Why writing law essays is a pain-in-the-posterior (Suzanne)

When I write normal, artsy style essays, like the ones I do for music history, there are certain phrases which I like to use. These include “substantial”, “remedy [for a problem etc]”, “(in)significant”, and “question”. These words all have legal meanings, which, while similar to their common meanings, are actually not exactly the same. So when I write law essays, I have to go back and check all these words to make sure that it is clear which meaning I am using. In many cases, this involves either constructing rather unwieldy phrases to make it syntactically impossible for it to mean the other version, or using a less punchy word. It’s rather annoying.

On a similar note, case names are such a waste of word count. When you only have 1500 words for an essay worth 50% of your grade, typing out Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd or Victoria Park Racing and Recreational Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor repeatedly is really not a huge deal of fun, especially if you have a mental wordcounting instinct like me and are watching all the remaining words in your wordcount drain away.

I suppose this is why my essay focused more on Grosse v Purvis and Hosking v Runting.