header-logo header-logo

Eschewing antiquated loquacious verbosity

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll