legal problem solving assignment

Using IRAC – to solve problems & to read cases.

• 31 May 2021
• IRAC , Legal Writing , Research , Tips for Students

What is IRAC?

IRAC ( Issue ,  Rule ,  Analysis , and  Conclusion ) forms the fundamental building blocks of legal analysis. It is the process by which lawyers think about  any  legal problem. The beauty of IRAC is that it allows you to reduce the complexities of the law to a simple equation.

• I SSUE: What  facts  and  circumstances  brought these parties to court?
• R ULE: What is the  governing law  for the issue?
• A NALYSIS: Does the rule  apply  to these unique facts?
• C ONCLUSION: How does the  court’s holding  modify the rule of law?

IRAC is a commonly recommended ‘tool’ for addressing legal problem tasks. It is a great tool for:

• Planning your responses to essay / problem questions;
• Writing answers to problem questions under pressure in an exam
• Organising your notes
• Checking that you’ve covered all bases when reviewing an assignment.

IRAC is not always the best way to structure your writing – particularly in a complex assignment . IRAC is great for planning responses, organising your thoughts and making notes when you read cases LawStudent.Solutions

Using IRAC (or (M)IRAC)

The following summarises the the process. You will note that we have included an additional step – identifying the material facts.

IRAC is also a helpful way to summarise cases. Keeping your notes in an IRAC format will help you index / sort them by issue. An example of a case analysis prepared using IRAC is set out below.

I – Identify the issues

It’s tempting to go straight to identifying the issues – but we always recommend starting issue spotting by identifying the most important – the material – facts.

Start with the material facts

Sorting through the facts you have been given to determine which facts are relevant and how you are going to use them is a necessary part of any problem solving task.

The following is a list of questions that may help you do this

• Who is involved? (identify parties specifically by name, if possible)
• Who suffered?
• Why? (was is avoidable?)
• What is the known (relevant) information?
• Is there any missing information?
• Include specific details like dates and monetary figures

Reread the question regularly. This will tell you what you are supposed to be doing and it will help you determine which facts are relevant LawStudent.Solutions

Issue spotting for problem solving

• Identify the problem: what has gone wrong and for whom?
• Name each Plaintiff and Defendant and briefly describe their individual issues
• Work out what area of law may govern the resolution of the problem.
• Be specific rather than general – if it’s a contract law question, specify what part.  Assignments generally relate to one area of law but the assignment will usually raise a number of issues within that general area.
• Identify any conflicting or troublesome facts – which facts are important.

Issue spotting when reading a case

• What facts and circumstances brought these parties to court?
• Are there key words in the judgement / report that suggest an issue?
• Is the court deciding a question of fact ? – i.e. the parties are in dispute over what happened – or is it a question of law? – i.e. the court is unsure which rule to apply to these facts?
• What are the non-issues?

The trap for the unwary is to stop at the rule. Although the rule is the law, the art of lawyering is in the analysis. LawStudent.Solutions

R – Rule / Relevant Law

Rule spotting for problem solving.

• Set out the legal principles that will be used to address the problem.
• Source legal principles from cases and legislation – aim to have a citation for every rule.
• Treat a statement of law as a statement that requires support / verification – if you make a statement about what the law is, support it with a (correctly cited) case or section.  Be specific – point to the specific section, paragraph or page of the judgement.  Be judicious in your choice – pick the most relevant / applicable cases.

Make sure you are specific when stating the relevant law/rules that apply, and always make sure to support propositions with case authority LawStudent.Solutions

Rule spotting when reading a case

Simply put, the rule is the law . The rule could be common law that was developed by the courts or a law that was passed by the legislature.

When you’ve finished reading a case, ask yourself: “What does this case stand for?” Assume your lecturer is not a psychopath and they’ve assigned the reading for a reason! LawStudent.Solutions

For every case you read, extract the rule of law by breaking it down into its component parts. In other words, ask the question: what elements of the rule must be proven in order for the rule to hold true?Questions to ask when reading a case:

• What are the elements that prove the rule?
• What are the exceptions to the rule?
• From what authority does it come? Common law, statute, new rule?  
• What’s the underlying public policy behind the rule?
• Are there social considerations?

A – Apply and analyse

“Compare the facts to the rule to form the Analysis.”

This important area is really relatively simple. For every relevant fact, you need to ask whether the fact helps to prove or disprove the rule. If a rule requires that a certain circumstance is present in order for the rule to apply, then the absence of that circumstance helps you reach the conclusion that the rule does not apply.

For instance, the successor legislation to the Statute of Frauds in each Australian jursidiction the effect of requiring that all contracts for the sale of land must be in writing. Consequently, in analyzing a problem involving an agreement for the sale of land, you apply the presence or absence of two facts – (a) the arrangement relates to land and (2) whether there’s a written contract – in order to see whether the rule holds true.

The biggest mistake people make in exam writing is to spot the issue and just recite the rule without doing the analysis . In open book exams (which is the case for most Australian Law exams) it’s a given that you can look up the law, so the real question is whether you can  apply the law  to a given set of circumstances.  The analysis is the most important element of IRAC since this is where the real thinking happens.

Analysis for problem solving

• Explain in detail why the claims are (or are not) justified, based on the body of law pertaining to the case.
• Be clear on who you are advising and consider and explain how the law be used by each party to argue their case.  It’s important to be able to explain what your client will need to counter.
• Use relevant precedent cases, Legal Principles and/or legislation to support each answer (you should have already identified these, but often you’ll find you’re moving backwards and forwards as you do your research).
• There may be several parties involved. Take the time to examine each case individually and analyse why their claims are (or are not) valid.
• Legal Principles and precedent cases should be used in each analysis, even if there is overlap between the parties (sometimes the same precedent will apply to more than one case, sometimes you will need to distinguish between the cases).
• It is acceptable to refer the reader to another point in the paper, rather than rewriting it word for word, if the situation calls for the same legal recommendation. (This is signposting)

Take time to discuss the contentious aspects of the case rather than the ones that are most comfortable or obvious LawStudent.Solutions

Analysis when reading a case

Questions to ask when reading a case:

• Which facts help prove which elements of the rule?
• Why are certain facts relevant?
• How do these facts satisfy this rule?
• What types of facts are applied to the rule?
• How do these facts further the public policy underlying this rule?
• What’s the counter-argument for another solution?

C – (Tentative) Conclusions

“From the analysis you come to a Conclusion as to whether the rule applies to the facts.”

The conclusion is the shortest part of the equation. It can be a simple “yes” or “no” as to whether the rule applies to a set of facts. Law exam and assignment problems will often include a set of facts/issues that could go either way in order to see how well you analyze a difficult case. 

The mistake many students make is to never take a position one way or the other on an issue . Most examiners / assessors are looking to see how well you take a position and support it in order to see how well you analyze. LawStudent.Solutions

Another common mistake is to conclude something without having a basis for the opinion . In other words, students will spot the issue, state a rule, and then form a conclusion without doing the analysis. Make sure that whatever position you take has a firm grounding in the analysis. Remember that the position you take is always whether or not the rule applies.

If a rule does not apply, don’t fall into the trap of being conclusive on a party’s liability or innocence. There may be another rule by which the party should be judged. In other words you should conclude as to whether the rule applies, but you shouldn’t be conclusive as to whether some other result is probable. In that case, you need to raise another rule and analyze the facts again.

In addition, the conclusion should always be stated as a probable result. Courts differ widely on a given set of facts, and there is usually flexibility for different interpretations. Be sure to look at the validity of the opponent’s position. If your case has flaws, it is important to recognize those weaknesses and identify them.

Conclusions when problem solving

• Stand back and play ‘the judge.’
• Your client won’t always be the good guy – your job is to identify the correct answer, not to find ways to advocate for your client. If theirs is not a strong case, tell them!
• Choose the argument you think is the strongest and articulate what you believe to be the appropriate answer.
• State who is liable for what and to what extent.
• Consider how parties could have acted to better manage their risks in order to avoid this legal problem.
• Your conclusion should logically flow from the reasoning.

Your conclusion will almost always be a tentative conclusion – but at the same time, don’t sit on the fence.  Give an indication of where you think the end result would go.

Conclusions when reading a case

Practical approaches for using irac.

The IRAC Triad emphasizes the  Analysis  by using the  Facts ,  Issue  and  Rule  as building blocks. The  Analysis  is the end product and primary goal of the IRAC Triad, but the role that facts play in forming the analysis is highlighted. The Triad is actually just a simple flowchart in which the facts can be pigeonholed into a  Conclusion .

The  facts  of a case suggest an  Issue . The legal issue would not exist unless some event occurred.

The  issue  is governed by a  Rule  of law. The issue mechanically determines what rule is applied.

Compare the facts to the  rule  to form the  Analysis . Do the facts satisfy the requirements of the rule?

