Skip to content

CA Intermediate · Corporate and Other Laws · Interpretation of Statutes

A statute provides: 'Any person who keeps a cow, buffalo, goat or other animal in a residential building without permission shall be fined.' Meena keeps a pet parrot in her flat. The authority seeks to fine her. Applying the rule of ejusdem generis, what is the likely position?

Meena is not liable. Under ejusdem generis, the general words 'other animal' following cow, buffalo and goat are limited to the same kind, namely livestock. A pet parrot does not belong to that class, so the provision does not apply to it.

  1. AShe is liable, because 'other animal' covers every animal including birds
  2. BShe is not liable, because 'other animal' is limited to animals of the same kind as cow, buffalo and goat, i.e. domestic livestock, and a parrot is not of that classCorrect
  3. CShe is liable, because ejusdem generis applies only to criminal statutes of a different type
  4. DShe is not liable, because the Act must be read only literally

Explanation

Ejusdem generis restricts general words following specific words to things of the same genus. Cow, buffalo and goat are livestock mammals, so 'other animal' takes its colour from them. A pet parrot is not in that class. Option A ignores the specific words that precede the general term.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Interpretation of Statutes shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Interpretation of StatutesFree diagnostic mock

More Interpretation of Statutes questions