… All three authors clearly share a passion for clear, direct, legal writing. This comes through in their writing, for they practise what they preach. Each book offers detailed practical advice on how to write with clarity, brevity and legal precision. … I expect that they will appeal to similar readerships: law students, academics, practising lawyers and legislative drafters.

… Adler/Perry start by examining some of the problems with traditional legal writing. This subject matter will be familiar to many readers of books about plain legal language. Topics include: judicial criticisms of traditional legal language; the inefficiencies of contorted language; and the ways in which convoluted legal language can mask not merely typographical mistakes but errors of substance. Yet, though the ground is well-trodden, the treatment is fresh, persuasive and engaging. Adler/Perry then move to examine the true nature of plain language, and why some lawyers still oppose it.

Next comes what many will regard as the core of the book: the techniques for writing and drafting in plain language. Interestingly (and for me, properly), the authors start with matters of structure and organisation – formatting, fonts, formulas, and the like. In this, their work reflects a change in the focus of plain language advocacy. In the early days of the revived plain language movement, writers tended to focus almost entirely on finer points of language – such as word choice (simpler, not complex), sentence length (shorter, not longer), active vs passive (prefer active) and verbs vs nouns (prefer verbs). But the “revived” plain language movement recognises that “larger” matters of structure, organisation and layout are crucial to effective communication. Adler/Perry give these matters the priority they deserve.

Then follow chapters on punctuation (“use it”, they recommend), redundancy (“avoid it”, they urge), definitions (“be more thoughtful about them”), word choice (“lighten up”), and sentence length (“shorter is better”). There are also useful chapters on how to make writing more persuasive, and on computer aids to better writing (including readability-testing). The book then moves to important chapters about avoiding vagueness and ambiguity, and ends with fascinating overviews of the principal rules of legal interpretation – on the premise that a good legal writer should know not only how to write but also how judges are likely to interpret what they write.

Throughout, Adler/Perry include clear illustrations of the various matters they discuss. As Lord Neuberger notes in his Foreword to the book, the authors “very sensibly realise that by far the best way to make their point is by examples” (p xi). Valuable appendices give before-and-after examples of legal drafting. Some of these examples the authors draw from recent UK decisions; others they draw from correspondence, legal documents and statutes. All illuminate the discussion in the text. …

These two books are invaluable additions to the “legal writing” shelves of all lawyers. The tips and techniques they explore are invaluable, and will help all lawyers write with brevity, precision and panache. And in an era when many law books are dense in tone, arcane in subject matter, and drenched in footnotes, these books are an enjoyable read. Perhaps you will find them – as I did – not merely enlightening, but also instructive, engaging and refreshing.