It is very common for lawyers to write and speak as if our usual interlocutor and clients were always another lawyer. This often leads to limited understanding on the part of the person listening to us. We consider it an egoistic practice that, rather than effectively communicating something, seeks to make the speaker appear wise, intellectual, or—why not—even cultured.
Yet, far from achieving that, what often happens is that people see us as “characters,” to the point that when there is enough familiarity with others, someone might jokingly say: here comes this one again with his fancy Sunday words…
In the context of the lawyer–client relationship, the use of technical jargon, doctrinal references, quotations from famous phrases, citations of legal provisions, Latin expressions, and complex legal constructions—which, although technically correct—do not necessarily fulfill the most important objective of our work: properly guiding the client.
It is not uncommon to see contracts, reports, or emails filled with legal language that, for us, seems clear and natural, but for the client may be confusing, distant, or even somewhat intimidating.
From this arises an interesting question: Who are we really trying to serve with that language?
By nature, the law requires precision. But that does not mean unnecessary complexity. A lawyer must have the skill to master technical language and, at the same time, know how to translate it. A good lawyer not only interprets the law; they also interpret the client’s problem and explain it in terms that the client can understand and use to make decisions.
The way lawyers speak depends on the setting. We do not speak the same way to:
a judge,
another lawyer,
a businessperson,
a foreign investor,
or a family buying their first property.
Each interlocutor needs clarity from their own context.
When a client consults us, they are not necessarily looking for a law lecture. They are seeking guidance, certainty, judgment, and the presentation of viable strategies. They want to understand what is happening, what their risks are, and what decisions they should make.
If the client finishes the conversation more confused than when they started, we probably have not communicated well—even if our legal analysis is impeccable.
In that sense, perhaps one of the great challenges of the modern practice of law is not to impress with technicalities, but to guide with clarity.
