own opinions or
es of the prejudices
literal rule
Upholds the separation of powers

Recognises Parliament as the

supreme law maker
Problems with the literal rule

There can be
disagreement as to
Creates loopholes
what amounts to Leads to injustice
in the law
the ordinary or
natural meaning

Creates awkward
precedents which Undermines public
require confidence in the
Parliamentary time law
to correct
Golden Rule
Golden Rule

The golden rule of statutory interpretation may be applied where an application of the literal
rule would lead to an absurdity. The courts may then apply a secondary meaning.

The golden rule aims to adapt the meaning of the words in the Parliament Act, in order to
not reach an absurd decision.

There are 2 approaches: Narrow and Wide.

The court will always start off with the literal approach, however, if this fails to make sense,
the golden rule will be applied.
 Narrow: the courts will choose
between the best of two
Narrow and alternative meanings. “If [words]
are capable of more than one
Wide meaning, then you can choose
Approaches between those meanings, but
beyond this you cannot go.”
Wider approach

Wide: modifies the outcome to avoid an absurd

outcome.
1. Where words have a clear meaning, but following
them would lead to an unacceptable situation.
2. The court will modify the words of the statute to
avoid this horrible situation.
 Activity

Apply the literal rule firstly to this case. Would the Defendant be guilty?
Law:
You cannot obstruct a member of Her Majesty’s forces engaged in security duty in the
vicinity of a prohibited place.
Adler v George (1964)
Adler gained access to a Royal Air Force station (a prohibited place within the meaning of
the Official Secrets Act 1920) and was actually within its boundaries. He obstructed a
member of Her Majesty's forces engaged in security duty in relation to the station.
 Adler v George – evidence of Literal rule absurdity.

Literal rule: would mean that Adler is not guilty because ‘in the VICINITY
of a prohibited place’ suggests NOT ON the premises but nearby.
However, the courts felt that this was not the Parliament’s intention, and
therefore the literal rule led to an absurd literal meaning.
Therefore, the GOLDEN rule was applied whereby the court held that:
The defendant was guilty of the offence because "in the vicinity of" should
be interpreted to mean ON OR NEAR the prohibited place.
Which approach is used? Wide/Narrow?
Wide.
 WHY THE GOLDEN RULE??

Any suggestions?
It would be absurd for a court to insist on applying a literal
interpretation to the wording of the Act, without giving any thought
to the consequences.
Refer back to Adler v George – if courts stuck to literal meaning, any
trespasser would get away by being ON the premises of a prohibited
place, because they wouldn’t be considered to be ‘in the vicinity’.
 R v Sigsworth [1935]

Facts:
A son murdered his mother. The mother had not made a will, but as per rules set
out in the Administration of Justice Act 1925, her next of kin would inherit (who
was the son).
Do you think he would be allowed to inherit, using golden rule?
Held:
A person who had murdered his mother was not allowed to benefit from the
proceeds of her estate. The court felt to modify the literal meaning, on the
grounds of PUBLIC POLICY, to prevent the murderer benefiting from the ‘fruits of
his crime’.
Which approach was used, Wide/ Narrow?
Wide.
 Maddox v Storer (1963)

Facts:
D drove a minibus made to carry 11 people at over 30 mph. Under
the Road Traffic Act 1960 it was an offence to drive at more than 30
mph in a vehicle ‘adapted to carry more than seven passengers’.
Golden rule applied and court held:
‘adapted to’ could be taken to mean ‘suitable for‘.
Which approach was used: Wide or Narrow?
Narrow.
 When can difficulties arise when deciding to use the golden
rule?

1. Deciding when there is an absurdity OR when

there is a simple logical conclusion that the judge
does not like – in other words: is the judge simply
stating there is absurdity because he does not like
the literal meaning?
 When can difficulties arise when deciding to use the golden
rule?

Lord Diplock:
Where the meaning of the statutory words is plain and unambiguous:
it is not for the judges to invent fancied ambiguities as an excuse for failing to give
effect to its plain meaning because they themselves consider that the consequences of
doing so would be inexpedient, or even unjust or immoral.

India: Under our Constitution it is Parliament’s opinion on these matters that is paramount."
 Case: Duport Steels Ltd v Sirs (1980)

The House of Lords needed to interpret a section of the Trade Union and Labour Relations
Act 1974 which gave immunity to union members committing torts in
contemplation of a trade dispute.
At first sight, the wording of this Act may seem absurd as it suggests union members
cannot be liable for committing torts, if it is industrial based. HOWEVER…
It was established that this is CLEARLY what the Parliament intended to say, since the
phrase had been used in statutes SINCE 1906 and ITS MEANING WAS WELL SETTLED.
In what situations might a Judge use the G.RULE for the wrong reasons?

 Political tendencies.
 When they wish to offer empathy with one party.

Judges are not allowed to be biased and steer clear of political opinions, therefore if the
literal meaning makes sense/ and there is evidence, then it should remain so.
 ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
The golden rule can prevent the problems of the An absurdity may mean different things to
literal rule, e.g. injustice. different judges.

The rule can put into practice what Parliament May give judge too much discretion – how?
intended.

