Unusually, there have been two pronouncements on judgment writing from high judicial officers in the UK recently (news, 23 November). The long and short of it is a win for the sensible call that judgments need to be clearer and shorter, but that there is also room for improvement by advocates.

First, Lady Arden of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has noted that judgments are getting longer, a fact that she laments in terms of its impact on the attractiveness of the English jurisdiction as a forum for worldwide litigation. She says the target audience includes non-lawyers (especially litigants in person) and should therefore aim for simplicity of expression. She quotes Blaise Pascal: ‘If I had had more time I would have written a shorter letter.’ She also calls on advocates to shorten their written submissions and witness statements and for appellate judges to agree more often.

This was followed up by Lord Neuberger, president of the UK Supreme Court (the highest judicial office in the UK since it replaced the judicial House of Lords), who reiterated much of what Lady Arden said, and added calls for summaries at the beginning of judgments and for the use of tables of contents. He also referred to the difficulty of interpreting multi-judgment appellate decisions.

James Bowers, Russell Jones & Walker, London