Aug 30, 2025
What used to be a grammar nerd’s crusade is now a global benchmark. Contracts, policies, and disclosures will never be the same.
Circa-2011
We were all there for the same reason: to see the odd couple of legal writing — Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner — co-authors of Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts.
For me, this wasn’t just another CLE or book signing. Ever since I had devoured Garner’s The Winning Brief, my obsession had gotten… well, let’s say well-documented. My colleagues at ORIX once plastered my office door on Valentine’s Day with rose petals, construction-paper hearts, and a giant photo of Bryan Garner.
So, when the chance came to meet Garner and Scalia in person, I stood in line — along with a hundred other in-house counsel, knees shaking at the thought of getting face-to-face with Scalia. Up ahead, the two men bantered like an old comedy duo, passing books back and forth, tossing quips, keeping the line moving.
When my turn came, I slid my copy of Reading Law across the table. Garner signed it with his usual flourish.
Then, almost under my breath, I asked,
“Do you think you could sign this too?”
From my bag, I produced the most battle-worn copy of The Winning Brief anyone had ever seen — highlighted, tabbed, annotated within an inch of its life. Garner chuckled and signed without hesitation.
My Over-Tabbed Winning Brief
Justice Scalia spotted it immediately. His voice boomed.
“Wait. Wait. What did you give him?”
The room went silent. I sheepishly held up my well-loved book.
“You brought that monstrosity for him to sign?”
The line froze. My pulse roared in my ears. This was it — the moment to deliver a dazzling retort, to quote Scalia back to himself, maybe even win a rare nod of approval.
What I managed instead was a sheepish smile and one word: “Sorry.”
Scalia threw his head back and roared — a full-bodied, belly laugh. He took my The Winning Brief, scratched his name beneath Garner’s, and handed it back with a grin.
That moment confirmed something more profound:
My love for plain language, legal design, and practical writing isn’t a fad—it is, at its core, a gesture of respect for readers, clients, and the court.
If Scalia could laugh at my over-tabbed fanaticism, it’s because words matter, and clarity is power.
And here's where the nerd story gets good.
Because ISO just dropped ISO 24495-2: Plain Language — Legal Communication.
What started as a niche obsession has become a global benchmark. Today, contracts, policies, and disclosures are expected to meet it.
What is ISO?
ISO stands for the International Organization for Standardization, the global body in Geneva that makes the standards we all take for granted. Swipe a credit card? That’s ISO. Stack a shipping container on a truck? ISO. Certify cybersecurity with ISO/IEC 27001 or AI governance with ISO/IEC 42001? ISO.
If you work in tech, ISO is part of your everyday. Your clients can’t launch products, close deals, or get through diligence without aligning to ISO frameworks. Investors and acquirers expect compliance.
And now, for the first time, ISO has turned to legal communication.
This Isn’t New
In fact, we’ve known this for decades. The SEC has been saying it since 1998. Their Plain English Handbook told securities lawyers point-blank: if you want to keep your clients (and their investors) out of trouble, write clearly. Ditch the jargon. Cut the fat.
And yet — I can’t count how many arguments I’ve had with outside counsel about replacing “prior to” with “before.” (The SEC literally uses that example in its handbook.) Same goes for the “hereinafters” and “therewiths” that live rent-free in standard forms.
My favorite part? When I’d point this out and they’d say, “Oh, that’s just our standard form.” (Some people cry when a Kardashian changes her hair color. I cry at comments like that.)
24495-1: The Global Plain Language Baseline
In 2023, ISO published 24495-1: Plain Language — Principles and Guidelines. This was the first global benchmark for clarity in any communication.
Its four pillars apply everywhere:
Relevant — give readers what they need.
Findable — make it easy to locate.
Understandable — write so it can be understood.
Usable — structure it so it can be acted on.
That first standard wasn’t written just for lawyers — it was written for everyone: governments, hospitals, banks, and tech companies.
Here’s a quick summary of what the standard means — and what it looks like in practice:
ISO 24495-1
While ISO 24495-1 gives us the four principles: relevant, findable, understandable, usable. The new ISO 24495-2 tells us how to apply them in practice.
ISO 24495-2: Plain Language for Law
ISO 24495-2 doesn’t reinvent the wheel — it adapts the four principles from Part 1 to legal writing:
Relevant – Readers get what they need.
Findable – Readers can easily locate what they need.
Understandable – Readers can grasp what they find.
Usable – Readers can act on the information.
Composition of Paragraphs and Sentences
Point-first writing: put the main idea up front, then add supporting details.
