Online Submissions
Already have a Username/Password for The Journal of Academic Legal Studies?
Go to Login
Need a Username/Password?
Go to Registration
Registration and login are required to submit items online and to check the status of current submissions.
Author Guidelines
1. Structural Format
We will publish shorter articles in English (of between 3,000-6,000 words in length), which offer a contextual analysis of a recent judicial decision, or a recent legislative act such as a statute. The decision or act in question may come from any legal jurisdiction.
To enhance overall comparability, we ask that submissions conform to the following structural format. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY:
A. For articles that take a judicial decision as their focus of analysis:
These should be divided into four main sections (you may subdivide each further by subheadings as you wish). An indication of the respective matters that should be addressed in each main section appears below: -
I. Facts of the Case
Here outline the facts that gave rise to the legal action. This should include the names (where available) of the parties, and the nature of the legal remedy that the party who instigated proceedings was seeking (e.g. monetary damages in a civil action, punishment of the defendant in a criminal case, etc). In cases where you are reporting on a judicial decision at appellate level, you should state what the decision of the lower instance court(s) was, and briefly specify the key argument(s) raised by the appellant against the earlier decision.
II. Contextual Background
Here you should locate the particular problem at issue in the case within the relevant background area of law (e.g. contract law, tort law, public law, etc). Give a brief overview of the key legal principles operative in the relevant area as they bear on the particular case. (Where possible make comparisons and contrasts with the analogous law in England and/or Germany.) Also state the source of the relevant law (is this contained in a legislative act, e.g. a statutory code, or previous judicial decision? (In relation to multi-level systems –e.g. where your discussion concerns a national court’s application of a supranational norm, you should clarify the legal relation between the different levels –is one binding on the other, etc?) You should go on to focus on the nature of the particular dispute between the parties. What was the source of the uncertainty or ambiguity in the existing law that led to the action being brought, and had the same or a related problem exercised the courts before?
III. Resolution of the Case
In this section you should analyse the arguments of and result reached by the court. What were the key contentions of each party to persuade the court to find in its favour? And what reasons did the court give for preferring those of the successful party? Were these reasons predominantly legalistic (identifying previous decisions as binding or persuasive authority, and/or stressing factors such as legal certainty and conceptual coherence)? Or were policy arguments as to the practical consequences of the instant decision for third parties or for society, and/or appeals to underlying social or moral values, also significant? It would be useful to cite extracts from the law report – translated (if originally in another language) into English.
IV. Evaluation
Here you should evaluate the significance of the decision for the development of the relevant area of law. In doing so you should identify any apparent difficulties with the reasoning of the court and/or practical problems that the decision may create. Overall, does the judgment clarify and settle the law or are key issues left unresolved? Is further litigation or legislative intervention in the area in prospect?
B. For articles that take a legislative act as their focus of analysis:
These should also be divided into four main sections (you may subdivide each further by subheadings as you wish). An indication of the respective matters that should be addressed in each main section appears below: -
I. Introduction
Briefly state the broad purpose of the act, including the area of law in which it will apply (e.g. criminal law, contract law, etc): why was new legislation needed / what mischief is it designed to address? Does it amend or consolidate earlier legislation and/or case law, or deal with a new issue or problem in respect of which there was previously no clear law?
II. Legislative Context and Process
Here first provide some context by briefly explaining the underlying political and legislative system in place in the relevant jurisdiction, e.g. a parliamentary democracy with a bicameral parliament. (Where possible make comparisons and contrasts here with the position in England and/or Germany.) Then describe the process that led to the particular act reaching the statute book. Who was the key instigator/sponsor: was it proposed by the government or a third party? Was the drafting of the act preceded by a consultation period, and if so what results did that yield? Did the proposed legislation have the general support of the legislative assembly or was there significant opposition? If so, what were the major concerns / arguments of its opponents: did these relate to the overall ends pursued by the act, or the means employed (e.g. the ambiguity of certain concepts used in it, the risk of undesirable side effects, etc)? Did the voicing of such concerns lead to amendments being made?
III. Overview of the Legislation
Here first refer back to the main issues or mischief that the act is intended by its framers to address. Then explain how the act sets out to achieve its objectives; first outline its overall architecture, then focus on its key provisions and definitions. Discuss the (intended) effect of these, including whether the legal rules laid down are drafted precisely or leave interpretative discretion to the courts and other law enforcers. It would be helpful to cite extracts from the act’s provisions – translated (if originally in another language) into English.
