The Winning Writing Style in APC

8/9/03

Writing Short Sentences - Learning from Lord Denning, the Master of Full Stop

As the APC Written Exam is approaching, Jim Yip, the Hon. Editor, tells an important technique in passing the written exam.

Short sentences are back in vogue. In modern society, communication is measured in seconds. The most basic form of communication -writing -has also moved up in speed by having short paragraphs, short sentences and short words.

This month's Write Stuff column will take a look at some of the landmark judgments made by Lord Denning, the best-known and the best-loved judge in the English history.

Most people admired Lord Denning, not only his open-minded attitude to the revision of old precedents superseded by changed social conditions. They also loved his writing style. He was the master of the full-stop. Short sentences. The prose of an evangelist.

"I notice that you use plain simple language, short words and brief sentences. This is the way to write English... When you catch adjectives kill most of them - then the rest will be valuable." Mark Twain, writing to a schoolboy essayist.

Lord Denning was most renowned for his storytelling style of writing judicial opinions. He wrote in short, crisp sentences intended to make the law accessible to lay people. A biographer referred to his writing style as "pungent English."

As Lord Denning effectively showed in many of his judgments, the recitation of the facts which are decided need not be dull.

To illustrate this point, these are the opening paragraphs of the judgment of Lord Denning in Beswick v Beswick [1966], a case which concerned the enforceability by third parties of contracts entered into for their benefit:

"Mr. old Peter Beswick was a coal merchant in Eccles, Lancashire. He had no business premises. All he had was a lorry, scales and weights. He used to take the lorry to the yard of the National Coal Board, where he bagged coal and took it round to his customers in the neighbourhood. His nephew, John Joseph Beswick, helped him in the business. In March 1962, old Peter Beswick and his wife were both over 70. He had had his leg amputated and was not in good health. The nephew was anxious to get hold of the business before the old man died. So they went to a solicitor, Mr. Ashcroft, who drew up an agreement for them. The business was to be transferred to the nephew: old Peter Beswick was to be employed in it as a consultant for the rest of his life at 6 pounds and 10 cents a week. After his death the nephew was to pay to his widow an annuity of 5 pounds per week, which was to come out of the business."

In contrast, the equally eminent, but perhaps somewhat less interesting, Lord Justice Salmon said:" Throughout this judgment I will, for the sake of clarity, refer to A, B, and C. A is the late Mr. Peter Beswick and also the plaintiff standing in his shoes in her capacity as administrator. B is the defendant and C is the plaintiff in her personal capacity."

In 1968 the Court of appeal had to decide whether it was for the benefit of children (born and yet to be born) to vary a trust so that the money and the family could be transferred to Jersey, to save tax. Lord Denning's response was memorable and terse:" Many a child has been ruined by being given too much. The avoidance of tax may be lawful, but it is not a yet a virtue": Re Weston's Settlements [1968]. He then added a final comment:

"There is one thing more. I cannot help wondering how long these young people will stay in Jersey. It may be to their financial interests at present to make their home there permanently, but will they remain there once the capital gains are safely in their hands, clear of tax? They may well change their minds... Are they to be wanderers over the face of the earth, moving from their country to that, according to where they can best avoid tax? I cannot believe that to be right. Children are like trees: they grow with firm roots."

The law explained by Lord Denning reads like a story, not like a dry legal text. For example, he contributed one of the most memorable openings to a judgment in a case on nervous shock: Hinz v Berry [1970]:

"It happened on April 18 1964. It was bluebell times in Kent. Mr. and Mrs. Hinz had been married some 10 years, and they had four children, all aged nine and under. The youngest was one. Mrs. Hinz was a remarkable woman. In addition to her own four, she was foster-mother to four other children. To add to it, she was two months pregnant with her fifth child."

Here also is the beginning of his judgment in Dutton V Bognor Regis Urban District Council [1972]:

"In Bognor Regis there was years ago a rubbish tip. It was filled in and the ground made up so that it looked like the land next to it. You would not have known there had ever been a rubbish tip there."

Another Rank Film Distributors Ltd v Video Information Centre [1982] started:

"'It is, it is a glorious thing, to be a pirate king', said W S Gilbert. But he was speaking of ship pirates. Today we speak of film pirates. It is not a glorious thing to be, but it is a good thing to be in for making money."

Reading past judgements is a good training on expressing complex ideas in simple sentences. My recommended list of recent landmark cases in property:

1. Zero Hope Value?
Director of Lands v. Yin Shuen Enterprises Ltd and Nam Chun Investment Co. Ltd. 2003

In assessing the compensation of the land resumed by the Government, comparables of similar leases and subject to similar restrictions are not good enough. The Court of Final Appeal tells valuers to discount the speculative element for which the Government ought not to pay in accordance with the Section 12(c) of the Lands Resumption Ordinance. This case opens a new basis for valuing the government-resumed land i.e. the real value of the property, a departure from the traditional open market value basis.

2. Zero Tolerance of Reclaiming Harbour
Society for Protection of the Harbour Limited v. Town Planning board 2003

The Government must pay heeds to the principle of presumption against reclamation in the harbour as provided in the section 3 of the Protection of Harbour Ordinance, before deciding to reclaim the harbour, the Judge said.

3. A Complete Picture in Compulsory Sale for Redevelopment
Bond Star Development Limited & Capital Well Limited (LDCS 2000 of 2001)

A good reading on the principle and mechanism of the Land (Compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) Ordinance.

4. A New Dividing Line
Santal Limited v. Secretary for Transport LDMR 7 of 2001

In this case, the judge set out new principles in determining the eligibility for entitlement to compensation in the event of road closure under the Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance ("the Roads Ordinance").

All the judgments can be downloaded from the Judiciary website.