Golden rule provides a check on the strictness of Professor Zander’s criticisms of the golden
the literal rule. rule – ‘an unpredictable safety valve’ ***

It respects the parliamentary supremacy as

it does not give judges complete freedom to
interpret.
Mischief Rule
 Mischief Rule

1. The mischief rule of statutory interpretation is the oldest of the

rules.
2. The mischief rule was established in Heydon's Case [1584] EWHC
Exch J36 Case summary.
3. the mischief rule should only be applied where there is
ambiguity in the statute. Under the mischief rule the court's role
is to suppress the mischief the Act is aimed at and advance the
remedy.
4. It looks for the wrong: the ‘mischief’ which the statute is trying to
correct. The statute is then interpreted in light of this.
 consider 4 things:

1. What the common law was before the Act was passed
2. What the mischief was that the Act was designed to remedy
3. The remedy proposed in the Act
4. The reason for the remedy
The mischief rule aims to interpret statute to what it meant regardless of the wording, by
referring to any previous statutes for the same purpose and how did Parliament intend to
improve that statute in the new one. It also needs to find out the mischief in the case in order
for it to be used.
 Smith v Hughes [1960]

Law: Street Offences Act 1958: it is an offence to solicit in a street for

the purpose of prostitution’.
Facts:
Some prostitutes were accused of soliciting, contrary to the Act. The
defendant along with other prostitutes , sat on a balcony, or inside a
building tapping on the window, to attract the attention of men in the
street.
Apply the literal rule. Will the defendant be guilty of soliciting?
 Smith v Hughes cont’d

Interpreted literally, there would therefore be no offence. Applying the

mischief rule, it did not matter that the women were not on the street
themselves, as they were still soliciting men in the street, which was
what the Act was designed to prevent. They were therefore found
guilty. The mischief was them tapping on the balcony seeking attention
from the street.
Lord Parker said: ‘Everybody knows that this was an Act intended to
clean up the streets… I am content to base my decision on that ground
and that ground alone’.
 Corkery v Carpenter 1951

Law: S.12 of the Licensing Act 1872 made it an

offence to be drunk in charge of a 'carriage' on
the highway.
Facts:
The defendant was riding his bicycle whilst
under the influence of alcohol.
 Corkery v Carpenter 1951

Apply the mischief rule – what do you think is

the mischief? And is the person guilty?
 Corkery v Carpenter 1951

Held: The court applied the mischief rule

holding that a riding a bicycle is a carriage. This
was within the mischief of the Act as the
defendant represented a danger to himself and
other road users.
 Elliot v Grey 1960

Law: s.35(1) Road Traffic Act 1930: it is illegal to use an uninsured

vehicle on the road.
Facts: The car was parked outside A's house; it had broken down some
months before, the engine would not work, and there was no petrol in
the tank. A had therefore cancelled his insurance, but said that he
would have renewed it before driving the car again. It was jacked up
and had its battery removed. The defendant argued he was not 'using'
the car on the road as clearly it was not driveable.
Apply the mischief rule, do you think he was guilty? Was his actions
contrary to what Parliament meant?
 Elliot v Grey 1960 cont’d

It was held that the car was being ‘used on a road’ and needed
insurance, it was a hazard of the type which the statute aimed to
prevent. The High Court affirmed his conviction.
Lord Parker CJ said the mischief was the protection of third parties, so
"use" should be taken to mean "have the use of". Quite apart from the
fact that another vehicle had collided with the stationary car, it was on
a hill and could have rolled away if someone had let the brake off.
 Advantages
It allows judges to “fill in the gaps” when
Parliament had left something out.
It allows judges to interpret statutes in the
light of changing social, economic and
technological circumstances.
It also allows the court to look at
Parliamentary Debates (Hansard in UK) so
that the words of the minister bringing the
bill before Parliament can be considered
In 1969, the Law Commission proposed that
the mischief rule should be the only rule
used.
Disadvantages
Finding the intention of Parliament is not
easy, even if Parliamentary Debates (Hansard
in UK) is used. It only shows the intention of
government
They may not be such a thing as “the
intention of Parliament” so trying to find it
out serves no purpose other than promoting
litigation between parties
It could lead to confusion because judges
could change the meaning of what an Act
says.
It gives too much power to judges. It should
be Parliament that makes any changes.
Purposive Approach
 80
Pickstone v Freemans plc (1989).

 Facts: The claimant, Ms Pickstone, was an employee of the defendants, Freemans, where she worked as a warehouse
operative and received a salary equivalent to that of her male counterparts performing the same job.
 However, the warehouse checkers, who were male, benefit from a greater salary than the warehouse operatives,
receiving £1.22 per week more.
 Here, women warehouse operatives did the same work as male warehouse checkers.
 Ms Pickstone subsequently alleged that the defendants were in breach of the Equal Pay Act 1970.
Issues

