Submission Guidelines 

• Please refer to our scope and mandate (hyperlinked) to understand the kind of scholarship that IPLR seeks to promote.

• Only original content will be accepted. Submissions will be screened for plagiarism and Generative-AI input.

• The maximum word limit depends on the nature of the submission. However, this stipulation is flexible at the Editors’ discretion.

  • Precis: 1500-2000 words. 

  • Analytical articles: 2500-3000 words.

  • Essays: 3000 words. 

• Submissions must be made by filling the form linked above.  The manuscript must be submitted as a Microsoft Word document (.docx). The Word document title and body must not contain any personal information of the author such as name and institution. 

• You will be required to submit 4 key words on the key themes and arguments made. It must also have a short bio of the author(s) and the name of the institution that they are affiliated to. Co-authorship of up to two authors is permitted.

• References must be in the form of hyperlinks, linked to keywords and phrases in the body of the submission. Use of footnotes/endnotes should be limited to circumstances where a hyperlink reference is not available. For footnotes/endnotes, the Oxford University Standard for Citation of Legal Authorities (OSCOLA) (4th edition) must be adhered to. 

• Authors are advised to be precise while referencing, such as by hyperlinking the relevant statutes and judgements, and citing the precise provisions, pages (where articles are referred to) and paragraphs (where judgements are referred to) in brackets.

• In case the piece has been sent elsewhere for review, the author must duly notify the Board of the platform to which it is sent. While we entertain cross-publications, this shall be at the Editor’s discretion.​​​

Editorial Policy

The Editorial Board reserves final discretion over whether a piece shall be accepted or rejected for publication on the blog and will review the submissions in the manner described as follows, insofar as possible.

1. The board will evaluate submissions on the basis of criteria including but not limited to novelty, argumentation, language, structure and analysis. Editors shall compare submissions with existing literature available elsewhere to assess novelty. The Board reserves the right to reject a piece at any stage, if it is noticed that these criteria are not duly met.

2. Categories of Pieces:

   1. Precis: 

      1. This refers to a summary of seminal literature on the subject. The purpose of a precis is to make accessible articles that have significantly advanced scholarship on the subject. Authors have wide discretion on choosing the articles on which they wish to write a precis. 

      2. However, they are encouraged to select articles that are widely cited or discussed in scholarship. For example, articles such as Fuller & Purdue on Reliance Interest, Horwitz on Historical Foundations of Modern Contract Law serve as good examples of seminal pieces that merit a precis. 

      3. The authors are also encouraged to contextualize the precis by discussing the present-day implications of the subject matter of the precis.

      4. There is no strict requirement of novelty or non-obviousness, but we welcome any novel contributions the authors would like to make subject the word limit of 1500-2000 words.

   2. Analytical pieces: 

      1. This would broadly include pieces that analyse the development of a particular doctrine of private law, either to expose some flaws in the way in which law has developed or simply to elucidate an under-explored area of law. 

      2. Merely descriptive pieces are discouraged, and authors should ideally engage with and trace the development of judicial reasoning on the chosen subject. Authors are encouraged to comparatively analyse how the doctrine has evolved in other (preferably, common law) jurisdictions.

   3. Essays: 

      1. This is a catch-all category, where authors are free to comment on/respond to some significant article/judicial decision that has important implications for any field of private law. 

      2. These essays do not require argumentative depth or granularity in their analysis. Rather, they serve as a platform to spark discourse in any area of private law.

      3. Nevertheless, these are held to a standard of novelty and non-obviousness. While they need not be contemporary, they focus on the author’s original thoughts or voices on an area of private law.

3. Authors must ensure that their chosen theme/arguments have not already been substantially covered in past articles on our site (the search tool on our website can be utilized for this). Such submissions will be rejected without review. However, this does not apply to responses/contrary opinions/different perspectives to existing content.

4. As per our two-stage review cycle, the Editorial Board may take up to 14 days to respond to submissions. Once accepted, the submission shall be published within 7 days of acceptance. 

5. While responding to the Editor’s comments, authors are requested to retain the comments and make all edits in “track changes” mode in the review document itself.

6. Please note that editors will directly respond with the verdict to each submission, as per the stipulated timeline.  Due to our volume of submissions, we do not send formal acknowledgements of receipt.

7. Once a piece is reviewed, re-reviews are not entertained. 

8. Once posted on IPLR, a submission may be cross-posted on other platforms after notifying the Editorial Board. The cross-post must carry the words ‘First posted on Indian Private Law Review’, with a link to the IPLR post. ​

​

​

​