Example: using IRAC to make a case note:

Another popular legal problem solving method is referred to as MIRAT – and you might be able to see that the way I approach using IRAC is really a blend of IRAC and MIRAT.  Read more about MIRAT in this article  Meet MIRAT: Legal Reasoning Fragmented into Learnable chunks

Related Resources

Writing a legal memo (for an assignment)

• June 18, 2021

Online Research – looking for secondary materials

Online Research using Benchbooks

Insert/edit link.

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

• RMIT Australia
• RMIT Europe
• RMIT Vietnam
• RMIT Global
• RMIT Online
• Alumni & Giving

• What will I do?
• What will I need?
• Who will help me?
• About the institution
• New to university?
• Studying efficiently
• Time management
• Mind mapping
• Note-taking
• Reading skills
• Argument analysis
• Preparing for assessment
• Critical thinking and argument analysis
• Online learning skills
• Starting my first assignment
• Researching your assignment
• What is referencing?
• Understanding citations
• When referencing isn't needed
• Paraphrasing
• Summarising
• Synthesising
• Integrating ideas with reporting words
• Referencing with Easy Cite
• Getting help with referencing
• Acting with academic integrity
• Artificial intelligence tools
• Understanding your audience
• Writing for coursework
• Literature review
• Academic style
• Writing for the workplace
• Spelling tips
• Writing paragraphs
• Writing sentences
• Academic word lists
• Annotated bibliographies
• Artist statement
• Case studies
• Creating effective poster presentations
• Essays, Reports, Reflective Writing
• Law assessments
• Oral presentations
• Reflective writing
• Art and design
• Critical thinking
• Maths and statistics
• Sustainability
• Educators' guide
• Learning Lab content in context
• Latest updates
• Students Alumni & Giving Staff Library

Learning Lab

Getting started at uni, study skills.

• Referencing
• When referencing isn't needed
• Integrating ideas

Writing and assessments

• Critical reading
• Poster presentations
• Postgraduate report writing

Subject areas

For educators.

• Educators' guide
• Answering a legal problem - IRAC

Proper planning is vital to successfully answering a legal problem. Below are some hints and tools using a problem from Company Law.  When answering a legal problem, it is useful to apply the IRAC structure so that you address all areas required.

• IRAC structure

The IRAC method has four steps:

• Identify the issue
• Relevant law - Here you need to explain the law not just state it. This could be sections/s of the Corporations Act or case law
• Application to the facts - the law is applied to the facts of the problem

Use the following IRAC structure as a guide to answer case study questions.

• Issue: Define the legal relevant issue.
• Relevant law: Identify legal principles from cases and statutes. Explain the law, don't just state it.
• Apply to the facts: Develop legal arguments by applying the law to the facts.
• Conclusion: Arrive at a considered conclusion.

Note: Students gain the most marks by explaining the relevant law and then applying it to the facts.

Example question and answer

Bingo Ltd is a manufacturer of electrical goods. It entered into a contract with Melvin Ltd, a large discount retailer. Under this contract, Bingo Ltd was to supply its goods exclusively to Melvin Ltd. The directors of Melvin Ltd subsequently discover that a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bingo Ltd is selling identical electrical goods to competitors at cheaper prices. It appears that the subsidiary was incorporated to enable Bingo Ltd to avoid the effects of the contract with Melvin Ltd. Advise the directors.

(This a five-mark question)

Please note: This is a simple low mark answer (5 marks) to illustrate the use of IRAC only. Many Company Law problems will involve multiple issues. In these scenarios each issue would need to be addressed. For example: The first issue is... The second issue is whether...

1. Read the following question.

2. Now read the following text and try to identify the IRAC structure.  Check your understanding by clicking on the buttons to reveal the IRAC structure.

Read the following question, then identify which part of the IRAC structure best fits each text excerpt by selecting from the drop down menu.

• Writing case notes
• Writing a legal memo

Still can't find what you need?

The RMIT University Library provides study support , one-on-one consultations and peer mentoring to RMIT students.

• Facebook (opens in a new window)
• Twitter (opens in a new window)
• Instagram (opens in a new window)
• Linkedin (opens in a new window)
• YouTube (opens in a new window)
• Weibo (opens in a new window)
• Copyright © 2024 RMIT University |
• Accessibility |
• Learning Lab feedback |
• Complaints |
• ABN 49 781 030 034 |
• CRICOS provider number: 00122A |
• RTO Code: 3046 |
• Open Universities Australia

IPSA LOQUITUR

Writing Law Problem Questions

How to write a legal problem essay.

