12/06/2026
Why Clear Language in Law Matters More Than Ever
In South Africa’s legal system, two contrasting languages operate daily: the dense, technical legalese used by lawyers and the plain language that ordinary citizens can understand. Knowing when to use each is critical for justice, consumer protection, and public trust in the law. Legalese — with its archaic terms like “hereinafter,” “aforementioned,” and complex sentence structures — serves an important purpose. It delivers precision in statutes, court pleadings, commercial contracts between sophisticated parties, and formal legal opinions. This technical accuracy maintains continuity with precedent and minimises ambiguity in high-stakes matters. Yet when legalese dominates consumer-facing documents, it creates serious problems. Many South Africans, especially those with limited formal education or English as an additional language, struggle to comprehend contracts for loans, insurance, rentals, or cellphones. This opacity undermines informed consent and perpetuates power imbalances between big corporations and individual consumers. The Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA) directly tackles this issue. Section 22 grants consumers the right to information in “plain and understandable language.” A document qualifies if an ordinary consumer of the relevant class, with average literacy and minimal experience, can understand its content, significance, and implications without undue effort. The Act also requires suppliers to draw attention to certain onerous terms in plain language under section 49.The National Credit Act 34 of 2005 pioneered this approach with section 64, which imposes similar plain language obligations on credit agreements — a foundation later expanded by the CPA. South African courts have increasingly scrutinised unclear drafting.
In the seminal case of Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Dlamini 2013 (1) SA 219 (KZD), the court analysed complex credit agreements under the National Credit Act’s plain language provisions. It emphasised that dense wording and poor layout can prevent consumers — particularly vulnerable or illiterate individuals — from genuinely understanding the documents they sign. Earlier judgments laid important groundwork. In Brink v Humphries & Jewell (Pty) Ltd 2005 (2) SA 419 (SCA), the Supreme Court of Appeal considered how the structure and presentation of contract terms affect whether parties truly consented, especially regarding unexpected or onerous clauses. Similarly, Mercurius Motors v Lopez 2008 (3) SA 572 (SCA) highlighted the importance of clear communication in contractual relationships. More recently, Eskom Holdings Limited v Halstead-Cleak 2016 ZASCA 150 reinforced the need for contextual and purposive interpretation aligned with consumer protection goals. These cases, alongside provisions in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (section 6) and insurance legislation requiring plain language in policies and prospectuses, signal a clear judicial and legislative shift. Traditional contract law focused primarily on enforcement; modern statutes now demand fairness and accessibility. Legal practitioners must therefore exercise sound judgment. Deploy precise legalese in expert-to-expert communications and complex commercial deals. Switch to plain language when drafting consumer contracts, explaining rights to clients, or producing public-facing documents. This is not about diluting legal standards — it is about making the law accessible, which reduces disputes and strengthens compliance. In a diverse democracy like South Africa, the law must speak to all its people. Clarity is no longer optional; it is a statutory right and a cornerstone of contractual fairness. When consumers truly understand what they are agreeing to, the entire legal system benefits.
