16/08/2026
Call for CASE COMMENTARY
Submission & Writing Guidelines:
1. About the Case Commentary
A Case Commentary is a critical and analytical discussion of a judicial decision. It should not merely summarise the facts or reproduce the reasoning of the court. The purpose of a Case Commentary is to examine the legal issues involved, assess the courtโs reasoning, evaluate the principles established or applied by the judgment, and discuss the broader legal significance and implications of the decision.
Authors are expected to demonstrate their ability to understand the judgment, identify relevant legal principles, engage with existing authorities, and develop an independent and well-supported legal analysis.
2. Word Limit
- Main Text: 1,000โ1,500 words
- Abstract: 100โ150 words
- Keywords: 4โ6 keywords
- The word count should generally exclude footnotes and bibliography/references.
- Authors are encouraged to maintain a balanced discussion and avoid excessive description of facts at the expense of critical analysis.
3. Language
- The Case Commentary must be written in English.
- Authors should use clear, precise, formal, and academically appropriate language.
- Grammatical accuracy, coherence, and logical organisation should be maintained throughout the submission.
- Legal terminology should be used accurately and consistently.
4. Recommended Structure
A Case Commentary should generally follow the structure below. Authors may modify the headings where necessary depending on the nature of the case.
A. Title
The title should be concise, specific, and reflective of the central legal issue or argument of the Commentary.
Authors are encouraged to avoid generic titles such as โCase Commentary on X Caseโ and, where appropriate, use an analytical title that indicates the principal legal question or significance of the judgment.
B. Case Citation
The Commentary should begin with the complete identification of the case, including, where applicable:
- Case name
- Court
- Case number
- Citation
- Date of judgment
Example:
ABC v State, [2025] HCD ###.
C. Abstract
The Abstract should provide a concise overview of the entire Case Commentary.
It should briefly indicate:
- The case and its central legal issue;
- The principal legal question addressed;
- The approach or reasoning adopted by the court;
- The author's main analytical argument; and
- The broader significance of the judgment.
The Abstract should not simply repeat the facts of the case. It should give the reader a clear understanding of what the Commentary argues and why the case matters.
Recommended length: 100โ150 words.
D. Keywords
Authors should provide 4โ6 keywords that represent the principal legal concepts, issues, doctrines, or areas of law discussed in the Commentary.
Example:
Judicial Review; Fundamental Rights; Constitutional Law; Separation of Powers; Rule of Law.
E. Introduction
The Introduction should establish the context and importance of the case.
It should briefly explain:
- Why the case is legally significant;
- What principal legal issue is being examined;
- The broader legal context of the dispute; and
- The central argument or position of the Commentary.
The Introduction should give the reader a clear idea of the direction of the Commentary without unnecessarily discussing the full facts or judgment.
F. Facts and Procedural History
Authors should present only the material facts necessary for understanding the legal dispute.
The discussion may include:
- Background of the dispute;
- Relevant actions of the parties;
- Procedural history;
- Decisions of lower courts or tribunals, where relevant; and
- The circumstances that ultimately brought the matter before the court.
Authors should avoid reproducing lengthy portions of the judgment. The focus should remain on facts that are legally relevant to the issues being analysed.
G. Legal Issues
This section should clearly identify the principal legal questions considered by the court.
The issues should preferably be expressed as specific legal questions rather than broad statements.
For example:
ยซWhether the exercise of the statutory power violated the applicant's fundamental rights?ยป
Where a case involves multiple legal issues, authors should identify and prioritise the issues that are most relevant to the Commentary.
H. Decision and Judicial Reasoning
This section should explain the court's decision and the principal reasoning behind it.
Authors should discuss:
- The final decision or holding;
- The legal principles applied;
- Relevant statutory or constitutional provisions;
- Previous judicial authorities relied upon by the court;
- The interpretation adopted by the court; and
- Any significant observations made by the judges.
This section should be analytical rather than purely descriptive. The author should explain why the court reached its conclusion and how the reasoning relates to the relevant legal framework.
I. Critical Analysis
The Critical Analysis should constitute the core of the Case Commentary.
Authors should critically evaluate the judgment rather than merely agreeing or disagreeing with the court.