Law problem question essays give you an imaginary scenario. They then ask you to comment on the legal issues that arise and advise the parties. This guide will explain how to answer a problem essay with eight handy tips.

1. Read the Facts

The first step to answering any law problem question is to read the entirety of the facts you are given. Do not just jump into answering the question. Take your time and ensure that you fully understand all the issue involved in the case. It may help to highlight parts of the fact-pattern that you think are important.

2. Structuring Your Analysis

This is a mistake many law undergraduates and GDL students make when writing a scenario law essay. They look at the facts and recognise that they are similar to a case they’ve read. They will then immediately assume ‘this is like Joe Bloggs vs John Smith’, and answer the question accordingly. For this reason, examiners often complain that law essays lack coherent structure or proper analysis.

To avoid this pitfall, when answering legal problem questions you must adopt a structure .

Say you have an problem on whether or not the defendant is liable in the tort of negligence. The facts look similar to a particular case you’ve read on contributory negligence. Your first instinct is to start talking about defences. Stop . Ignore the similarity completely for now, and think. Before you can even discuss defences, you must talk about whether the defendant is liable in the first place. What does the law actually require you to establish to prove liability? Is the defendant liable? If so, what defences might he rely on, and how are those established?

Develop steps that you can put every scenario relating to that area of the law through in order. For example:

Contract Law

• Has there been an offer ?
• Was the offer accepted ?
• Are the terms of the agreement certain ?
• Do the parties intend to be legally bound ?
• Is there consideration ?
• What are the terms of the contract?
• Is there a breach ?
• What kind of breach has occurred?
• Is there a defence to the breach?
• What are the innocent party’s remedies and options?

Criminal Law

• Is the actus reus of the offence established?
• Is the mens rea of the offence established?
• Is there a relevant defence?

Negligence Law

• Does the defendant owe the claimant a duty of care ?
• Has the duty been breached ?
• Is the breach a factual cause of the loss?
• Is the breach a legal cause of the loss?
• Is the loss sufficiently non-remote ?

This doesn’t mean you have devote a whole paragraph to every step. If its obvious that the defendant owed a legal duty, a single sentence pointing this out will suffice. If the question tells you there is a contract, simply note you will assume the contract was validly-formed. The most controversial and difficult points should be given the majority of your essay’s attention.

Nevertheless, you get credit for completing each necessary step in the order in which they arose. This is how a court of law would most naturally consider them. This method of structuring essays also stops you missing interesting elements of problem questions. You might miss these points by skipping straight to what you think is the most obvious issue.

3. Structuring the Overall Essay

The problem question may present you with multiple areas of law. For example, a defendant may have committed different kinds of crime, or liability might arise in both negligence and nuisance. Alternatively, the question may ask you to discuss the liability of several different people.

If you have to advise different parties, discuss the liability of each party in turn . Otherwise, a good rule is to  deal with each area of the law in turn . Give each area of law its own separate section. This will lead to a clearer essay structure than trying to deal with each event chronologically.

4. Structuring Individual Paragraphs

You can structure your discussion of individual issues any way which makes sense and follows a logical structure. One of the most popular ways for structuring discussions is the IRAC method. This stands for:

State the issue you are about to discuss

State the applicable legal rules (with authority or statutory references)

Discuss how these legal rules apply to the facts in front of you

State what the conclusion to the issue is based on your analysis

For example, lets say you are writing a problem question in tort law. You have a defendant who has run over a pedestrian with his car. You think he may be liable in negligence, so you start by considering whether he owes a duty of care. You would structure your analysis of this issue as follows:

The first issue is whether the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care.

If the case’s facts are non-novel, whether a duty is owed depends on the applicable precedent ( Robinson v CC of West Yorkshire Police ). It is established that road-users owe others a duty of care ( Nettleship v Weston ).

In this case, the defendant is a road-user because he was driving a car on the road. The claimant was also a road-user because they were a nearby pedestrian.

Therefore, the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care.

5. Not Enough Information Given?

What if the problem question does not seem to give you enough information to advise on the parties’ legal position? It is completely fine to write ‘the problem question does not give us enough information to determine X’.

For example, lets say you think that whether the defendant was in breach depends on how fast he was driving. The facts do not tell you how fast he was driving. Do not be afraid to say so!

However, saying that there isn’t enough information is NOT enough. You must then go on to say what information you would need to advise the party. Once you have set this out, explain how the law would apply to the facts if you had this information.

