No More Legal Writing in Contracts—Time to Break the Magic Spell!

The business world and the legal profession are undergoing a historic transformationTransformation. Traditional approaches to contracting and lawyering are being challenged, accelerated by the rise of generative AIGenerative AI (GenAI), and the spread of design-led thinking. These changes are reshaping the very nature—and legitimacy—of legal writingLegal writing, particularly in the context of contracts. For decades, contracts have been treated as formal legal documents written by lawyers for other lawyers. Their structure, tone, and language have remained remarkably consistent over time, often reflecting inherited drafting conventions rather than the needs of the people who use them. If the purpose of contracts is to set and reach common goals, why does their language so often feel mysterious, like a kind of magic spell?Magic Spell This chapter begins by taking this question seriously. It explores how traditional legal writingLegal writing has functioned as a form of inherited linguistic power, a dark legacyDark legacy. Yet that spell and legacy have begun to break with the rise of visual and redesigned contracts, plain language,Plain language and the increasing integration of GenAI. These developments do more than make contracts easier to read; they challenge long-standing assumptions about what and who contracts are for, and how they can work. If we can move beyond legal writingLegal writing as usual, we can begin to see contracts not as formal legal documents, but as tools for understanding and action. “No more legal writingLegal writing in contracts” is more than a slogan. It is a call to reimagine how contracts are communicated, how legal professionals work, and how legal knowledgeKnowledge is shared and applied. It is also a call for lawyers to rethink their role—not only as firefighters or interpreters and guardians of rules, but as proactive solution providers and strategic enablers: partners in designing and building a better future.