It’s all about the pictures: government considers radical changes to contracts

Print This Post

9 September 2015


contract

Is time up for old-fashioned contracts?

Radical changes are being considered for government contracts for digital services, including removing “negative language”, limiting sentences to two lines and hosting boilerplate clauses online.

The use of “visual representations” will also be considered, such as diagrams and icons, to communicate contractual rights, obligations and dates.

In a series of blogs on the gov.uk website, Warren Smith, an assistant director at the Government Digital Service (GDS), outlined how contracts could be made simpler and clearer.

Mr Smith said government digital services contracts currently contained over 88,000 words, which, based on an average adult reading speed of 250 words per minute, would take six hours to read.

“Lots of things make current contracts hard to use and inaccessible to the people that could benefit from them,” Mr Smith said.

“Contracts are rarely designed using modern techniques to create digital content, including legal content. They’re often worded in a way that suggest an expectation that something’s going to go wrong.

“Lots of content uses negative or controlling language, e.g. termination, consequences, liabilities, penalties, prevention, safeguarding, dispute and so on.”

Mr Smith said that, as part of the digital services redesign, the government would “like to look at replacing negative language with something more neutral”, while getting rid of inaccessible aspects of the contracts such as obscure terminology and language, inconsistent and duplicate content, lack of structure, poor format and layout and the unnecessary volume of words used.

Mr Smith said the GDS had held a series of “contract design jams” or workshops, for people interested in transforming government contracts, which would involve the Government Legal Service.

Mr Smith said that, as well as drafting in plain English, the GDS was aiming for a two-line limit on sentences, as recommended by Clarity International.

To reduce the length of contracts, Mr Smith said the government could host boilerplate clauses online, “meaning that we publish them once, rather than reproducing them for every contract that’s been created”.

He said there were wider opportunities for government legal documents to use images, to help users understand contractual rights and obligations.

“During the design workshops we started to explore the use of visual representations, for example diagrams and icons, to communicate contractual elements such as rights, obligations, timelines and dates.”

Mr Smith concluded: “We believe that open, digital and visual contracts, which are easier and faster to create and implement, are needed to support building better services across government. We’ll continue to work closely with service delivery teams in departments, our suppliers and beyond.”

Tags: , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Rating lawyers by their wins and losses – a good idea?

Robert Ambrogi

Lawyers will give you any number of reasons why their win-loss rates in court are not accurate reflections of their legal skills. Yet a growing number of companies are evaluating lawyers by this standard – compiling and analysing lawyers’ litigation track records to help consumers and businesses make more-informed hiring decisions. The shortcomings of evaluating lawyers by win rates are many. Not least of them is that so few cases ever make it to a win or loss. Of equal concern is that, in the nuances of law practice, it is not always obvious what constitutes a win or a loss.

February 22nd, 2017