Linguistic and drafting ability in the target language
What this domain tests
The drafting paper tests whether your target language is accurate, coherent and idiomatic under legal constraints. Markers look for control of modality, sentence structure, reference, punctuation and EU house style - not literary flair.
Core rules
- One legal proposition per sentence. Long enumerations should be signposted (“the following conditions are met: (a) ...; (b) ...”). Keep subject and verb close.
- Use modal verbs deliberately. “Shall” imposes an obligation; “shall not” prohibits; “may” confers discretion or possibility; “must” is rarely the EU legislative register. Do not alternate between them for variety.
- Make reference unambiguous. “Which”, “it” and “the latter” must have one clear antecedent. Repeat the defined term rather than risk ambiguity.
- Observe EU style. Capitalise “Member State”, “the Union”, “the Commission” and “the Court”; use “Article 5(2)” and “Directive (EU) 2019/...” consistently; follow the Interinstitutional Style Guide for dates, numbers and abbreviations.
- Keep formulae intact. “Without prejudice to”, “by way of derogation from” and “for the purposes of this Regulation” are fixed operators; paraphrase changes legal effect.
Worked example
Original: “The Commission may reject the application submitted by the Member State which it considers incomplete within 30 days.” Two readings: (a) the Commission has 30 days to reject an application it considers incomplete; (b) the Member State submits the application within 30 days. The relative clause “which it considers incomplete” also attaches ambiguously to “application” or “Member State”. Rewrite: “Where the Commission considers an application incomplete, it may reject it within 30 days of submission.” Reasoning: the condition is explicit, “it” refers to the Commission, and the 30-day period clearly attaches to rejection.
Traps
- Dangling modifiers: “Having examined the file, the decision was adopted” - the decision did not examine the file.
- Shifting terminology: “application”, then “request”, then “claim” for the same act.
- Overusing the passive until the actor disappears.
- Punctuating lists inconsistently or inserting a serial comma where house style does not use one.
- Translating “shall” as “will” or “should”, which changes legal force.
- Letting a modifier drift so that a deadline or condition attaches to the wrong verb.