 Whether an employer is in breach of equal pay legislation, where it has

different pay rates for workers completing work of the same value who
are of different genders?
 Pickstone v Freemans plc

 literal reading of the legislation would have meant that Freemans was not
breaching equal pay rights as the warehouse operatives and warehouse
checkers were performing different jobs.
 House of Lords adopted a purposive approach to statutory interpretation,
permitting Ms Pickstone’s claim on the grounds that she was being paid less
than male workers completing work of equal value, despite the work per se was
not the same.
 House of Lords was ensuring that Britain did not breach its European treaty
obligations to legislate and protect equal pay
Pepper v Hart
 Mr Hart was a schoolmaster at a fee-paying school which operated a concessionary fee
scheme enabling members of staff to have their kids educated at the school at reduced fees if
surplus places were available.
 Tax was payable by Mr Hart on ‘the cash equivalent of the benefit’, but the statutory definition
of that expression was ambiguous.
 During the committee stage of the Finance Bill in the House of Commons the financial
secretary to the Treasury indicated that the basis of taxation for certain benefits in kind would
remain as cost to the employer of providing the service.
 In Mr Hart's case the actual additional cost to the employer was negligible, because boys
educated through the scheme were filling places which otherwise would have been empty.
 However, relying on the wording in the Act, the Inland Revenue had taxed a proportion of the
total cost of providing the services.
Pepper v Hart

 Could the courts incorporate the use of Hansard into their interpretation
of legislation?
 How does one interpret the relevant section of the Finance Act,
especially given that Mr. Hart was pointing to the debates during the
House of Commons where the Finance Secretary made a statement that
was pointing to the effect that such benefits should not be taxed,
instead seen as a cost to the employer.
Pepper v Hart (Decision)

• The majority held that the Hansard may be referred to, where legislation was
ambiguous, obscure or led to absurdity and the statements relied upon were
clear
• Such reference to the Hansard did not impeach Parliamentary Privilege.
• The purpose of looking at Hansard will not be to construe the words used by the
Minister but to give effect to the words used so long as they are clear. Far from
questioning the independence of Parliament and its debates, the courts would
be giving effect to what is said and done there’: p. 638H
Pepper v Hart

 ‘the use of clear ministerial statements by the court as a guide to the construction of
ambiguous legislation would not contravene anything’. It was held that the reference
to parliamentary materials should be allowed where

(a) legislation is ambiguous or obscure, or leads to an

absurdity;
(b) the material relied upon consists of one or more
statements by a Minister or other promoter of the bill together,
if necessary, with such other parliamentary material as is
necessary to understand such statements and their effect; and
(c) the statements relied upon are clear.
 87
Intention of the Legislature……..

“The days have long passed when the courts adopted a strict
constructionist view of interpretation which required them to adopt
the literal meaning of the language. The courts now adopt a
purposive approach which seeks to give effect to the true purpose of
legislation and are prepared to look at much extraneous material
that bears upon the background against which the legislation was
enacted.”
- Lord Griffiths in Pepper v Hart –
 Purposive Approach

1. The purposive approach is a modern version of the mischief rule.

2. the purposive approach seeks to look for the purpose of the legislation before
interpreting the words.
3. the purposive approach starts with the mischief rule in seeking the purpose or
intention of Parliament.
4. It is therefore a much more flexible approach giving judges greater scope to
develop the law in line with what they perceive to be Parliament's intention.
5. The purposive approach more readily embraces the use of extrinsic aids to assist
in finding Parliament's intention.
6. For example in relaxing the rule on reference to Hansard in Pepper v Hart the
House of Lords adopted a purposive approach.
 89
Purposive Approach
 This rule allows a judge to add or ignore words in an Act to help them
give a decision that supports, in their view why the Act was created.
 90
Comparison with the mischief rule

1. The purposive approach is often compared to the mischief rule. Under the
mischief rule the court is looking to see what gap there was in the old law
and how Parliament has filled the gap and what remedy has been
provided for.
2. The purposive approach, on the other hand, is broader still in that it is not
just looking to see what gap might have existed in the law previously, but
the judges are attempting to identify what they believe Parliament aimed
to achieve.
 91
Outside the confines of the statute

1. As a natural consequence of this approach the judges find

themselves concerned with matters which are outside the
confines of the particular statute itself.
2. This includes the context in which the law was created.
3. The judges therefore consider it quite appropriate and
proper to examine the concerns of the government and
Parliament at the time the Act was passed.
 92
Spirit of the statute

1. In purposive approach judges go beyond the letters of the statute.

2. Instead, they go by the spirit of the statute – Intention of the Legislature.
3. Legislative intention with regard to a particular statute can be the intention of majority of
the parliamentarians
 93
Preamble.

 Preamble defines reasons and cause for enacting the Act.

 This is not essential part of a statute.
 Preamble have for a long time been something of a rarity.
 94
Preamble

1. When there is a preamble, it sets out the facts and assumptions upon
which the statute is based.
2. The long title and preamble are discussed together because the law
with regard to the use which may be made of each is the same, and
what is strictly a long title is sometimes erroneously referred to as a
preamble.
3. This approach has emerged in more recent times. Here the court is
not just looking to see what the gap was in the old law, it is making a
decision as to what they felt Parliament meant to achieve.
 95
Purposive Approach

 Lord Denning:
 We do not sit here to pull the language of Parliament to pieces and make
nonsense of it. We sit here to find out the intention of Parliament and carry it out
and we do this better by filling in the gaps and making sense of the enactment
than by opening it up to destructive analysis’
Class Exercises
  R v Harris (1836) 7 C & P 446
 The defendant bit off his victim's nose.
Problem 1  The statute made it an offence 'to stab cut
or wound‘
 Is the defendant guilty?
Problem 1  the court held that under the
literal rule the act of biting did not
come within the meaning of stab,
cut or wound as these words
implied an instrument had to be
used.
 Therefore, the defendant's
conviction was quashed.
 Problem 2

