“Even though a contributing cause to the reduction in sales/revenue may be a lack of sensitivity towards market sentiment (which the Company had investigated/researched through a specialized marketing team), and a shortage in manpower (which is to no fault of the Company that has taken reasonable measures), as sales/revenue is fundamental to the Company’s existence, and consequently the livelihood of its staff/employees, those reasons do not justify the Defendant’s action (or lack thereof), and therefore the Defendant’s shall, amongst other reasons as submitted above, still be liable for the losses suffered by the Company, and consequently liable to compensate the Company.”
Have you all played a game where you try to find how many squares are there in a picture? Something like the one in the featured image.
Now, let’s figure out how many sentences are there in the example above.
To be honest, I don’t even know the answer.
I think there are around 10 – 15 sentences in that 1 sentence; it is just atrocious.
Worse, there are 100 words in total in just 1 sentence!
Why do some lawyers write like that?
Who taught them that lawyers should write that way?
Do they think that is how to make one sound more lawyer-ish and that is how one can win over a client or a judge?
To me, these long, convoluted sentences are neither clear nor persuasive.
A reader dreads to read it, gets tired while reading it, and forgets all about it after reading it.
These sentences are a waste of energy; they distract more than they persuade, and they annoy more than they impress.
Perhaps some think that writing like this shows how sophisticated he/she is, but I personally think that the only thing it shows is a lack of skill and effort.
I would change the sentence to the following:
“Indeed, poor sensitivity to market sentiment is one reason for the reduction in sales and revenue. Another reason is the shortage of manpower.
However, these are not valid excuses to justify the Defendants’ lack of action.
The Defendants cannot blame the Company as the Company has taken reasonable measures to try to overcome the problem, including hiring a specialized marketing team.
The reduction in sales and revenue severely affects the Company and threatens the livelihood of its employees.
The Defendants must compensate the Company for the losses it suffered due to the Defendant’s inaction.”
I hope we can agree that the amended version is more readable, is easier to follow, and consequently conveys a clearer message. It also leaves less room for ambiguity and confusion.
My suggestions to better writing are as follows:
- Write in active voice.
- Use short sentences.
- Avoid compounding more than 2 sentences.
- Avoid legalese e.g. “lack thereof”, “in relation thereto.”, unless really necessary.
- Use simple words.
- Remove words that mean the same e.g. “staff” and “employees”.
- Convey 1 message only in each paragraph.
- Use a list if it helps.
But to put it simply, lawyers should remember to think like a normal human being and communicate like a normal human being la…Stop writing like a (legal) moron.
A good book on this is the book titled “Plain English for Lawyers, by Richard C Wydick”; I highly recommend it.
For other legal practice-related posts, see here: The Art of Advocacy