Oral submissions and courtroom procedure - Clear, logical, a...

Learning Outcomes

This article covers clear, logical, and persuasive structure in oral submissions and courtroom procedure, including:

• The standard sequence for submissions: introduction, legal basis and relief, concise facts, issues, arguments, anticipated objections, and a clear conclusion
• Techniques for effective signposting, pacing, pausing, and plain language to assist judicial note-taking and audience engagement
• Tailoring structure, tone, and formality to tribunal expectations across Magistrates’ Court, County Court, High Court, Crown Court, and jury contexts
• Framing persuasion by reference to the burden and standard of proof, and tying each legal test directly to evidence and authority
• Using skeleton arguments, chronologies, authorities lists, and pinpoint references to reinforce civil interim hearings without overwhelming the court
• Practical bundle management and citing document locations to orient the bench swiftly during submissions
• Observing ethical and professional duties to the court under the SRA Standards and Regulations while advancing the client’s case
• Avoiding common SQE2 pitfalls in organisation and clarity, such as unclear relief sought, excessive factual detail, weak signposting, and overlong written aids

SQE2 Syllabus

For SQE2, you are required to understand how to structure and deliver oral submissions in formal hearings, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• Clarifying the purpose and procedural context of an oral submission or application in court.
• Arranging submissions in a logical, persuasive sequence using effective signposting.
• Maintaining audience engagement and assisting judicial note-taking.
• Adjusting structure and formality to suit specific court types and applications.
• Recognising and avoiding common errors in organisation and clarity under examination conditions.
• Framing submissions by reference to the relevant burden and standard of proof.
• Using written aids to support oral advocacy (e.g., skeleton arguments, reading lists, chronologies) and handling authorities efficiently.
• Observing duties to the court and professional conduct requirements when making submissions.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. You are making a bail application before a District Judge in the Magistrates’ Court. What essential structural steps should your submission follow to ensure clarity and persuasiveness?
2. How can effective signposting within oral submissions assist your audience and improve your persuasiveness?
3. In a summary judgment application in the County Court, is it appropriate to open with a summary of all the facts, or should you begin differently? Why?
4. What is the difference between an "opening statement" and a "submission" in oral advocacy?

Introduction

Oral submissions are a core element of advocacy in both civil and criminal courts. A clear, well-organised, and persuasive structure is essential for effective communication, especially under exam and courtroom pressure. For SQE2, you must be able to construct logical arguments, signpost your submissions, and present them with authority, ensuring your presentation is tailored to the tribunal and compliant with all procedural expectations.

The duty to the court shapes content and delivery. Under the SRA Standards and Regulations (Code of Conduct, dispute resolution and proceedings before courts and tribunals), advocates must not mislead, must draw attention to material legal authorities or procedural irregularities likely to affect the outcome, and must comply with court orders and directions. That ethical framework sits alongside the advocate’s duty to act in the client’s best interests and with independence, honesty, and integrity. Submissions should therefore be factually and legally sound, clearly framed against the applicable legal test, and presented efficiently to assist the court in achieving the overriding objective.

Key Term: oral submission
An organised, spoken presentation made to a court or tribunal, usually in support of an application or during a hearing, which advances a party’s argument or seeks a procedural order.

Building a Clear, Logical Structure

A successful oral submission is constructed using a logical framework that guides the tribunal through your argument. This is not merely a list of points—it is a coherent sequence focused on purpose and persuasiveness.

A recommended core structure for most submissions is as follows:

1. Introduction of yourself, your client, and the application/purpose.
2. Set out the legal basis and relief sought.
3. Summarise the key factual background or context—only as much as is necessary.
4. Identify and address the issues to be determined by the court.
5. Develop arguments for each issue in a logical sequence, supporting each with evidence or authority as appropriate.
6. Address anticipated arguments or objections by the other side, where relevant.
7. Conclude with a summary of why your application should succeed and restate the relief sought.

In ad hoc application hearings (commonly interim applications in civil practice), the court expects brevity and focus. Introduce parties and the application, confirm the documents the court should have, and give a concise roadmap of your argument before presenting the substance. Where an application arises within a trial (e.g., an application to exclude a confession under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 76), do not repeat contextual facts the court already knows; state the application, tie the legal test to specific facts and evidence, reply briefly to the opponent as needed, and return to trial in a manner consistent with the decision.

Signposting and Audience Engagement

Within your submission, use clear signposts to help the judge or magistrates follow your argument. Explicitly state when moving to a new topic (“Turning to the facts…”), summarise at intervals (“In summary, there are three reasons why…”), and announce your key submissions (“My first submission is…”). Effective signposting is especially valuable when issues are technical, multi-factorial, or time-limited.