For example, you might say ‘if the defendant was speeding, he is likely in breach of his duty.’ Explain why. Then, say that ‘if he was not speeding, he is likely not in breach.’ Finish by explaining why this is the case.

This shows you are thinking like a lawyer. If a client walks in and gives half the facts, you need to be able to ask the right questions. You then need to be able to evaluate the facts, whatever they turn out to be.

6. Red Herrings

Sometimes, the fact-pattern will include information which seems salient, but actually is not. This is known as a red herring. These red herrings are designed to test your ability to pick apart relevant information from irrelevant information.

Many students assume that all of the information in the problem question must be relevant and addressed. When presented with a red herring, these students will panic and start guessing at how the information affects the outcome. Instead, the examiners expect you to point out that the information is not relevant. You can get bonus points by explaining why the law doesn’t consider this kind of information relevant.

For example, say you have a commercial law question where the owner of a painting stores it with a local art dealer. The owner then sees that the art dealer has put the painting up for sale without authority. The owner decides he will call the dealer later in the day to clear up the problem. However, he negligently forgets. The painting is later sold to a third-party.

The red herring here is the owner’s negligence. This seems like it should be relevant to whether the owner has lost property in the painting. In reality it is not: you cannot lose ownership of property because you were negligent. Because the information seems relevant, it is tempting to discuss it at length, for example by talking about estoppel by negligence. This wastes time and will not get you any marks. Rather, you should say ‘the owner’s negligence is not relevant to whether he retains ownership of the painting’. Then, move on.

7. Don’t Hedge Your Bets (and other Stylistic Tips)

If there’s one thing most law professors hate, its a phrase like ‘it seems from the evidence that there might be a possibility of supporting the argument that…’.

Confidence in essay-writing is not something that is stressed enough at school or university. When you aren’t sure, it is tempting to hedge your bets with language like ‘probably’ and ‘it might be the case’. Resist that urge. If your analysis is correct but don’t sound confident, the examiner may doubt that you firmly grasp the material. If it is not correct, saying ‘probably’ in front of the error won’t help in any case.

Other stylistic tips for writing a professional sounding essay include:

• Avoid contractions (‘don’t’, ‘can’t’), slang phrases and other informal language;
• Avoid the phrase ‘it is submitted that’. This kind of wording is for moots and legal debating, not academic legal essays;
• Try to deal with only one issue per paragraph. This makes the essay less visually intimidating;
• If simple language and short sentences get your point across, use simple language and short sentences. There is a temptation to sound ‘professional’ by using multi-clauses sentences and complex vocabulary. This just makes the essay harder to read.

8. Cite, Cite and Cite Again

If you ever make any kind of positive claim about the law, back it up with a citation. What proves your claim? A case? A statutory provision? Cite it. You need to assure the marker that you aren’t just making lucky guesses. Also, many institutions’ grading criteria specify that you can’t get more than a 2:2 if there is insufficient citation.

Generally there is no need to give the year, report and page number of case-law in exams. However, you should check your university’s best practice guidelines to know for sure.

Share this:

• Aug 27, 2014

Tips from your Tutor: 10 Ways to Improve your Problem Solving Assignment

Legal problem solving is a skill that does not always come naturally. As a marker, I’ve noticed that students of all year levels tend to make the same types of mistakes when it comes to answering hypothetical questions. Avoid frustrating your marker by following these tips…

1. Don’t get side-tracked by describing the facts

Many students feel the need to outline, in detail, the background to the dispute between the parties at the start of their Issues section. This is unnecessary as it does not further your analysis and tends to indicate a student that is confused about the key issue(s) between the parties.

Instead of describing the facts, start your paper by identifying the main issue(s). Fore example, “The key issue between the parties is….” If you cannot reduce the issue to one sentence, you should consider conducting more research to improve your knowledge of the content.

2. Provide a detailed statement of the issue Simply stating that the issue between the parties is, for example, the existence of a contract tells the marker nothing. When you outline the issue, you need to do so with enough detail that it is obvious which legal rules you will be drawing upon. For example, in the contracts scenario:

“The key issue between Party A and Party B is whether there has been a mutual mistake regarding the identity of the contract subject matter that means that the intention to contract is absent.”

3. Avoid general, irrelevant legal principles

It is a waste of words to summarise all the principles that relate to your subject in your Rule/Law section. Only outline the rules that are directly relevant to the dispute between the parties.

Think about it this way: if this was a real case, the lawyers for each party would not spend time in court arguing about principles that are not in dispute.

4. Discuss cases rather than listing them Make sure you use full sentences to explain legal rules. Dot pointing a case is lazy and may mean that you miss out on vital marks, as discussion of the key precedents often features in marking criteria.

5. Attempt a detailed Application

Your Application section is where you should be drawing upon each element of a test and closely referring to the facts. What would you argue for the Plaintiff? If you were the Defendant’s lawyer, how would you counter this argument? Which facts from the scenario support these interpretations? Make sure you give yourself the strongest chance to get into the highest mark range by developing a sophisticated Application section – this analysis is what sets HD students apart from the rest of the cohort.

6. Stay within the brief

If the assignment states that it will be on the first four weeks of the course, only look at the topics from the first four weeks. In 99% of cases, including content from weeks that have not been covered in class yet is done badly. Even if it is done well, you are wasting words on developing an argument that falls outside of the marking criteria.

7. Cite the textbook as a secondary source only

Most hypotheticals do not have a research component. This means that your textbook will be the primary source of your information, but does not mean that your textbook should be the primary source cited in your footnotes. When you state a legal rule, make sure you cite the primary authority for that rule; the statute or the case. Do not forget that the textbook is a secondary source that should only be cited for its commentary.

8. Never put argument in footnotes

Never ever do this, even if it would mean that your over-the-word-limit assignment is suddenly good to go. Edit your assignment again and cut out the least relevant information.

9. Consult the AGLC Remember, academics follow the Australian Guide to Legal Citation in their own writing and know the conventions inside out. Footnoting errors are glaringly obvious to a marker and create a bad impression, even if there is no separate marking criteria for referencing.

10. Use 1.5 or double line spacing

Formatting is usually not in the marking criteria, but think about your marker. They have probably just finished marking 20 papers, and their eyes are tired, their back is sore, and they need to finish their work quickly so they can enjoy their weekend. You want this maker to be happy before they start reading, so make your paper easy to mark – use 1.5 or double line spacing.

Marie Hadley is a lawyer, PhD candidate at UNSW, and tutor who loves teaching legal writing and problem solving skills.

FROM THE ARCHIVES: This story was first published on Survive Law on 14 August 2013.

Enjoyed this post? Sign up for the Survive Law weekly newsletter for more.

#study #tips #tutor #problemsolving #IRAC

Recent Posts

Top 3 Gradual Law Grad Realisations

Top 3 Studying Mistakes to Avoid in the First Week of Uni

Top 3 Methods to Overcome A Lack of Motivation

The Art of Solving Legal Problem Questions

Table of Contents

❌ The Wrong Approach

✅ the successful technique, 4️⃣ the four-step process: irac, 1️⃣ 1. issue, 2️⃣ 2. rule, 3️⃣ 3. application, 4️⃣ 4. conclusion, 🎉 final thoughts.

Legal problem questions are something that trip up many law students. After all these years of writing free-flowing essays, suddenly you have to completely change the way you think about writing and answering questions. Not only will the typical essay approach no longer work when it comes to tackling problem questions, but clear structure is more important than ever. So today I want to help you develop a process for answering problem questions that works every single time. 

I think problem questions are great if you have a system or process for approaching them, so this is how I’m going to break down the article. Firstly, I want to show you the wrong approach most law students take, specifically looking at how they differ from essay questions. Secondly, I want to help you create your own problem solving technique that is equally applicable across all your law modules. So stick around and let’s get into it.

Perhaps the biggest mistake law students make is using their essay skills to answer problem questions.

In my first year of law school, this is something that I did too. After all, why wouldn’t a problem question have an introduction and a conclusion? It seems as though it makes sense to demonstrate your contextual knowledge of the law and to show the examiner your thought process in a coherent arc from start to finish. Unfortunately, this just demonstrate a poor awareness of what a problem question really is. 

With essays, you are supposed to critically analyse the law and associated academic opinion, interjecting your own thoughts into a form of written debate. Whereas with problem questions, you’re not engaging in a verbal battle of opinions, but a structured application of the law to a set of facts. In other words, your goal is not to debate whether or not a law is right or wrong, but to offer advice to a fictitious client about their legal responsibilities.

Think about it like this: if they were a real client would you really sandwich your legal advice with introductions and conclusions? Would they really care about academic opinion or the intricacies of the law? No, that would be absurd! 

