In the plethora of legal writing available, judgments rendered by courts as well as articles written by law professors and students occupy a crucial position. However, the writing in both these branches of legal scholarship is riddled with certain flaws which have the deleterious effect of lowering the overall quality of legal scholarship. We intend to shed light on these systemic defects. Addressing the defects would be beneficial for litigants, lawyers, judges, law students, law professors, organizations and the general public. In Part II, we discuss legal judgment writing by judges as a subset of legal scholarship, and underline the importance of making judgments precise, reasoned and comprehensive. In Part III we scrutinise legal pedagogy in law schools, and the reasons behind the lack of meaningful engagement with empirical exploration in the works of law professors and students in the course of their research. In Part IV we draw some conclusions…