Term and Legal Significance of ‘Plain’
The term ‘Plain’ (in English: ‘Simplicity,’ ‘Plainness,’ or ‘Clarity’) describes, especially in a legal context, a way of expression in laws, contracts, or other legal texts that is clear, understandable, and free from unnecessary complexity. The demand for ‘Plain Language’ (simplified, clear language) is becoming increasingly important in various legal fields, as it significantly contributes to transparency and legal clarity.
Definition and Distinction
In legal discourse, ‘Plain’ refers in particular to documents or clauses formulated without technical jargon, complicated sentence structures, or unnecessary foreign words. The aim is to ensure that laypersons can also understand the content. This transparency counters the risk that parties may not grasp contractual or legal regulations due to incomprehensible language and therefore may not be able to exercise their rights and obligations.
Plain Language in Contract Law
Significance in General Contract Law
In contract law, ‘Plain Language’ (clearly understandable contractual language) stands for the requirement that contracts and general terms and conditions (GTC) are drafted so that all parties can comprehend their contents. Case law, especially for consumer contracts, demands formulations that are understandable and transparent.
Transparency Requirement (§ 307 para. 1 sentence 2 BGB)
The transparency requirement pursuant to § 307 paragraph 1 sentence 2 of the German Civil Code (BGB) obligates users of standardized contractual clauses (e.g., in GTC) to choose clear and understandable wording. Unclear or ambiguous provisions may be invalid if they result in an unreasonable disadvantage to the contracting party. The simplicity (‘plainness’) of language is therefore a crucial criterion for the validity of contractual clauses.
Impacts in Consumer Law
The significance of legal texts written in plain language is particularly high in consumer protection. Laws such as the Introductory Act to the German Civil Code (EGBGB) and the Price Indication Ordinance require that consumers are informed transparently and understandably. Complicated or obscuring formulations can render contractual clauses or information obligations inadmissible.
Plain Language in Public Law
Legislation and ‘Plain Language’ Initiatives
In many countries, including Germany, there are increasing initiatives aimed at simplifying statutory language. The goal is to structure laws and administrative provisions so that citizens can easily understand them. This includes the ‘principle of clarity of norms,’ which requires that legal norms be drafted clearly and comprehensibly in order to avoid legal uncertainty.
Significance in Administration
The use of plain formulations is also becoming more important in authorities and administration. Citizen-focused communication in decisions, information sheets, or forms reduces misunderstandings, increases acceptance of official decisions, and simplifies legal protection against administrative acts.
‘Plain’ in International Legal Transactions
Plain Language in Common Law Systems
Especially in English-speaking countries, the concept of ‘Plain Language’ is firmly established. There, under the principle of ‘Plain English,’ contracts, court decisions, and laws are required to be formulated clearly and understandably. International companies and institutions therefore increasingly focus on comprehensibility and transparency in multilingual contracts and compliance guidelines.
Requirements of the European Union
The European Union recommends that its institutions and member states draft legal acts and official information in easily understandable language. The goal is to harmonize the application of the law and protect the rights of citizens in all member states. The ‘Code of Good Administrative Behaviour’ of the EU Commission places great value on easily understandable language and user-friendly formulations in all official languages.
Case Law and Consequences of Unclear (‘Non-Plain’) Legal Documents
Case Law on the Unclarity of Contractual Clauses
Courts regularly examine whether contractual terms or other legal provisions are sufficiently clear and understandable. Formulations that are unclear are interpreted, in case of doubt, to the detriment of the party that drafted them (see § 305c para. 2 BGB ‘rule of ambiguity’).
Instructions on Revocation and Information Obligations
Especially regarding revocation and return instructions in consumer law cases, the Federal Court of Justice has repeatedly decided that the use of unclear or misleading formulations can render the instruction ineffective. As a result, deadlines may not start, or the consumer may continue to have a right of withdrawal.
Requirements and Significance of Plain Language in Legal Dealings
Advantages of Plainly Formulated Legal Texts
- Transparency and Traceability: Clear language enables all parties to understand rights and obligations and to act with legal certainty.
- Legal Certainty: Understandable regulations help prevent disputes and legal proceedings.
- Consumer Protection: Consumers, in particular, benefit from transparent information and are better able to exercise their rights.
Requirements for Legal Texts Written in Plain Language
To meet the legal requirement of transparency, legal texts should
- use short sentences,
- use common terms instead of technical jargon,
- avoid convoluted structures and ambiguities.
Criticism and Challenges in the Use of Plain Language
Balance Between Precision and Understandability
A key challenge lies in maintaining a balanced relationship between legal precision and ease of understanding. Excessive simplification can lead to substantive inaccuracies, while formulations that are too complex restrict comprehensibility.
Complexity of Certain Legal Areas
Especially in complex legal areas, a full implementation of plain language is difficult to achieve without sacrificing accuracy or detail. The aim remains to ensure that material legal consequences and relationships are comprehensible to all parties involved.
