header-logo header-logo

12 July 2018 / Jonathan Morgan
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Eschewing antiquated loquacious verbosity

nlj_7801_morgan

In the profession of the 21st century, it’s time to get rid of legalese & just say what you mean, writes Jonathan Morgan

Why do lawyers seem to be stuck in a rut of writing lengthy letters, using ten words when they could get their message across with three? Lawyers often send correspondence back and forth using long-winded and passive language—even when writing to customers, they tend to overcomplicate issues with lengthy phrases and words dredged up from a Dickens-style legal dictionary.

Has practising the law become about getting results for customers, or point-scoring with the use of archaic vocabulary? Surely we could be focusing most of our time on the core legal tasks if we were to correspond with clients using a friendly, conversational tone to get to the point quickly.

Stuck in the linguistical past

Lawyers have always had a love for phrases and expressions normally found only in 18th-century period dramas, and have always been susceptible to the charms of corporate speak—even as it goes out of fashion. ‘I attach herewith’ is

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll