Plain English vs Legalese: Can Law Be Made Simpler Without Losing Precision?

---

Law is often described as the language of power — precise, binding, and authoritative. Yet for most people, legal documents sound like a foreign language. The dense, complex, and archaic style known as legalese has been part of legal writing for centuries. Words like heretofore, whereas, and hereinafter make even simple contracts sound intimidating. This style, while historically rooted, often alienates laypersons and reinforces the perception that law is inaccessible.

In contrast, the Plain English Movement argues that laws and legal documents should be written in clear, accessible language that ordinary citizens can understand. This raises an important question:

Can law be made simpler without losing its essential precision?

This debate lies at the heart of the Foundations of Legal Language, where clarity, precision, and accessibility must coexist.

What is Legalese?

Legalese refers to the traditional style of legal writing characterized by long sentences, archaic words, redundant phrases, and Latin expressions. For example:

“The party of the first part hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the party of the second part…”

This could easily be written as:

“The first party agrees to protect the second party from any loss or damage.”

Legalese developed in medieval England, when lawyers combined Latin, French, and Old English in their documents. Over centuries, it became a specialized code that ensured precision, consistency, and tradition in legal interpretation.

However, the same features that made legalese precise also made it inaccessible to non-lawyers — creating a gap between the law and the people it governs.

The Rise of the Plain English Movement

The Plain English Movement emerged in the 1970s in the United States and the United Kingdom, aiming to simplify legal and bureaucratic writing. Governments began encouraging clarity in public documents so that citizens could understand their rights and obligations without needing a lawyer to interpret every sentence.

For example:

• In 1978, the U.S. President Jimmy Carter issued an executive order directing federal agencies to write regulations in plain English.
• The Plain Writing Act of 2010 further required U.S. federal agencies to use clear communication.
• In the U.K., the Plain English Campaign awarded its famous “Crystal Mark” to documents that achieved clarity and readability.

India too, though not formally part of this movement, has seen a growing interest in simplified legal drafting and citizen-friendly laws, especially with the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023), which aims to replace colonial-era legal codes with simpler language. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023), along with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, reflects a broader legislative effort to modernize legal language and remove colonial-era complexity.

Why Legal Language Is Complex

Despite calls for simplicity, legal language cannot be reduced to ordinary speech without caution. The precision of law depends on certain linguistic features:

1. Certainty of Meaning: Legal rules must leave no ambiguity. For example, in criminal law, the difference between “culpable homicide” and “murder” hinges on nuanced statutory language that cannot be casually rephrased. Every word has a defined meaning based on precedent.
2. Inclusiveness: Legal documents must cover all possible scenarios and interpretations.
3. Formality: Legal writing reflects authority and seriousness, which informal language may dilute.
4. Tradition and Precedent: Courts interpret laws based on centuries of usage. Changing wording may unintentionally change meaning. This is especially true in jurisdictions like India, where precedent from colonial-era judgments still influences interpretation, and statutory language must align with constitutional principles.

For example, the word “consideration” in contract law does not mean mere thoughtfulness — it has a specific legal definition referring to something of value exchanged between parties.

Thus, legalese persists because lawyers and judges fear that simplicity may lead to loss of precision, and consequently, legal uncertainty.

Can Plain English Preserve Precision?

Yes — if done thoughtfully. The goal is not to oversimplify the law but to make it clear without compromising accuracy. Modern drafting techniques demonstrate that it is possible to balance simplicity with legal precision.

1. Use of Clear Structure

Breaking long sentences into shorter, numbered points helps readers grasp obligations and conditions easily.

2. Avoiding Archaic Words

Words like thereof, aforementioned, and hereinbefore can be replaced with simpler alternatives like of it, mentioned earlier, or above.

3. Defining Terms

If technical terms are necessary, they can be defined clearly at the beginning of the document.

4. Active Voice and Logical Flow

Instead of writing “The contract shall be terminated by either party,” use “Either party may terminate the contract.”

5. Reader Testing

Legal documents can be tested for readability using tools like the Flesch Reading Ease Score or readability indexes, ensuring they are understandable without legal training. In India, legal tech platforms and government portals have begun experimenting with bilingual summaries and simplified formats to improve citizen engagement.

Benefits of Plain English in Law

1. Accessibility: Citizens can understand their rights and obligations without legal assistance.
2. Efficiency: Simplified drafting reduces litigation caused by misinterpretation.
3. Transparency: Clear laws enhance public trust in the legal system.
4. Time and Cost Saving: Lawyers and judges spend less time deciphering ambiguous clauses.
5. Democratization of Law: Law becomes a tool for everyone, not just for professionals.

Challenges in Implementation

While the advantages are evident, implementing plain English faces resistance from traditionalists who view legalese as part of legal heritage. Moreover:

• Translating complex legal ideas into plain English without altering meaning is difficult.
• Laws must be consistent across languages, especially in multilingual countries like India.
• Legal education and drafting culture still emphasize old styles inherited from colonial systems. However, some Indian law schools and bar training programs are introducing plain language modules and drafting workshops to bridge this gap.

However, with reforms in legal education and increasing digitization, the shift toward citizen-friendly legal communication is becoming inevitable.

The Middle Path: Clarity with Precision

The most practical approach is not to eliminate legalese but to modernize it. This approach is gaining traction in India’s legislative drafting offices, where newer bills increasingly include explanatory notes and structured clauses for clarity. Legal drafters must strike a balance between clarity and precision. This involves:

• Using plain English for general readability, and
• Retaining technical terms where they are essential for exactness.

For example, a will, a contract, or a statute can be drafted in plain language with necessary legal terms retained and defined clearly. The aim is “to make law understandable without making it simplistic.”

Conclusion

The debate between plain English and legalese is not about choosing one over the other, but about harmonizing clarity with accuracy. Law exists to serve people, not to confuse them. The Foundations of Legal Language must evolve toward inclusivity — where every citizen can comprehend the law that governs them.

As Lord Denning famously said, “The English language is not the special preserve of lawyers.” His statement resonates strongly in multilingual democracies like India, where legal comprehension is key to participatory governance.

Making the law plain does not make it weak — it makes it just, transparent, and democratic.

---

References

1. Mellinkoff, David. The Language of the Law. Little, Brown & Co., 1963.
2. Kimble, Joseph. Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please: The Case for Plain Language in Business, Government, and Law. Carolina Academic Press, 2012.
3. Redish, Janice C., and Ginny Redish. Plain Language and the Law: A New Approach to Legal Drafting. Federal Register, 1979.
4. Plain English Campaign (UK) – www.plainenglish.co.uk
5. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (India).

#LegalLanguage #PlainEnglish #Legalese #LegalWriting #LawSimplified #LegalEducation #LegalDrafting #LanguageOfLaw #AccessToJustice #FoundationsOfLegalLanguage #DrGaneshVisavale