Section Article

Legislation that use outdated terminology
Author(s): Dr. Ajay Garg

Abstract
Archaic language in legal papers and court judgements pertains to the use of antiquated terms phrases and structures that were once prevalent but are now hardly employed outside of legal settings. The practice of valuing stability and consistency in language in law has historical origins and is rooted in the tradition-bound structure of the legal system. This ensures that legal concepts stay intact throughout time. Outdated phrases like hereinbefore heretofore and whereas sometimes remain in legal writings posing difficulties for contemporary readers who may find these statements unclear and hard to understand. The use of outdated language in legal discourse serves many purposes such as maintaining legal consistency minimising uncertainty by using terminology with established definitions and establishing a formal atmosphere that emphasises the gravity of court proceedings. Nevertheless it also has notable disadvantages namely in relation to accessibility and clarity. The use of outdated terminology might make it difficult for non-experts to comprehend which can give the impression that the legal system is hard to access or needlessly complex. This abstract examines the conflict between tradition and clarity in legal language investigating the factors for the continued use of outdated words and the consequences for legal communication. Additionally it takes into account the trend towards using simple and clear language in legal writing aiming to find a balance between accuracy and the need for clarity and comprehensibility. The text examines the shift towards contemporary legal language emphasising the continuing discussions about the most effective methods for achieving legal change while maintaining the accuracy and consistency that archaic language has historically offered.