It has been claimed that I have a certain writing style. It is said to be distinctive. The word “curial” apparently features. Three-word sentences abound. And, sentences beginning with “and”. More on this later. Outcomes are announced by the passive voice.
Doubt attaches to the claim. I reject it for three inter-related reasons.
First, anyone can write in short sentences. It is simple. Only a full stop is required. And, if the tone invokes a clipped manner, that is to be expected. Curial process does not admit loquacity.
Second, commencement of sentences with conjunctions is unremarkable. However, and, and but, especially when followed by commas, are used by many. And, they add to readability. And, contribute bounce. Many must read, and understand, curial decisions.
Third, the claim is cast broadly. That is not insignificant. It ignores the longer sentences, often comma-strewn, which serve as a counterpoint to the brevity that may, at times, break up any judge’s decision. Discernment of a pattern is difficult at best. Curial workings are not so easily satirised.
Insuperable hurdles plague this claim. Rejection must follow.
A final observation. I do not always end with a final observation.
The claim is dismissed.
Strictly obiter 