Summary and Outlook
The term ‘Plain’ is of central importance for the drafting of legal texts in terms of clarity and comprehensibility. It is an essential prerequisite for transparency, legal certainty, and the effective exercise of rights and obligations by all parties involved in legal transactions. With the growing focus on user-friendly communication and European harmonization, the importance of plain language will continue to rise in the future.
Frequently Asked Questions
What legal particularities apply to the use of Plain Agreements in German contract law?
Plain Agreements, i.e., contracts in so-called ‘plain language,’ are generally subject to the same legal framework as conventional contracts under German civil law. However, there are particularities regarding interpretation and transparency. According to §§ 133, 157 BGB, the decisive factor is how the objective recipient understands the declarations made. Contracts in plain language can therefore contribute to improved comprehensibility in the event of a dispute, particularly when they are created for persons with limited language skills or comprehension difficulties. Nevertheless, Plain Agreements must also clearly, consistently, and comprehensively regulate the essential obligations to remain valid in case of dispute. If deviations from statutory standards (e.g., tenancy law, employment law) are intended, this must be made clear and understandable for laypersons; otherwise, clauses may be interpreted under the rules of GTC review (§§ 305 et seq. BGB) or even deemed surprising and thus ineffective.
Are Plain Agreements legally permissible and valid under the GTC review?
Plain Agreements, provided they are pre-formulated for a multitude of contracts, are generally subject to review under §§ 305 et seq. BGB governing general terms and conditions. The use of simple, clear language is expressly welcomed, as it serves the transparency requirement (§ 307 para. 1 sentence 2 BGB). However, clarity alone is not a guarantee of validity: even simple formulations must be appropriate in content, not surprising, and not unreasonably disadvantageous to the contracting party. In particular, ‘plain language’ clauses that deviate from essential statutory models may be invalid if they do not make these deviations sufficiently clear or if they unreasonably disadvantage the contracting party.
In which areas of law are Plain Agreements already legally recognized or preferred?
Plain Agreements are primarily used in consumer protection law, tenancy law, employment law, as well as in the area of online services. The legislator increasingly promotes simple, understandable contract design (see Art. 12 para. 1 sentence 2, 3 GG, as well as § 126a BGB for electronic contracts). There is also a growing demand for clear, understandable contractual templates in the financial and insurance sectors. Legally, contracts in plain language are increasingly recognized when they foster transparency, contract certainty, and help prevent misunderstandings. In sensitive areas such as employment law (protection against surprising clauses, § 305c BGB), plain language is already a subject of judicial review.
Can Plain Agreements influence the burden of proof or issues of interpretation in legal proceedings?
The use of Plain Agreements can significantly contribute to easier presentation of evidence. Simple and clear language facilitates understanding and prevents potential ambiguities. In the event of interpretational disputes, courts regularly apply the so-called ‘objective interpretation’ and examine how a reasonable average recipient would understand the declaration. If a contract is deliberately drafted in plain language, it is assumed that both parties shared the same level of understanding, which can reduce later doubts about the agreement. Unclear or subsequently added passages, according to the principle ‘in dubio contra stipulatorem,’ are interpreted to the detriment of the user—a factor that works even more in favor of the consumer in Plain Agreements.
Are there formal requirements for the drafting of Plain Agreements from a legal perspective?
The same formal requirements generally apply to Plain Agreements as to other contracts. For certain types of contracts, the law provides for written, textual, or even notarial form (e.g., § 311b BGB for real estate sales, § 492 BGB for consumer loans). The choice of plain language does not replace these formal requirements. Moreover, case law—especially in consumer contracts—recommends clear structuring, short paragraphs, avoiding technical terms, or explicitly explaining them. Increasingly, ‘easy language’ versions are required when the contract is intended for vulnerable groups. The contract should be structured so that purposes, rights, and obligations are clearly understandable for the relevant target audience.
Can subsequent amendments or supplements in Plain Agreements be legally problematic?
Any subsequent amendments—also in Plain Agreements—require the consent of both parties and must also be made in clear, understandable form. Legally relevant here are the transparency requirement and the prohibition on surprising clauses (§ 305c BGB). Supplements that are added later and without clear indication are often invalid from a GTC perspective. Amendments must also meet the relevant formal requirements; oral supplements, for example, are not sufficient for contracts that require written form (§ 125 BGB). The contract text must always remain comprehensible; subsequent changes made without appropriate marking and explanation are considered non-transparent and, in the event of a dispute, may be deemed invalid.
How does the use of Plain Agreements affect international enforceability?
In international contractual relations, the comprehensibility of the contract content is decisive for later judicial enforcement. A contract drafted in plain language can facilitate examination by foreign courts, as misunderstandings due to translation are reduced. However, even in such cases, the applicable law (conflict of laws, typically according to the Rome I Regulation) remains decisive. If German law is agreed upon, the above principles also apply before foreign institutions. In individual cases, however, the use of Plain Agreements cannot replace the requirement of certified translation, if this is required in the relevant legal system. Here too, it is advisable for international contracts to use standardized, legally reviewed plain language contract templates to minimize legal risks.