IV. Evaluation
In this section you should assess the prospects of the act satisfying the expectations of its drafters. Summarize potential problems with it (referring back where appropriate to arguments and opposition to the act during the legislative process). E.g. are there unresolved ambiguities or apparent contradictions on the face of the statute, or potential clashes with other areas of law or legal principle (including constitutional rights)? May there be difficulties in applying / enforcing the act?
In addition to the article conforming to the above structural format, two other key factors in its acceptance by JOALS are the quality of the writing, and compliance with accepted academic standards.
2. Writing Issues
We accept that acquiring skill in writing academic legal English is a lengthy process and no easy matter for student and young academic authors – especially those for whom English is a second language. Accordingly, we are not seeking perfection; however, in no other discipline is the accurate expression of ideas and arguments more important than in Law. It is thus essential that, before submitting your article, you ensure that the level of English is sufficient to communicate your ideas reasonably clearly.
Many good academic English writing resources are freely available on-line. See, for example, the following useful summary of academic style and writing conventions prepared by Dr Hazel Hall of Napier University: Academic Writing Tips
- or see the helpful, detailed advice on all aspects of academic writing provided by the Dartmouth College Writing Program in the US: Dartmouth Writing Program
You may also consider investing in a text: a good book that deals with specific issues arising in legal academic writing is Professor Eugene Volokh’s, Academic Legal Writing (3rd edition, New York: Foundation Press, 2007). Further details are available at: Volokh Book (One of the exercises in the book, dealing with the need to be concrete in one’s writing - something student authors often find tricky- is available separately on-line at: Writing Exercise)
3. Academic Integrity
It is essential that your article complies with academic standards of integrity (including the full and accurate referencing of sources). The reason for this is not only to avoid charges of plagiarism, but also to make your article a credible and useful link in the discourse of the academic legal community. This point is well put by Dartmouth College’s Committee on Sources:
“Proper citation lies at the heart of intellectual exchange. By citing sources correctly, you acknowledge your debts to other scholars, signal your desire to belong to a community of ideas, and highlight—precisely—your contribution to the ongoing academic conversation. When you demonstrate that you have done the research required to qualify you to join the conversation, you not only show respect for others’ work, you also confer authority upon yourself and highlight the novelty of your particular contribution to the set of ideas under discussion. In these ways, citing sources represents a fundamental step in developing a scholarly voice.
Furthermore, by citing sources you extend a courtesy to other scholars. Citations provide a trail by which others who are interested in your topic can track an idea.”
(Braunstein et al, Committee on Sources, Institute for Writing and Rhetoric, Dartmouth College, May 2008)
Further guidance as to how to avoid pitfalls associated with plagiarism is available on-line. See, for example, the following tutorial from the University of Southern Mississippi: Plagiarism Tutorial
And for help on the correct citation of legal sources and references, please see the following on-line tutorial offered by Cardiff University on the Oxford Standard for Citation of Legal Authorities (OSCOLA): Legal Citations
In submissions to JOALS, these citations should be placed in endnotes.
Submission Preparation Checklist
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- My/our submission adheres to the content and structure requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
- I/we have attempted to provide sufficient background context in order for the reader (an intelligent generalist lawyer) to make reasonable sense of the arguments.
- Where appropriate, I/we have defined the concepts and specialised terms used.
- I/we have considered whether it will be apparent to the reader how each point relates to the overall argument, and where necessary have made this clearer.
- As far as possible, I/we have tried to ensure that grammar, punctuation and spelling are correct.
- I/we have attempted to adopt a tone appropriate for an academic paper, avoiding slang terms, emotive or overly subjective expressions, etc.
- I/we have distinguished clearly between my/our ideas and those of others, and for the latter provided full and accurate references.
- Where appropriate, I/we have provided legal authorities to back up points; these are referenced in line with a standard system of legal referencing.
- My/our submission file is in Microsoft Word or RTF file format. The text uses a 12-point font, is double-spaced, and employs italics rather than underlining (except with URL addresses). Citations and references are placed in endnotes.
- I/we have complied with the instructions designed to facilitate the review process at Ensuring a Blind Review.
Copyright Notice
This Journal uses the Open Access Law: Publication Agreement & Copyright License. Link: [HTML] [PDF]
Privacy Statement
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
ISSN: 1862-0280
Dieser Inhalt ist unter einer Creative Commons-Lizenz lizenziert.