One sentence = one idea. One paragraph = one broader idea.
Keep sentences short (15–20 words recommended) and paragraphs lean (≤6 sentences).
Move legal references (statutes, precedents, authorities) to the end of the sentence or into footnotes — don’t lead with “According to Section 7 of the Securities Act…”.
Layering
Write for multiple audiences in one document by layering content.
Example: In a contract, a simple summary column (“In plain terms…”) alongside the full legal text.
Use visible cues like side panels, icons, or annexes to separate layers.
Headings
Write them as statements or questions. (“What your policy does not cover” is better than “Exclusions”).
Keep hierarchy shallow — no more than 3–4 levels deep.
Use numbering systems that are intuitive (Arabic > Roman).
Content Rules
Start sections with clear introductions: What this part does, why it matters, and what to do with it.
Eliminate archaic legalese (pursuant to, notwithstanding, hereinafter).
Define terms at first use, not buried in a glossary.
Favor active voice (subject → verb → object).
Add context and examples whenever possible (“If you stop paying rent, we can terminate this lease” is clearer than “Failure to render timely consideration shall constitute grounds for termination”).
Design & Layout
Use white space and clean formatting.
Don’t rely on underlining, all caps, or multiple emphasis styles (bold + underline + highlight). Pick one, sparingly.
Use visuals: flowcharts, timelines, checklists, tables.
ISO explicitly references legal design as a discipline — meaning that lawyers are now expected to think like designers, not just drafters.
👉 ISO standards, including ISO 24495-1 and ISO 24495-2, can be purchased directly from the International Organization for Standardization at www.iso.org.
What This Means for Companies
ISO 24495-2 isn’t about “prettier contracts.” It’s about turning legal documents into usable business tools. Here’s how adopting plain language can change outcomes for your company:
Faster Deals — Customers, partners, and investors can scan and sign faster.
Lower Legal Risk — Ambiguity is expensive; clarity prevents disputes.
Investor & Regulator Confidence — Aligns with SEC guidance and ISO benchmarks.
Policies People Actually Follow — Compliance only works if employees and vendors understand it.
Global Scalability — Plain language is easier to translate and enforce across borders.
This isn’t style. It’s strategy. It’s risk management. It’s growth fuel.
It’s smart business and smarter lawyering.
Where Do We Go from Here?
I know for a lot of my lawyer colleagues, this new ISO standard will spark one of three reactions:
Panic, Hide, Celebrate.
Anticipating the Eyerolls
The first two groups will have plenty of objections. You’ve probably heard some of these before:
❌ “So what? I don’t practice international law.” This isn’t about cross-border treaties. ISO standards seep into every industry. Your clients in tech, finance, health, and consumer goods already live and die by ISO certifications. If you hand them contracts, policies, or disclosures that don’t measure up, you’re the outlier.
❌ “My clients don’t care about this.” Maybe not today. But investors, regulators, and counterparties will. When diligence teams start flagging poor readability as a risk, the plain language standard will go from nice-to-have to non-negotiable.
❌ “This is just style, not substance.” No. Clarity is risk management. Ambiguity leads to disputes. Hidden terms lead to lawsuits. And “style” is now codified into an international benchmark.
❌ “I’ve been using these forms for 20 years — my clients know them.” True, but your clients are under pressure to evolve. Investors, regulators, and counterparties will expect ISO-aligned contracts. If you don’t help them adapt, someone else will.
What This Means for You
If your lawyer still drops a fax number in your contracts, they’re behind.
If you’re a founder without in-house counsel, you don’t have time to slog through ten pages of legalese in your key forms.
If you’re a GC, you need an AGC bench that delivers documents your business partners will read and use.
And if you’re a law firm, you don’t need to spend months learning ISO standards—let us help you redesign your core documents or train your team to do it right.
Unified Law has been working this way long before ISO gave it a number. We future-proof contracts, policies, and forms to meet SEC guidance and ISO 24495—then we show your team how to keep them sharp.
📩 We also put together a handy one-page prompt for ISO 24495 compliance. Want a copy? Just drop a comment below or email us at legaldesign@unified.law. No spam, no lists—just something useful you can put to work right away.
Because plain language isn’t just style. It’s speed. It’s risk management. And now, it’s the standard.
Unified Law provides fractional in-house counsel for growing companies. Our team of former General Counsel, Assistant GCs, and government attorneys acts like your legal department— scaled to what you need, when you need it.
Built for business. Backed by GCs. That’s Unified Law. www.unified.law
Pre-ISO Prompt versus Post-ISO Prompt
