The Legal Englishes of Dispute Resolution Rules

The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) has published the UK's first Digital Dispute Resolution Rules (DDRR), which are aimed at facilitating the rapid resolution of commercial disputes, in particular those revolving around digital technology. On the other hand, the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) has published an updated version of its Arbitration Rules (LCIAR). This paper is aimed at exploring the differences in the language and style of these two international documents. On the one hand, it addresses the sector-specific language used; on the other hand, it explores the general comprehensibility of the two documents to the layperson. Legalese elements, if any, are brought to the fore and focused on, as well as technical words, in order to explore how these documents are intelligible. The paper findings highlight that the LCIAR heavily rely on legalese, whereas the DDRR present several instances of plain English. The reasons why this is possible could be found in the fact that the former are drafted by legal experts such as arbitral organisations, whereas the latter are mostly written by business and financial advisers. Also, the DDRR clearly cater for the needs of the businesses' new (digital) requirements.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Fachsprache
Published
2024-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24989/fs.v46i3-4.2210
Citations
2
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.11
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Legal Englishes of Dispute Resolution Rules

Patrizia Giampieri
2 citations
Fachsprache
International Arbitration and Investment Law
1.11
article

The Legal Englishes of Dispute Resolution Rules

Patrizia Giampieri
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) has published the UK's first Digital Dispute Resolution Rules (DDRR), which are aimed at facilitating the rapid resolution of commercial disputes, in particular those revolving around digital technology. On the other hand, the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) has published an updated version of its Arbitration Rules (LCIAR). This paper is aimed at exploring the differences in the language and style of these two international documents. On the one hand, it addresses the sector-specific language used; on the other hand, it explores the general comprehensibility of the two documents to the layperson. Legalese elements, if any, are brought to the fore and focused on, as well as technical words, in order to explore how these documents are intelligible. The paper findings highlight that the LCIAR heavily rely on legalese, whereas the DDRR present several instances of plain English. The reasons why this is possible could be found in the fact that the former are drafted by legal experts such as arbitral organisations, whereas the latter are mostly written by business and financial advisers. Also, the DDRR clearly cater for the needs of the businesses' new (digital) requirements.

FachspracheVol. 46(3-4)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
1.11
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.