Legal writing basics: sentences a court can follow

Legal writing has a reputation for density that it does not deserve. The best legal prose is plain: it names the actor, states the rule, applies it, and concludes. What makes it legal is the precision, not the ornament.

This article is the craft, in the forms you will use in practice and in the examination.

The five habits

1. One idea per sentence. If a sentence has three clauses and two qualifications, it has three sentences in it. Splitting them is not dumbing down; it is helping the reader follow the reasoning.

2. The conclusion early. In a memo, an answer, a letter: say what you conclude in the first paragraph. A reader who knows where you are going can follow the route; a reader who does not is doing work you should have done.

3. The actor named. "The contract was rescinded" hides who rescinded it, and in law that is usually the question. Prefer "X rescinded the contract".

4. The rule stated as a rule. Not "there is a principle that…" but "Article 1191 authorises the injured party to choose between performance and rescission."

5. The conclusion stated as a conclusion. Not "therefore, it is submitted that the position may be…" but "X may rescind."

The four-part paragraph

The paragraph that does most legal work has four moves, in this order:

1. The proposition — what you are asserting.
2. The authority — the provision or the decision.
3. The application — what about these facts makes it so.
4. The consequence — what follows.

That is the same skeleton as a bar answer, scaled down, and the same skeleton as a memo section. Learning it once serves both. For the examination version, see how a bar answer is scored.

Words that do no work

A short list, worth hunting in your own drafts:

• "It is submitted that" — the whole document is submitted.
• "Clearly" — if it were clear, you would not need to say so.
• "Respectfully" — when the document is already respectful.
• "And/or" — choose, or explain.
• "Said" as an adjective ("the said contract") — the definite article usually does the job.
• "Wherefore, premises considered" — conventional, and fine in a pleading's prayer, but not an argument.

Removing them makes prose shorter and, more usefully, clearer about what is being asserted.

Defined terms and consistency

A drafting discipline that transfers to examination writing:

• Define once, then use the defined term. If you call it "the property" in paragraph one, do not call it "the parcel" in paragraph four and "the land" in paragraph six. In an answer, inconsistency in identifiers is how candidates lose marks to crossed parties — see formatting mistakes.
• Use one term for one thing. A "complaint" is not also an "action"; a "motion" is not also a "petition".
• Number when the law numbers. If a provision has three requisites, write three.

Structure on the page

Three conventions worth keeping, in practice and in the examination:

• Headings that state the point, not the topic: "The period had not lapsed" rather than "The period".
• Short paragraphs. Four to six sentences. Long paragraphs hide the reasoning.
• One argument per paragraph, in the order the reader needs to accept them.

Adapting the register

• A pleading — formal, numbered, conventional. The forms exist; use them.
• A memo — analytical, structured, conclusion first, with the facts separated from the discussion.
• A letter to a client — plain, direct, no Latin you would not say aloud, and a clear statement of what the client should do next.
• A bar answer — compressed: conclusion, rule, application, conclusion, in twelve minutes.

The register changes; the skeleton does not.

The revision that improves everything

Read your draft aloud. It takes two minutes and it catches:

• sentences that run out of breath before they run out of clauses;
• arguments with the authority missing;
• identifiers that drifted;
• conclusions that stop without concluding.

This is the cheapest editing technique available, and almost nobody uses it on legal writing.

Why this matters in a review year

Because the examination marks writing, not knowledge, at the margin: two candidates who know the same law are separated by whether the examiner can find the rule and the application quickly. The habits above are the difference — and they are learnable in an afternoon of practice, which is a better return than another chapter read.

For the difference between writing for a court and writing for an examiner, see writing a memo versus writing an answer.