 FACTS: The Royal College of Nursing challenged an action against the legality of the
involvement of nurses in carrying out abortions.
 The Offenses against the Person Act 1861 states that it is an offence for any person to
carry out an abortion except a doctor who has been legally certified.
 The Abortion Act 1967 stated that the doctor or a legal medical practitioner could carry
out the abortion under satisfying conditions.
 As technology advanced surgical abortions were replaced by hormonal abortions (i.e.
induced labor with drugs).
 In this case the first part was done by the doctor and the second part by the nurse without
the supervision of the doctor.
 Problem

 HELD: The judgment was that it is legal for the nurse to administer such abortions.
 The Abortion Act 1967 was aimed to remove all the street abortions completely as there
is no proper medical care available on the streets.
 it is lawful for the nurses to carry out this action.
 Mischief Rule (ROYAL COLLEGE Of NURSING v DHSS(Delaware Health and Social
Services)[1981] 2 WLR 279)
Problem 3

Allen had gone through a wedding ceremony with a woman

although he was married to someone else.
The defendant was charged with the offence of bigamy under
s.57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 as he was
going through a marriage ceremony
The statute states 'whosoever being married shall marry
any other person during the lifetime of the former
husband or wife is guilty of an offence'.
 Do you think defendant can be held guilty?
Held:

 In this case the defendant was charged with bigamy under Section 57 of the
Offences against the Person Act 1861 which made it an offence to ‘marry’ whilst
your spouse is still alive and not divorced. The ambiguous word was the word
‘marry’.
 The court decided that in order to make sense of the provision, the word should be interpreted as
meaning to go through a second ceremony of marriage.
 The word can also mean to become legally married but because someone who is already married
cannot legally marry someone else, the more general meaning of the word was preferred.
 Under a literal interpretation of this section the offence would be impossible to commit since civil
law will not recognise a second marriage any attempt to marry in such circumstances would not
be recognised as a valid marriage.
 Wider Approach (R v Allen)
Problem 4

 In order to park on the road near your residence in a certain way,

permission was required from a policeman in uniform;
 the defendant was a policeman in uniform.
 Should the defendant take permission from a policeman or does the act
require him to seek permission from some other policeman?
 It was held that permission had to be requested (i.e. from someone
else).
 Wider Approach (Keene v. Muncaster 1980)
State of Madhya Pradesh v Azad Bharat
Financial Company, AIR 1967 SC 276


A truck of the transporting company was taken into legal custody as it
contained opium along with the apples.
 The transport company stated that they were unaware of the fact that
opium was also loaded in the truck.
According to Section 11 of the Opium Act 1878:
Where the the offender is transporting, importing or exporting any opium exceeding
the quantity (if any) which he is permitted to transport, import or export, as the case
may be, the whole of the opium which has is transporting or exporting shall be
confiscated.
 Therefore, defendant’s vehicles were seized along with opium.
 State of Madhya Pradesh v Azad Bharat
Financial Company, AIR 1967 SC 276

 By applying the literal rule of the interpretation court stated that this interpretation is
leading to injustice and inequality.
 Therefore, the golden rule is applied concluding that the words 'shall be confiscated'
should be interpreted as 'may be confiscated.'
 State of Punjab V. Quiser Jehan Begam,
AIR 1963 SC 1604

The respondents were the owners of 55 bighas of land in two villages.

 Their lands along with nearby lands were acquired by the appellant for its
use.
 The respondents were not informed about the acquisition and were not
present at the time of the award of compensation.
 The Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 96 per acre but
the respondents a year later contended the valuation of their lands.
 The senior subordinate judge rejected their application as it was already 6
months since the acquisition and was thus beyond the period of limitation
as per Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
State of Punjab V. Quiser Jehan
Begam

 Whether the limitation period starts from the day of sale or from the
day of getting the knowledge of the award.
 State of Punjab v Quiser Jehan
Begam

• Held that the parties must first come to know the award in order to make an application
for reference under Section 18.
• The parties were not informed of the award by notice.
• Since the parties got to know of the award on a later date, the limitation period for Section
18 would start from this date and not the date on which the compensation was awarded.
• In this case, the Court applied the golden rule to modify the meaning of the
provision to include the start of the limitation period from the date of receiving the notice
of award.
 Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing
Association Limited (1999) 4 All ER
705
1. The lower court had declined to allow same-sex partners to inherit statutory tenancies on
the ground that they could not be considered to be the wife or husband of the deceased.
2. The Appellate Court held that the Rent Act, 1977 was incompatible with the convention on
the grounds of its discriminatory treatment of surviving same-sex partners.
 Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing
Association Limited (1999) 4 All ER
705
 The court applied the golden rule and held that the incompatibility could be remedied by
reading the words 'as his or her wife or husband' as meaning 'as they were ‘his wife or
husband’.
 Department of Public Prosecution v Bull

 A man was charged with an offense under s.1(1) of the Street Offences Act 1959 which
makes it an offense for a ‘common prostitute to loiter or solicit in a public street or
public place for the purposes of prostitution’.
 The magistrates found him not guilty on the grounds that ‘common prostitute’ only related
to females and not males. The prosecution appealed by way of case stated.
 The court held that the Act did only apply to females.
DPP v Bull

 The word prostitute was ambiguous and they applied the mischief rule.
 The Street Offences Act was introduced as a result of the work of
the Wolfenden Report into prostitution.
 The Report only referred to female prostitution and did not mention
male prostitutes.
 The court, therefore, held the mischief the Act was aimed at was
controlling the behavior of only female prostitutes.
 Bengal Immunity v State of Bihar

 The Appellant company is an incorporated company carrying on the business of

manufacturing and selling various sera, vaccines, biological products and medicines.
 Its registered head office is at Calcutta and its laboratory and factory are at Baranagar in
the district of 24 – Perganas in West Bengal.
 It is registered as a dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act and its registered
number is S.L. 683A.
 Its products have extensive sales throughout the Union of India and abroad.
 The goods are dispatched from Calcutta by rail, steamer or air against orders accepted by
the appellant company in Calcutta.
 The appellant company has neither any agent or manager in Bihar nor any office, godown
or laboratory in that State.
 Bengal Immunity v State of Bihar

 On the 24th October, 1951 the Assistant Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Bihar wrote a
letter to the appellant company which concluded as follows :-
 “Necessary action may therefore be taken to get your firm registered under the Bihar Sales
Tax Act. Steps may kindly be taken to deposit Bihar Sales Tax dues in any Bihar Treasury at
an early date under intimation to this Department”.
 The principal question is whether the tax threatened to be levied on the sales made by the
appellant company is leviable by the State of Bihar.
Article 286: Restriction as to
imposition of tax on sale or purchase
of goods
(1) No law of a State shall impose, or authorise the imposition of, a tax on
the sale or purchase of goods where such sale or purchase takes place—
(a) outside the State; or
(b) in the course of the import of the goods into, or export of the goods out
of, the territory of India.
Explanation.—For the purposes of sub-clause (a), a sale or purchase shall
be deemed to have taken place in the State in which the goods have
actually been delivered as a direct result of such sale or purchase for the
purpose of consumption in that State, notwithstanding the fact that under
the general law relating to sale of goods the property in the goods has by
reason of such sale or purchase passed in another State
 Bengal Immunity v State of Bihar

 This was done by construing article 286 whose interpretation came into question and the
meaning granted to it.
 It raises a question of construction of article 286 of the Constitution. It was decided
that Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947 in so far as it purports to tax sales or purchases that take
place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, is unconstitutional, illegal and void.
Mischief Rule
Aids to Interpretation
Aids to
Interpretation
 Intrinsic: Long title,
short title, schedules,
individual sections.
 Extrinsic: Dictionary,
Hansard, international
treaties.
Rules of Language

 Ejusdem generis:
 Latin for “of the same kind”.
 Where a list of words is followed by general
words, the general words are limited by the
specific words in the list.
 Rules of Language: Ejusdem Generis

 Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse (1899)

 Defendant was charged with keeping a “house, office, room or other place for betting”.
 He had been operating an outdoor betting stall.
 HELD: Since the list is restricted to indoor places, so was the general phrase “other places”.
The conditions or the elements are
as follows:

The statute contains an enumeration of specific words,

The subjects of enumeration constitute a class or
category;
That class or category is not exhausted by the
enumeration;
The general terms follow the enumeration; and

There is no indication of a different legislative intent.

1. Ejusdem generis

 General words following particular ones normally apply only to such

persons or things as are ejusdem generis (of the same genus or class) as
the particular ones.
 The Doctrine of Ejusdem Generis provides that when a list of specific
words are being followed by the general words, the general words are
interpreted in a way so as to restrict them to include the items or things
which will be of the same type as those of the specific words.
 interpret according to the intention of the legislation so as to make the
provision of legislation clear and unambiguous and thus fulfilling the
purpose of the legislation.
Category or genus must be present

1. In order to invoke the doctrine of Ejusdem Generis for its application, a

distinct 'category' or 'genus' must be present.
2. "The specific words must apply not to different objects of widely different
character but to something which can be called a class or kind of object".
3. This implies that the enumeration of specific words preceding the general
should necessarily constitute a distinct genus: it must be of some class.
4. Then only after the application of ejusdem generis the general words can
be restricted to the same class or genus.
5. some objective relationship with the purpose of the statute.
 "traffic signals" under Section
48(9) Road Traffic Act, 1930, to
include "all signals, warning sign
posts, signs, or other devices".