Key Term: signposting
Verbal cues and transitional phrases used to signal the progression of an argument, guiding the court through each step of the submission.

This not only improves comprehension and note-taking but also creates a sense of authority and control. Support signposting with clear delivery: speak at a steady pace; use purposeful pauses to mark transitions and allow note-taking; project your voice so you are audible to the bench; and avoid filler words. Keep sentences short and avoid jargon. If needed, briefly flag where in the bundle each point sits (“C’s WS §12; Bundle A/345”) to orient the tribunal.

Key Term: audience (in advocacy)
The judge, magistrates, or jury being addressed by the advocate; submissions must be attuned to their needs and expectations.

Key Term: submission (in court)
An argument or set of arguments put forward by an advocate to persuade the court to rule in their favour—may be oral or written.

Worked Example 1.1

Scenario: You are defending a debtor against an application for summary judgment in the County Court. What structure should your oral submission take?

Answer:
You should:

• Introduce yourself and the party you represent.
• State you are opposing the application and identify the relief sought (dismissal or adjournment).
• Briefly outline the key disputed facts (only those relevant to your argument).
• Identify the legal test for summary judgment (CPR Part 24) and any procedural issues.
• Present your main reasons (in order of weight), supporting each with facts or authority.
• Point out weaknesses in the claimant’s evidence or arguments.
• Summarise, restate your position, and formally request the court’s order.

Procedural Context and Flexibility

The core structure above must be tailored to the context and procedural forum. Applications in the County Court or High Court require a formal, structured approach, often supported by a skeleton argument and a short chronology. A good skeleton is concise, identifies issues, states propositions of law with pinpoint references, and ties submissions to evidence. It serves as an oral advocacy aid, not a script.

In most Magistrates’ Court applications, conciseness and direct reference to statutory criteria are key. For example, bail decisions hinge on statutory grounds (Bail Act 1976, Sch. 1). Anchor submissions to those grounds, then address factual matters relevant to those criteria (e.g., risk of failure to surrender, risk of offending on bail, risk of interference with witnesses). Offer appropriate conditions where justified, and explain why they manage any risk.

For applications where time is limited or the matter is very simple (e.g., an adjournment), it may be appropriate to condense your structure. However, you must always provide introductory context, identify exactly what you seek, and support your position with at least one reason.

Worked Example 1.2

Scenario: Asked to oppose a prosecution application to withdraw a charge, how should you structure your brief response?

Answer:

• Address the court and introduce yourself.
• State your objection and the reasons (e.g., proper process not followed, prejudice to your client).
• Summarise the impact on your client.
• Conclude by asking the court to refuse the application.

Persuasiveness and Logical Flow

A logical structure aids persuasiveness by demonstrating the advocate’s control and giving the court a reasoned path to the order sought. Arrange points by importance, grouping the strongest arguments at the start and end. Avoid rambling, repetition, or contradicting yourself.

Always support assertions with a legal or factual basis. Avoid asserting “I believe” or using personal opinions—respect the convention of arguing “I submit” or “It is respectfully submitted”. Build from the relevant legal test to specific facts, then the conclusion. Where authorities are cited, explain the proposition each authority proves and give a pinpoint reference. If opposing counsel relies on a case, distinguish it or explain its limited application.

Persuasiveness is measured against the burden and standard of proof. In crime, the prosecution’s case must persuade the tribunal so that it is sure; the defence’s submission often needs only to raise a reasonable possibility. In civil, the test is on the balance of probabilities, but interim relief often involves specific statutory or procedural criteria. Frame your submissions accordingly: do not merely argue that your version is preferable—argue that, in light of the applicable standard, the order sought is justified or cannot properly be made.

Worked Example 1.3

Scenario: Bail application before a District Judge in the Magistrates’ Court.

Answer:
Structure your submission as follows:

• Introduce yourself, your client, and confirm this is a bail application.
• Identify the legal basis (Bail Act 1976) and the specific grounds relied upon if objecting or responding to objections (Sch. 1).
• Summarise key facts relevant to risk (e.g., previous compliance, address, employment, family ties, health).
• Address each ground methodically (failure to surrender, commission of offences on bail, interference with witnesses), using evidence to rebut or mitigate.
• Offer tailored conditions where appropriate (e.g., residence, reporting, electronic monitoring, curfew, non-contact).
• Conclude by explaining why risks are sufficiently managed and inviting the court to grant bail (or impose conditions if necessary).

Tailoring to the Tribunal

Consider your audience at all times. A District Judge may expect a meticulous, cross-referenced sequence; a lay bench may require plain English, shorter sentences, and greater signposting. For procedural judges and district judges in civil interim applications, assist with a succinct roadmap, pinpoint references to statements and exhibits, and highlight the specific CPR rule engaged. In Crown Court submissions before a jury (e.g., on legal directions or admissibility), keep strictly to law and avoid argumentative comment; when addressing jurors in speeches, prioritise clarity and narrative.

