Report comment

I don't need to repeat all the "dumbing down" comments (for that is what it would be), but those who keep insisting that the law be made easy to understand forget why it isn't.

It is the avarice, stubbornness, gullibility and sometimes downright evil of people's behaviour that necessitates the legal system.

Over the centuries, in dealing with disputes between ordinary people among others, the law has had to develop many detailed and often complicated concepts because that is what the circumstances require.

It's a sad fact that many concepts can be explained only in paragraphs and not in soundbites. Part of a lawyer's job is to act as the interface between the complicated law and the uncomplicated individual. But, among themselves, lawyers and judges use technical language because it usually a quicker means of communicating the concepts.

Litigation is warfare on paper. It's never going to be nice and "chatty". It has winners and losers. Entering it as a litigant in person is like stumbling through a dense jungle that is littered with landmines. Without a competent guide, there's a danger of being wiped out. That's the nature of the process.

The best advice to the litigant who can't afford competent legal representation is "Don't fight. Compromise or concede". Pretending that civil justice can be made easy, affordable and understandable simply dupes the public into demanding what can't be had.