Evans v.
Cross The Court held that a painted line
on a road cannot be included in
the "other devices" as a traffic
sign because devices are here
indicating a thing, whereas
painted line on a road is not.
2. NOSCITUR A SOCIIS

 According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, noscitur a socii refers to “the

meaning of an unclear or ambiguous word (as in a statute or contract) should be
determined by considering the words with which it is associated in the context.”
 This tag refers to the fact that words “derive colour from those which surround
them.
 this phrase is also part of a longer Latin maxim “noscitur ex socio qui non
cogiiositur ex se” which is to be understood as “he who cannot be known from
himself may be known from his associates”
 Lord Macmillan had defined this rule of interpretation of statutes as “the meaning
of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps.”
 Bourne v Norwich Crematorium

1. Norwich Crematorium was engaged in the trade of disposing dead humans through cremation.
2. Built in 1936-37, the amount invested was 2,157 pounds.
3. For the year 1964-65, the Crematorium appealed to the general commissioners against an
assessment of income tax in respect of profits for 8,500 pounds.
4. The commissioners asserted that the furnace chamber and chimney towers were industrial
buildings or structures as per Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1952.
5. Located at Horsham St Faiths, Norfolk, the Crematorium is a public company incorporated on
April 5, 1935, under the Companies Act, 1929.
6. The counsels representing the crematorium contended that first, the structure in question came
under the ambit of Section 271(1)(c) and the human corpse should be regarded as “material” to
entail a substantive meaning to the provision in the present case.
7. Second, it was also contended on their behalf that the structure had to be brought within the
scope of Section 271(1)(c) and in no way, it qualifies under Section 271(1)(a),(b) or (d).
 Bourne v Norwich Crematorium

1. As per Section 271(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1952, crematoriums cannot be regarded as
“industrial buildings”.
2. According to Section 271(d) of the Act, including a human corpse under the scope of
“goods or materials” would be extremely immoral.
3. Consequently, the trade of taxpayers cannot be brought under the scope of Section
271(1)(c).
Bourne v Norwich Crematorium

 “English words derive colour from those which surround them.

Sentences are not mere collections of words to be taken out of the
sentence, defined separately by reference to the dictionary or decided
cases and then put back again into the sentence..” He strongly
disagreed with the contention of taxpayers and found no reason to
believe the burning of the mortal remains of homo sapiens as the
subjection of goods or materials to a process. Hence, it cannot be
brought under the ambit of Section 271(1)(c) under the scope of
“industrial buildings”.
R v. Harris

 The perpetrator, Harris, bit off a part of the victim’s nose.

 The act of Parliament under which Harris was held liable defined the crime
as “stabbing, cutting, or injuring”.
 By applying the literal rule as well as noscitur a socii, the court determined that biting
someone’s nose off did not qualify as either of the three injuries listed above. As a
result, the conviction of the defendant was quashed and Harris was not held guilty.
 The case clarified a point on the literal rule while respecting the parliament’s
sovereignty that it values precision in drafting and certainty in the law.
 R v. Maginnis

 Under section “5 (3) of the Abuse of Narcotics Act 1971”, the convict was charged with
possessing a prohibited drug with the intent to sell it.
 His car contained a box containing £500 worth of cannabis. The marihuana, according to
the complainant, belonged to a friend who would pick it up later.
 The trial judge determined that his conduct of returning the narcotics to his friend was an
act of supply.
 The verdict was reversed by the “Court of Appeal”.
 Decision

 The verdict was overturned.

 Lord Keith delivered the keynote address. The term “supply,” in its ordinary natural sense,
implies more than the simple transition of physical possession of any chattel from one
entity to another; it signifies the notion of furnishing or supplying to another
anything that is needed or necessary to satisfy the needs or demands of the
other.
 London and North Eastern Railway v.
Berriman

 In the course of oiling a railway route, a worker was killed.

 The wife demanded reimbursement from the railway board, i.e. “London and North Eastern
Railways” for failing to keep a lookout for her husband, and his subsequent demise.
 A law stipulated that anyone who was ‘ laying or fixing ‘the track must be compensated in
case of his/her demise while in course of his/her job.
 Whether the widow of a dead railway worker was eligible for damages in the event of her
husband’s death was the primary point of concern in this case.
 Another point of dispute concerned the interpretation of a proviso under the Fatal
Accidents Act 1864.
 London and North Eastern Railway v.
Berriman

 After careful consideration, the judges of the Court ruled that for the death of the husband
while working on the railroad, the wife was not entitled to reimbursement since the job of
“oiling” did not fall under the categories the statute enumerates.
 As per the Literal Rule of Statutory Interpretation “, the words of a statute are taken to
mean as they are in their natural, ordinary, and grammatical context”.
 Based on the literal rule of interpretation, ‘oiling’ did not fall under either “relaying or
repairing” the track in this situation. Therefore, the widow was not entitled to any
compensation as the judges applied the literal meanings of the terms “relay” and “repair”
to the facts of the case.
 3. EXPRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO
ALTERIUS

 when one or more things of a class are expressly mentioned others of the same class
are excluded.
 the express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another
 The effect of the maxim is that if a list of words appearing in an act or legislation are specific in
nature and are not followed by general words then that act/legislation will only apply to the words
appearing in the list.
 3. EXPRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO
ALTERIUS

 In other words, there are 2 conditions which need to be fulfilled cumulatively in order to apply this
maxim for interpretation of statutes which are as follows:
 Condition No.1 – The list of words appearing in a statute should be specific in nature And
 Condition No.2: Those specific words should not be followed by general words
 therefore mention of one or more specific things may be taken to exclude others of the same type.”
 It is not necessary to add other words to the list in order to make sense of the provision. When something
is mentioned expressly in a statute it leads to the presumption that the things not mentioned are excluded.
Tempest v Kilner (1846)

 In the court had to rule whether the Statute of Frauds 1677 applied to
the sale of stocks and shares.
 The Act required contracts for the sale of 'goods, wares and
merchandise' to be evidenced in writing if they were above a specified
value.
 The court decided that stocks and shares were not covered by the Act
as the specific words 'goods, wares and merchandise' were not followed
by general words
Three rules of Construction

Ejusdem Generis where a law lists specific classes of persons

or things and then refers to them in general,
the general statements only apply to the
same kind of persons or things specifically
listed
Noscitur a sociis the term in a statute is to be recognized by
the associated words
expressio unius exclusio indicates that the expression of one thing in
alter- ius a statute excludes by implication other
things unexpressed.
Exercises

1. House, shed, garage, or other structure

2. House, shed, garage or structure
3. Structures including but not limited to houses, sheds, and garages
4. Any structure including houses, sheds, and garages

Please focus on whether the principle of ejusdem generis applies at all.