Forms of address matter. In the magistrates’ court, district judges are addressed as “Sir” or “Madam”; a lay bench may be addressed as “Sir/Madam” (chair) or “Your Worships”. In the County Court, use “Your Honour”; in the High Court, “My Lord/My Lady” or “Judge” as appropriate. Courtesy and professionalism assist persuasion.

Revision Tip

Regularly practise building your submissions around a short written 'plan' under timed conditions. Use a checklist of headings: Introduction, Background, Issues, Arguments, Conclusion. This will strengthen clarity under pressure. For civil interim hearings, prepare a short skeleton, chronology, and authorities list—even when not expressly required.

Exam Warning

It is a frequent SQE2 error to omit either the introductory or closing summary, leaving submissions unclear or making it difficult for the tribunal to know exactly what is requested. Always clearly state the relief sought and summarise your main submissions at both the start and end of your argument.

Practical Techniques for Delivery and Structure

• Clarify stage and context: Is this a stand-alone application or within a trial? Tailor introductions accordingly.
• Confirm documents: Early on, verify the court has the application notice, statements, exhibits, skeletons, and any draft order.
• Use a roadmap: Briefly state the order of your submissions (“three points: law, facts, conditions”).
• Apply the law to facts: Avoid abstract lectures on law. Tie each legal test to specific evidential references.
• Anticipate and respond: Identify likely counterpoints and address them proactively within your structure.
• Summarise persuasively: Close with your strongest reasons and the exact order sought; offer alternatives if appropriate.

Worked Example 1.4

Scenario: You are the applicant at a civil interim hearing seeking directions and a short extension of time.

Answer:

• Introduce yourself and identify the application and relief sought.
• Confirm the judge has the application notice, supporting statement, draft order, and chronology.
• Roadmap your submissions (“brief context, test under CPR, why extension promotes the overriding objective, prejudice”).
• Apply the overriding objective (CPR Part 1) to the facts: explain why the short extension will enable just, proportionate resolution, with minimal prejudice.
• Address any opposing arguments (e.g., delay, costs) with concise facts and proposals (e.g., costs reserved).
• Conclude by inviting the court to make the draft order as proposed.

Worked Example 1.5

Scenario: In-trial defence application to exclude a confession.

Answer:

• State the application under PACE 1984, section 76 (or section 78, if fairness is engaged), and the relief sought.
• Identify the alleged unreliability or unfairness (e.g., oppressive questioning, breach of Code C), with references to the record of interview and custody record.
• Apply the legal test to the facts: explain why the confession is unreliable or why its admission would have such an adverse effect on fairness that it should be excluded.
• Allow the prosecution to answer; request a brief reply if needed.
• Conclude by inviting exclusion and, if appropriate, directions for the jury’s handling of any ancillary matters.

Ethics and Professionalism in Submissions

The duty to the court is primary: do not misuse evidence, tamper with witnesses, or overlook material authorities. Draw attention to relevant cases or statutory provisions likely to affect the outcome. Where rules or codes conflict, choose the course that best serves the public interest and the proper administration of justice. Maintain courtesy to litigants in person; do not exploit their lack of legal knowledge. Observe equality, diversity, and inclusion in language and delivery. If a client presses for an approach that risks misleading the court, manage expectations and refuse to act unethically.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

• Vagueness about the relief: Always define precisely what order you seek and why it is within the court’s power.
• Excessive factual detail: Summarise only the facts necessary to prove the test; provide references for depth.
• Weak link between law and facts: Continuously tie each proposition to evidence.
• Poor signposting: Mark transitions clearly to help note-taking and case management.
• Overlong skeletons: Keep written aids concise; they should support, not overwhelm, oral submissions.
• Ignoring burden/standard: Frame persuasion to what the tribunal must be satisfied about.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The importance of a clear, logical, and persuasive structure for all oral submissions and applications.
• The standard sequence of: introduction, legal/factual context, identification of issues, structured argument, and clear conclusion/restatement of relief.
• Effective use of signposting to assist the court or tribunal.
• The need to tailor language, length, and structure to the audience and procedural context.
• Avoiding SQE2-examined pitfalls: omission of critical stages, excessive repetition, or lack of explicit relief sought.
• Anchoring persuasiveness to the applicable burden and standard of proof and the specific legal test engaged.
• Using skeleton arguments, chronologies, and authorities lists to support oral advocacy in civil applications.
• Observing duties to the court, including accuracy, fairness, and drawing the court’s attention to material law or procedure.

Key Terms and Concepts

• oral submission
• signposting
• audience (in advocacy)
• submission (in court)