Your job is to simply and coherently explain how the law applies to the relevant facts that concern them, and what this could mean for them. Will they go to jail? Will they get a fine? What are the consequences? 

This is what your client cares about in real life and in a problem question.

The key to writing brilliant answers to problem questions then is treating these fictitious clients as real clients and having a structured technique for providing advice to them. 

Your own university has probably given you some advice already on how to structure these questions, but they have probably done little more than chucked an acronym at you and left you to it, without explaining how you can use each element of these acronyms to your advantage. 

So, I will do their job for them by breaking down the technique that actually works.

The IRAC process for answering problem questions is my favourite acronym to use, and it stands for issue, rule, application, and conclusion. So, first you identifying the issue that you are dealing with and advising on; second, you identify the relevant legal rule applies; thirdly, you apply the rule to the issue at hand; before reaching a conclusion that answers the question.

I’m going to talk about each element in turn, but before I do so it’s imperative you NEVER apply the IRAC process to the question as a whole. In other words, you aren’t breaking your answer into four big chunks where you begin by looking at all the issues, then all the rules, then apply the rules, before crafting a huge conclusion on everything. Instead, you are dividing the answer into a number of separate issues and sub-issues that must be explored in turn using the IRAC method. 

For example, let’s say we had a problem question dealing with 3 different people, Tom, Daisy, and Harry and their respective liability for an injury sustained by Emily. We could break down the problem question by structuring our answer as to the liability of each party (e.g. Tom’s liability, Daisy’s liability, and Harry’s liability). Then within each of these ‘issues’ we should be able to identify subissues, which we apply the IRAC method to. For example, you may have to analyse whether Harry owes a duty of care or whether there are any defences available to him, in which case you should make a statement of the law and apply it to the facts before making a conclusion on that subissue.

Warning to one side, let’s wrap our heads around each element of IRAC.

Your job here is to look at the facts in the problem question and analyse them in relation to two key variables: parties and events. So, this is a two stage process.

Firstly, with respect to parties, jot down each of the people that are identified in the problem question and write next to them whether they are someone who has a claim (i.e. something happened to them) or they are someone who faces liability (i.e. they did something wrong).

Once you’ve done that, you want to determine how each of the parties relate to one another. In other words, you need to clearly write down how the ‘victim’ in the problem question relates to the ‘wrongdoer’ and what the specific event that took place to potentially give rise to a claim. 

The purpose of this exercise is to build the structure for your answer setting you up for success. The obvious approach would be to structure your problem question by considering each party one by one (e.g. Tom’s liability), but clearly establishing the issues allows you to see the myriad of possible offences that may need to be analysed as sub-issues. For example, if Tom killed Emily, we will have to analyse the actus reus and mens rea of the offence as sub-issues to help us determine whether or not it was murder.

Now we have a structure for our answer based on the issues within the problem question, it’s time to turn to the law.

I like to open up my textbook, statute books, and relevant websites to simply learn the law around the issues I identified and create some VERY brief notes. There’s no need to go into too much depth because you’re simply looking for supporting authority. For instance, if I was trying to prove mens rea I may look for relevant cases that help explain what is meant by ‘intention’ or with theft I will be looking for its statutory definition.

My top tip here though is to avoid abstract statements of the law. The purpose of finding the relevant ‘rules’ is to simply state the law rather than applying – you don’t need to think too deeply as you’re only making it clear to the reader you are aware of what needs to be proved for there to be liability. What does the statutory law say? What does the case law say? These are the sorts of things you want to write down; the application of this law comes in the next stage.

Application is the crux of a winning answer to any problem question.

Having identified the issue at hand and the relevant law, our focus is on marrying them together to answer the questions. Fortunately, this is a relatively straightforward process as long as we aren’t lazy in our application and don’t just end up critically analysing the law as if we were dealing with an essay.

For example, if we were dealing with the issue of Tom taking Emily’s purse and his liability for theft, we would start by turning to the definition of theft, which is the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive. 

By breaking down the components of this definition we find that the actus reus of theft involves appropriating property belonging to another. We can then apply the law to the facts by asking ourselves whether or not Tom’s actions of picking up the purse and placing it in his rucksack was an exercise of the rights of ownership, and therefore whether or not it makes out the actus reus of the crime. 

You see, a good understanding of the law makes its application to the facts quite straightforward. By doing the groundwork in advance of finding the issues, understanding the facts of the case, and identifying the law, you can approach the problem question with a coherent understanding of what advice you need to give.