Exercise 2

Statute: It is illegal to “carry a dagger, dirk, stiletto, or other dangerous

weapon.”
Facts: Defendant was carrying an M-1 rifle.
Is the Defendant Guilty?
Exercise 3

 National Motor Vehicle Theft Act (1931): Punishes those who knowingly
transport a stolen “automobile, automobile truck, automobile wagon,
motor cycle, or any other self-propelled vehicle not designed for
running on rails.
 Fact: Defendant knowingly transported an airplane, is he guilty?
 Answer

 Jus­tice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., writing for the Court in McBoyle v. United States, found that the stat­ute did not
apply to an aircraft: An airplane is not a vehicle.
If one focuses on the term “vehicle,” the Court’s conclusion might seem puzzling. Isn’t an airplane a
vehicle?
Some have questioned whether the ordinary meaning of “vehicle” includes air-planes. Nevertheless,
even if some doubt exists, the specific context in McBoyle significantly bolstered the Court’s claim
that an airplane was not a vehicle.
But any puzzlement lessens when we consider the ordinary meaning of “vehicle” in context. The
general words, “any other . . . vehicle,” come after a long list of more spe­cific terms: automobile,
automobile truck, automobile wagon, and motor­cycle.
Perhaps, based on this context, an ordinary reader would under­stand the statutory rule to be more
specific: “Vehicle” refers to automobiles, motorcycles, and similar entities, like buses, that are
designed for traveling on land. But vehicles of a very different nature (e.g., canoes or airplanes) are
not “vehicles” in this context.
 Explanation

 “No doubt etymologically it is possible to use the word to signify a conveyance working on
land, water or air …
 But in everyday speech ‘vehicle’ calls up the picture of a thing moving on land.
 So here, the phrase under discussion calls up the popular picture.
 For after including automobile truck, automobile wagon and motor cycle, the words ‘ any
other self-propelled vehicle not designed for running on rails’ still indicate a vehicle in the
popular sense, that is a vehicle running on land is the theme. It is a vehicle that runs, not
something, not commonly called a vehicle, that flies. Airplanes were well known in 1919
when this statute was passed, but it is admitted that they were not mentioned in the
reports or in the debates in Congress.
Exercise 4

Fact: The Defendant's house was called The Café; it was found open during the night,
and seventeen females and twenty gentlemen were there, and were supplied with
cigars, drinks which they consumed.
  Defendant contended, that the premise is not
open for any public entertainment as she does
not play music in addition to the sale of
refreshments and therefore, she had not
committed the offence charged.
 Judge: I do not think that entertainment need
Answer be something in the nature of playing music. It
is rather the correlative of resort-the reception
and accommodation of the public who resort to
the place. The court held that "entertainment"
did not mean musical entertainment but the
reception and accommodation of people, so the
defendant was guilty.
Exercise 5

 Facts: Defendant had carried explosives in a cloth bag, where the law
required that:
 Statute: explosives shall be carried into a mine within a ‘case or
cannister’.
 Answer

 By interpreting the definition of ‘case’ by the words around it (specifically, the words ‘or
cannister’), the court concluded that a cloth bag could not be within the statutory
definition, as ‘case’ was intended to refer to an alternative to a cannister, that necessarily
could provide protection and structural integrity similar to what a cannister could.
 Under noscitur a sociis, it was held that the bag could not have been within the statutory
definition, because parliament's intention was referring to a case or container of the same
strength as a canister.
 Exercise 6

 Defendant is a registered dealer in 'dhoop' and 'aggarbatti‘. The Defendant was sought to
be made liable to pay sales tax at the rate of 10 paisa per rupee earned, as was leviable
upon items falling under the Entry No.16 of Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948.
 Statute: Entry No.16 read: "Cosmetics, perfumery and toilet goods, excluding tooth-paste,
tooth-powder, kum- kum and soap,"
 Answer

 The question was whether "dhoop" or "dhoopbatti" fell within the description of "perfume"
thereunder.
 It was held that perfumery means such articles as used in cosmetics and toilet goods viz,
sprays, etc but does not include ‘Dhoop’ and ‘Agarbatti’ .
 Exercise 7

Facts: Bugaiski shot a dog he claimed was attacking his own dog. He was prosecuted under the dog law of 1919.

Statute: “Any person . . . may kill any dog which he sees in the act of pursuing, worrying, or wounding any livestock
or poultry or attacking persons, and there shall be no liability on such person, in damages or otherwise, for such
killing.”

