Legal Writing: How a Law Article Is Built

A useful test. Write the question, then write the two answers a court could give. If you cannot write a second answer, the question is not open, and there is no article in it.

The shape of an article

There is no rule of law about this. What follows is the shape used by Indian law journals, and a student who follows it will not be marked down for structure.

1. Title. Say the subject and hint at the claim. "Section 12A and the Rejected Plaint" tells a reader more than "A Study of Pre-institution Mediation".

2. Abstract. One paragraph, usually 150 to 250 words. State the question, the answer and how the answer is reached. The abstract gives the conclusion away, deliberately: it is not a trailer.

3. Introduction. What the problem is, why it matters now, what the article argues, and how it proceeds. Two to four paragraphs. The last of them should say, in plain words, "this article argues that ...".

4. The legal background. The statute, the scheme, the position before the problem arose. Keep this short: it is the part students inflate. Include only what the argument later uses.

5. The problem, stated precisely. The conflicting authorities, the gap in the statute, the two readings of the section. This is the heart of the article and it usually deserves the most space.

6. The argument. Your answer, and the reasons for it, one reason per sub-heading. Each reason should be capable of standing alone.

7. The counter-argument, answered. Not a token paragraph. Take the strongest thing that can be said against you, state it as well as its supporters would, and then answer it. An article that never states a counter-argument reads as though the author never looked for one.

8. Conclusion. What follows if you are right. Who should do what. Do not introduce new material here.

9. Footnotes and bibliography. Below.

Using authority: the rule that makes legal writing different

In most writing, a source supports a point. In legal writing, a source is either binding, persuasive or neither, and the whole weight of a sentence changes depending on which.

Binding. A ratio of the Supreme Court binds every court in India under Article 141 of the Constitution. A High Court binds the courts subordinate to it. If your argument rests on a binding authority, say so and the argument is close to finished.

Persuasive. A judgment of another High Court, a foreign judgment, a Law Commission report, an academic article. These support an argument; they do not conclude it. Say which you are relying on, because a reader who has to work it out will assume the worst.

Neither. A blog post, a summary site, a coaching note, a large language model. These may point you to a source. They are not sources. Chapter 750 takes this up in detail, because it is now the commonest way a student's work goes wrong.

Two further rules that examiners enforce:

Cite the paragraph, not the case. "Balwant Singh Chaufal" tells a reader to read a hundred pages. "Balwant Singh Chaufal, para 198" takes them to the eight directions.

Never cite a case you have not read. This book's own case bank, authorities/cases.json, exists for exactly this reason: it separates cases whose facts and holding were read from cases that are only names. A proposition attributed to a case you have not read is the single fastest way to lose a reader, an examiner or, later, a judge.

A worked example, from question to paragraph

Take a real question this book had to answer: is the Mediation Act 2023 in force?

Step 1, the question. Not "what is the Mediation Act". The question is whether the Act that the syllabus names as governing mediation actually governs anything yet.

Step 2, why it is a question at all. Because the answer is not obvious. The Act received assent in 2023, is printed as an Act, is described everywhere as India's mediation law, and yet a student who applies it to a problem may be applying nothing.

Step 3, the primary source. The consolidated print of the Act, and specifically the footnote to section 1(3), which records that only sections 1, 3, 26, 31 to 38, 45 to 47, 50 to 54 and 56 to 57 were brought into force on 9 October 2023 by S.O. 4384(E). Sections 4 to 25, which contain mediation itself, are not in that list.

Step 4, corroboration. A footnote could be wrong or out of date. So: two answers of the Government of India in the Lok Sabha, unstarred question 1223 of 6 February 2026 and unstarred question 2423 of 13 February 2026, in which the Government states that the Mediation Council of India's Chairperson and Members are yet to be appointed. A Council that does not exist cannot be running the registration the unnotified sections require.

Step 5, the claim. "The Mediation Act 2023 is in force only in part, and the part that defines and regulates mediation is not among it."

Step 6, the counter-argument. Somebody will say the Act is in force because it has been notified in the Gazette and commenced. Answer it: commencement under section 1(3) is by notification for such sections as the Central Government appoints, and the notification appoints some and not others. Being an Act and being in force are different things.

Step 7, what follows. The article can now say something useful to its reader: a mediation conducted in India today is still governed by Part III of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 or by the court-annexed schemes, not by the Mediation Act, and a lawyer who advises otherwise is wrong.

That is an article. It is short, it is checkable, and every step of it can be verified by a reader who does not trust the author. That last property is the whole point.

Citation format, briefly

Indian journals differ, and each one prints its own house style. What does not differ:

• Statutes are cited by short title, section and year: the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, section 34(2)(b)(ii).
• Cases are cited by party names, reporter, volume, page and year, and the neutral or official reporter is preferred: State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, (2010) 3 SCC 402.
• Subsequent references use a short form: Chaufal, para 198.
• A source you did not read yourself is cited as "cited in", and never as though you had read it.

Whatever style a journal prescribes, apply it consistently. An editor reading a submission counts inconsistencies before reading the argument, and chapter 720 explains why.

What beginners get wrong

No question. The commonest failure. If the piece has no question, it has no thesis, and an examiner will say it reads like notes.

Too big a question. "Reforming arbitration in India" cannot be answered in 4,000 words. Narrow it until it can.

Background swallows the article. Ten pages of what the Act says and two of argument. Reverse the proportion.

Authority used decoratively. Cases named in a list to show reading, with no proposition attached to any of them.

No counter-argument. The reader concludes you did not look.

Citing a case for a proposition it does not contain. Fatal, and increasingly easy to do, because summaries of judgments are everywhere and judgments are long.

Quick revision

• An article answers one open legal question and argues one position.
• The research question must be answerable, unsettled, narrow, and matter to somebody. Test it by writing the two answers a court could give.
• Standard shape: title, abstract, introduction, background, the problem, the argument, the counter-argument answered, conclusion, footnotes.
• Authority is binding, persuasive or neither, and the sentence must show which.
• Cite the paragraph. Never cite a case you have not read.
• The article's test is that a reader who does not trust the author can check every step.

Test yourself

1. What distinguishes an article from a summary of the law? An article advances a claim that could be shown to be wrong and defends it with reasons. A summary reports what the sources say. If a reader could get the same content from the bare Act, no article has been written.

2. State the four requirements of a good research question. It must be answerable, not already settled, narrow enough to answer in the space available, and of consequence to somebody whom the article can name.

3. Why must an article state the counter-argument? Because an argument that has not met the strongest objection to it has not been tested, and a reader who can think of an objection the author did not mention will assume the author did not look for one. The counter-argument is stated as its supporters would state it, and then answered.

4. What is the difference between binding and persuasive authority, and why does it matter to how you write? A binding authority, such as the ratio of a Supreme Court judgment under Article 141, must be followed by the court you are writing for, so an argument resting on it is close to complete. A persuasive authority, such as another High Court's judgment or a Law Commission report, supports but does not conclude. The sentence must make clear which is being relied on, because a reader will otherwise assume the weaker.

5. Why is "never cite a case you have not read" a rule and not advice? Because a case cited for a proposition it does not contain destroys the reader's ability to rely on anything else in the piece, and it cannot be detected by the author, who by definition did not read the case. The discipline is to separate what you have read from what you only know the name of, and to write only from the first.