LAWYERS, FONTS, THE RULES AND SKELETON ARGUMENTS BEING REJECTED: A RECAP
Every so often there are discussions on Twitter about the appropriate fonts for lawyers to use. At times these can be heated discussions, including consideration of whether the use of the word “fonts” is itself appropriate. This led me to review again the rules and guidance as to the use of fonts in litigation, and in the law generally. (For those who doubt how seriously fonts are taken I recommend this video from You Tube).
THE RULES
The Civil Procedure Rules are surprisingly silent on the use of fonts.
SKELETON ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL
Practice Direction 52C dictates the size of the font.
This Practice Direction deals with the nature of skeleton argument.
“(b) be printed on A4 paper in not less than 12 point font and 1.5 line spacing.”
In his talk Civil Litigation: Should the rules be simpler? Lord Justice Stephen Richards observed
14. Even now, people frequently ignore or defy the requirement; some think that they can get away with appendices over and above the 25 page limit, or with extensive footnotes in a smaller font size and single spacing.
GUIDANCE IN THE QUEEN’S BENCH
The Interim Applications Court of the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court A guide for Litigants in Person has guidance to litigants in person on fonts.
“A font-size of not less than 12 should be used, please – and easy-to-read styles such as Times New Roman or Arial should be adopted. The document should be double-spaced.”
GUIDANCE IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT – GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO 11
The Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2016, allows an 11-point font.
“A skeleton argument should be clearly typed and properly spaced. A font style of not less than 11-point should be used, and lines should be reasonably spaced (1.5 or double spacing is ideal)”
FONTS ARE IMPORTANT: YOU COULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH DILBERT
There is an interesting article by Athelstane Aamodt in the New Law Journal: Legal typeface: the letter of the law
- Use Comic Sans and no-one will take you seriously.
- “Traditional” fonts such as Times New Roman and Arial can cause readers to become more easily bored “because of the subliminal association of those typefaces with the world of grey, corporate, “Dilbert” monotony.”
IMPORTANT READING – ABOUT SKELETON ARGUMENTS AND FONT SIZE
In 2018 The Administrative Court Clerks Users Group has sent out an email to many chambers in relation to the format of skeleton arguments. If you did not receive this it is worth reading.
THE EMAIL: SIZE AND FONTS OF SKELETON ARGUMENTS
“Dear All
Slightly outside of our remit, however trying to relay important information to as many of you as possible.
Please be aware and more importantly make your members aware, that skeleton arguments lodged in the Court of Appeal, that don’t meet with the proper criteria of being, “not less than 12 point font” which also includes the footnotes, will not be accepted. This will result in an application (N244) having to be made, at a cost of £528, in which to correct the situation to enable this to be re-lodge but out of time.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part52/practice-direction-52c-appeals-to-the-court-of-appeal
PD 52C, para.31(1)(b)
Skeleton argument
31.
(1) Any skeleton argument must comply with the provisions of Section 5 of Practice Direction 52A (and in particular must be concise) and must in any event–
(a) not normally exceed 25 pages (excluding front sheets and back sheets);
(b) be printed on A4 paper in not less than 12 point font and 1.5 line spacing (including footnotes);
(c) be labelled as applicable (e.g. appellant’s PTA skeleton, appellant’s replacement skeleton, respondent’s supplementary skeleton), and be dated on its front sheet.”
ADDENDUM: ERRATIC ENFORCEMENT – BUT IT DOES HAPPEN
Barrister Ben Williams noted on Twitter that
“The Civil Appeals Office has (albeit erratically rather than consistently) been rejecting skeletons where even a single footnote is not in 12 point or is single spaced, and requiring formal applications for relief from sanction.”
THE EVIDENCE
Barrister Jeffrey Jupp kindly sent me photographic evidence. NB the issue here was the footnotes and indented notes being single lined spaced.
THERE ARE WHOLE BOOKS ON THE SUBJECT (YES REALLY)
Typography for Lawyers: Essential Tools for Polished & Persuasive Documents, was written by Matthew Butterick in October 2015.
I highly recommend Matthew Butterick’s book and his fonts. I use his Equity fonts in all my drafts.
Cooper Hewitt, a font commissioned by the Smithsonian Museum which is so far as I can tell in the public domain, is excellent for legal documents. It’s not Arial and it’s not Times Roman, but it’s easy on the eye and very readable.
https://www.cooperhewitt.org/open-source-at-cooper-hewitt/cooper-hewitt-the-typeface-by-chester-jenkins/
Unfortunately, interesting as the articles listed at the end of the article look, only one of the links actually works!
You are right. I have put new links in instead, some of the previous posts have disappeared from the internet.
Times New Roman was designed to be relatively condensed, which means that it takes up fewer pages than fonts such as Arial or Calibri. Hence its relative ubiquitous use in skeleton arguments. For further reading on fonts, see Simon Garfield ‘Just my type’.
Remember, if you are drafting pleadings for the Court of Justice of the EU (now of course more of a niche endeavour), the type face does not matter, because the Court will translate all of your pleadings into French in their own typeface.
Happy New Year!