“ Livestock ” means horses, stallions, colts, geldings, mares, sheep, rams, lambs, bulls, bullocks, steers, cows, calves,
mules, jacks, jennets, burros, goats, kids and swine, and fur-bearing animals being raised in captivity.
 Answer

Issue: whether the Legislature intended that dogs be included within the definition of “livestock” as part of the
category “fur-bearing animals being raised in captivity.”

Dogs were not included within the definition of “livestock” as part of the category “fur- bearing animals being raised
in captivity.” The fact the Legislature listed “fur-bearing” animals as a separate category within the laundry list of
“livestock” indicates a specific intent to distinguish these animals from the rest of the list on the basis of their fur-
bearing characteristic, presumably at least in partial recognition of the commercial value of furs. Dogs are not so
distinguished.

Moreover, the deliberate use of the modifying phrase “being raised in captivity” implies the fur-bearing animals
contemplated in the category are not normally held in captivity. Again, dogs do not belong in this category.
 Pengelly v. Bell Punch Co. Ltd [1964]
1 WLR 1055

 The Bell Punch Company Limited have a storeroom at their factory at Uxbridge where they
stack a lot of reels of paper. They have racks on which the smaller reels are kept. At the
foot of the racks they store the big reels of paper. They are put in a double line at the foot
of the racks: so that they stand out 20 inches from the base of the racks.
 Mr Pengelley was employed by the defendant company to get reels from this room and
carry them to other parts of the factory. On the 26th October, 1961, he went to get one of
the smaller reels from the top of the rack. For this purpose he had to stand beside the big
reels which were on the floor and reach up and across to the smaller reels. He had done it
for years, and other men had done it for years, without any mishap at all. On this occasion
he had got his foot in between two of the big reels at the bottom; he had got hold of a
small reel and was bringing it down: then as he turned, he twisted his knee. It was not a
severe injury. The total damages are £575.
The ground on which the plaintiff filed his case was that the employers had broken
Section 28 of the Factory Act 1961 which says:
"All 'floors, steps, stairs, passageways and gangways shall, so far as is reasonably
practicable, be kept free from any obstruction".
The court held that as all the other words were used to indicate passage, a floor used
exclusively for storage did not fall within the Act.
Rule: Noscitur a sociis
 Exercise 8

 A Poor Relief Act 1601 had the effect of raising taxes weekly:
 “shall raise weekly or otherwise by taxation of every occupier of lands, houses, tithes, …
coalmines or saleable underwoods”
 The Court was asked to determine whether the Act applied to limestone mines as well.
 The Court used the rule ofexpressio unius est exclusio alterius and held
that since limestone mines were not expressly mentioned in the Act
and since the Act did not imply that it was not to applicable to
limestone mines
Exercise 9

 The Applicant, the twenty three year old illegitimate daughter, born in Hong Kong, of a
Chinese mother and a father said (and assumed to be by the court) to be English,
applied on 24 November 1974 for entry clearance to the United Kingdom as a student.
 Enquiries revealed that her intention was permanent residence and the application
was refused on the ground that as an illegitimate child she had no claim to reside in
UK under the Immigration Act 1971.
 The statute allowed an illegitimate child born to a British mother, but not a father.
Statute: The word "parent" within the meaning of section 2(3)(a) of the Immigration Act
1971 includes the mother of an illegitimate child;...."
 Answer

 The question is whether the word "parent" in the present case includes also the putative father
of this young lady who, for the purposes of argument, is assumed to be a British subject.
 Defendant argued that for a variety of reasons the word "parent" in this context must include
the father of an illegitimate child. Suggests that the word "parent" in ordinary conversation
must include the father of an illegitimate child: a man in the street would so conclude.
 One only has to look at the definition section which I have already read, which reads" 'parent'
includes the mother of an illegitimate child".
 One only has to apply to that the well known maxim of construction expressio unius est
exclusio alterius to see that the express inclusion of the mother excludes the father of the
illegitimate child. Consequently for that reason alone judge dismissed this case.
 Exercise 10

 Terrace was a citizen of both the United States and Washington State. He was a farmer and
wanted to lease his land to Nakatsuaka (who was born in Japan) for five years for agricultural
purposes. The Attorney General was claiming Alien Land Law and trying to prosecute criminally
which could lead to a confiscation of the land and imprisonment.
 Terrace pointed to the treaty between US and Japan that granted liberty to the citizens and
subjects of each party:
 "to enter, travel and reside in the territories of the other, to carry on trade, . . . to own or lease and
occupy houses, manufactories, warehouses and shops, . . . to lease land for residential and
commercial purposes, and generally to do anything incident to or necessary for trade upon the
same terms as native citizens or subjects,”
 Whether Terrace can lease land to Nakatsuaka for agricultural purposes given the treaty between
US and Japan allowed Japanese to enter, reside and carry on trade in US?
Answer

 In the case before us, the thing forbidden is very different.

 It is not an opportunity to earn a living in common occupations of the community,
but it is the privilege of owning or controlling agricultural land within the State.
The quality and allegiance of those who own, occupy and use the farm lands within
its borders are matters of highest importance, and affect the safety and power of
the State itself. Treaty indicates that the expression of one thing excludes by
implication other things unexpressed. Trade is mentioned but not agriculture.