The analysis may consider:
- Whether the court correctly interpreted the relevant law;
- Whether the reasoning is logically and legally persuasive;
- Strengths and weaknesses of the judgment;
- Whether the court properly applied existing legal principles;
- Whether the decision is consistent with previous authorities;
- Any inconsistency, ambiguity, or gap in the reasoning;
- Alternative interpretations that could have been adopted;
- Whether the judgment represents a development or departure from existing law; and
- Relevant comparative or international perspectives, where appropriate.
A strong Case Commentary should demonstrate independent legal reasoning and a clear analytical position.
J. Broader Legal Significance and Implications
Authors should explain the wider implications of the judgment.
Depending on the nature of the case, this section may address:
- Its impact on future judicial decisions;
- Implications for legal practice;
- Effects on fundamental or human rights;
- Constitutional significance;
- Impact on legislation or government policy;
- Implications for individuals, institutions, or society; and
- Whether the judgment creates uncertainty or provides greater clarity in the law.
Where relevant, authors may also discuss whether subsequent developments have strengthened, limited, or challenged the significance of the decision.
K. Conclusion
The Conclusion should provide a concise assessment of the judgment and the author's overall position.
It should:
- Revisit the principal legal issue;
- Summarise the most important findings of the analysis;
- State whether the court's reasoning is convincing; and
- Highlight the broader significance of the decision.
The Conclusion should not introduce substantial new arguments that were not discussed in the main body.
5. Citation & Referencing
Authors must follow OSCOLA (5th Edition) for all legal citations.
Appropriate citations should be provided for:
- Cases;
- Legislation;
- Constitutional provisions;
- Books;
- Journal articles;
- Reports;
- International instruments;
- Government publications; and
- Reliable online legal sources.
Authors should ensure that all authorities relied upon in the Commentary are properly cited and that citations are accurate and consistent.
6. Originality & Plagiarism
All submissions must be the original work of the author(s).
- The maximum acceptable similarity level is 20%.
- Any form of plagiarism, including unattributed copying, improper paraphrasing, or fabrication of sources, may result in rejection or disqualification.
- Authors are responsible for ensuring that all borrowed ideas, arguments, quotations, and materials are properly acknowledged.
7. AI-Assisted Content
AI tools may be used responsibly for limited academic assistance, such as:
- Grammar and language correction;
- Proofreading;
- Improving clarity and structure;
- Brainstorming research ideas; and
- Identifying possible areas for further research.
However, authors must retain intellectual responsibility and authorship over the submitted work.
Substantive AI-generated content should not exceed 20% of the submission. Authors remain responsible for verifying all legal authorities, quotations, citations, arguments, and factual claims.
Fabricated cases, statutes, citations, quotations, or sources generated through AI will be treated as a serious academic concern.
8. Formatting Requirements
The manuscript should follow the following formatting requirements:
- Font: Times New Roman
- Font Size: 12 pt
- Line Spacing: 1.5
- Text Alignment: Justified
- File Format: Microsoft Word (.doc/.docx)
- Citation Style: OSCOLA 5th Edition
- Language: English
Headings and subheadings should be used appropriately to improve readability and organisation.
9. What Makes a Strong Case Commentary?
Authors should remember that a Case Commentary is not a case summary.
A strong Commentary should answer questions such as:
ยซWhat did the court decide?
Why did the court decide it?
Was the reasoning legally sound?
What could the court have done differently?
How does the decision affect the existing law?
Why does the judgment matter?ยป
Authors are therefore encouraged to devote greater attention to critical evaluation, legal reasoning, and independent analysis rather than simply describing the facts and reproducing the judgment.
12. Final Checklist
Before submission, authors should ensure that:
โ The case is accurately identified and cited.
โ The Commentary contains an Abstract and Keywords.
โ The principal legal issues are clearly identified.
โ The court's reasoning is accurately presented.
โ The Commentary contains substantial critical analysis.
โ Relevant legal authorities have been properly considered.
โ All citations follow OSCOLA 5th Edition.
โ The manuscript is within the prescribed word limit.
โ Similarity is within the permitted limit.
โ The manuscript is original and free from fabricated sources.
โ The formatting requirements have been followed.
โ The final manuscript has been proofread before submission.
๏ฟผProcessing fee: 8 USD
Submission link: Please Check comment box
