Closing Argument Tips: Make Your Last Word the Most Effective
Most closing argument tips focus on eloquence: a memorable phrase, a rousing finish. How to Become an Unbeatable Lawyer starts from a more sober point. In Rule 7, Othman Al-Juboori writes that "the last word is not a guaranteed right", but that when procedure permits a reply or a further observation, "it can be an important opportunity to secure the point you want to remain clear at the end of the discussion."
That framing matters. Whether you get a closing statement in court, a reply, or just a final minute depends on the procedure that applies to you. What follows are the book's rules for using that moment of oral advocacy well, whatever form it takes.
Closing argument tips start with timing: don't spend everything early
The core idea of Rule 7 is simple: "do not exhaust all your tools at the beginning; leave yourself room to close." The first speaker often has to explain, justify, clarify and defend in advance. The last speaker can do something different. They "assess what has already been said."
The rule contrasts two types of lawyer. The impulsive speaker empties everything out at once and then "becomes predictable", "is mentally drained" and ends up defending what they have said instead of guiding the hearing. The lawyer with a sense of timing waits, knowing that a long opposing speech will often repeat itself, exaggerate or reveal its own weak point.
The book's illustrative example comes from a sensitive criminal hearing. One side spoke almost continuously for ten minutes, loudly and apparently in order, but circling the same idea. The other lawyer did not interrupt or show tension. When the opponent had finished, he stood and said: "Your Honour, everything said in those ten minutes can be reduced to one phrase: allegations without evidence." The book's comment: "Ten minutes fell in a second."
One decisive point, one clear sentence
Rule 7's practical steps are a compact checklist for closing arguments:
- Ask for an opportunity to reply when your opponent finishes, where procedure allows it.
- Do not repeat the details. Choose one decisive point.
- State your position in one clear sentence.
- Do not prolong it: "Precision matters more than eloquence here."
The rule also says when to stay quiet. It fails "when the opponent is so weak or confused that answering would look like showing off or bullying." The golden takeaway is honest about limits: use the last word to close a gap or establish the essential point, and "do not assume that the last person to speak determines the judgment."
Build the core sentence before the hearing
You cannot produce a decisive sentence at the end if you never found the core of the case. Rule 45 warns that a strong case can be weakened when "its central point disappears among details that do not advance the relief sought." A skilled opponent may add side topics, confuse the chronology or turn the case into a "complicated story".
In the book's example, a compensation file had filled with receipts, letters and mutual accusations. The lawyer stood and said: "Your Honour, this case is not about receipts, letters or mutual accusations. It is very simple: my client paid for a service and did not receive it." The questions changed, and peripheral details began to fall away.
Rule 45's instruction connects directly to closing: "Summarise the case in a single sentence. Use that sentence at the beginning and end of your submission." Ask of every detail: "Does this detail change the outcome?" The rule has a limit too. Simplification fails when it "drops an essential element."
Why the ending carries so much weight
Rule 12 is about openings, but its professional reading covers closings as well. When you design a submission, pay attention to "the beginning" and "the ending". "What comes between can be forgotten." Rule 7 adds that "the final idea acts as a lens through which earlier statements are reconsidered", while warning that a strong ending "cannot replace the substance that came before it."
This is one of the most practical trial advocacy tips in the book. Plan your first sentence and your last sentence before you plan the middle.
End on the request, not on the facts
Rule 16 lists three moments that reveal a lawyer who doesn't know what they want from the court. The third comes "at the end, when you repeat the facts without connecting them to the result." A closing that retells the story but never names the order sought leaves the judge to infer it.
The fix is to write one line at the top of your notes beginning "I ask the court to…" and make sure your final sentence reaches it. Rule 22 adds a delivery point for that moment: "Slow down and speak more clearly when stating the relief sought."
Don't turn the close into a summary
The last of these oral argument tips is about restraint. Rule 6 cautions that a recap nobody asked for can damage an argument that was already clear. Your final paragraph should not be an inventory of everything you said. That rule is covered in our guide to trial advocacy and oral argument skills, and it fits naturally with Rule 7: one decisive point does more than a hurried recap. If the judge expressly asks for a summary, though, give one.
Closing argument tips in a five-line checklist
- My core sentence (Rule 45): what is this case really about?
- My request (Rule 16): "I ask the court to…"
- The one point I will save for the end, if procedure gives me the floor (Rule 7).
- Where I will slow down (Rule 22).
- What I will not do: summarise everything or answer a confused opponent for the sake of it (Rules 6 and 7).
These advocacy tips are not a formula for how to win a case in court. The law, the evidence and the procedure decide that. But they help you present a case in court so that its strongest point is the one the judge remembers. If you are preparing for your first hearings, read our checklist for your first case in court. You can browse all the rules on the 50 rules page.