LEGAL LANGUAGE AS A TRAUMA OF LAW AND THE ROAD TO REHABILITATION

Abstract

Commentators, legal and non‐legal, have, down the centuries, criticised legal writing as unnecessarily verbose, often ambiguous, and generally not conducive to promoting access to justice. This is still largely the case today. This paper attempts to explain why this state of affairs exists, and proposes ways to rehabilitate the language so that it is in more in keeping with the consensus of what modern legal writing should be. Examples taken from documents currently in use illustrate the problems and plain English principles provide the vehicle for change.