For each of the issues and sub-issues you identified at the start you need to form a conclusion. This conclusion must address the overall liability of the parties, including the potential ‘punishment’ that they could face, and ensure that all your conclusions are aligned and consistent with one another. 

Unlike an essay question, where a more authoritative conclusion is usually desired, in a problem question you don’t need to be determinative. The nature of a problem question means there are going to be some grey areas of the law and saying “it depends” could be the ‘correct’ answer. But if you do that, make sure you state what the contingent factors and how liability would differ depending on the approach taken by the court.

The whole approach is extremely methodical, and if you follow these steps in order every time you answer a problem question – regardless of the law module you are taking – then you have a strategy that should lead to some awesome answers. It’s a one-size-fits-all approach where you don’t even have to think to get first class grades.

A methodical approach is possible to many other areas of your law degree. So, if you enjoyed this article, you’d probably also enjoy learning more about my approach to studying:  A Masterclass in Studying Law

Thanks for reading!

Legal Problem Solving

Added on   2023-06-07

About this Document

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Assignment on Business Law Contract lg ...

Requirements of a valid contract: summary and insights lg ..., introduction to business law assignment lg ..., vicarious liability: principal-agent vs independent contractor lg ..., business law and ethics: contracts, court system, enron fraud scandal lg ..., contract law in south african law: analysis of various legal aspects lg ....

AI-Enhanced Trash Cans Aim to Solve Food Service’s Waste Problem

By Alicia Clanton

Restaurants, buffets and caterers looking to cut down on food waste have a new tool at their disposal: AI-powered waste bins.

Leanpath Inc. , Winnow Solutions Ltd. and Orbisk B.V. are among the companies offering high-tech trash cans equipped with smart cameras, scales and sometimes touchscreens. The systems gather granular details about items being discarded down to the type of food and whether it was cooked or chopped.

The aim is to help the industry stop billions of dollars worth of food from just being chucked, reducing a significant source of greenhouse gasses.

The world wasted 1.05 billion tons of food in ...

Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:

Learn about bloomberg law.

AI-powered legal analytics, workflow tools and premium legal & business news.

Already a subscriber?

Log in to keep reading or access research tools.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

The Supreme Court says cities can punish people for sleeping in public places

Jennifer Ludden

U.S. Supreme Court says cities can punish people for sleeping in public places

A homeless person walks near an elementary school in Grants Pass, Ore., on March 23. The rural city became the unlikely face of the nation's homelessness crisis when it asked the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold its anti-camping laws. Jenny Kane/AP hide caption

In its biggest decision on homelessness in decades, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that cities can ban people from sleeping and camping in public places. The justices, in a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, overturned lower court rulings that deemed it cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment to punish people for sleeping outside if they had nowhere else to go.

Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch said, “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many.” But he said federal judges do not have any “special competence” to decide how cities should deal with this.

“The Constitution’s Eighth Amendment serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges to wrest those rights and responsibilities from the American people and in their place dictate this Nation’s homelessness policy,” he wrote.

In a dissent, Justice Sotomayor said the decision focused only on the needs of cities but not the most vulnerable. She said sleep is a biological necessity, but this decision leaves a homeless person with “an impossible choice — either stay awake or be arrested.”

The court's decision is a win not only for the small Oregon city of Grants Pass, which brought the case, but also for dozens of Western localities that had urged the high court to grant them more enforcement powers as they grapple with record high rates of homelessness. They said the lower court rulings had tied their hands in trying to keep public spaces open and safe for everyone.

Supreme Court appears to side with an Oregon city's crackdown on homelessness

But advocates for the unhoused say the decision won’t solve the bigger problem, and could make life much harder for the quarter of a million people living on streets, in parks and in their cars. “Where do people experiencing homelessness go if every community decides to punish them for their homelessness?” says Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Today’s ruling only changes current law in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes California and eight other Western states where the bulk of America’s unhoused population lives. But it will also determine whether similar policies elsewhere are permissible; and it will almost certainly influence homelessness policy in cities around the country.

Cities complained they were hamstrung in managing a public safety crisis

Grants Pass and other cities argued that lower court rulings fueled the spread of homeless encampments, endangering public health and safety. Those decisions did allow cities to restrict when and where people could sleep and even to shut down encampments – but they said cities first had to offer people adequate shelter.

That’s a challenge in many places that don’t have nearly enough shelter beds. In briefs filed by local officials, cities and town also expressed frustration that many unhoused people reject shelter when it is available; they may not want to go if a facility bans pets, for example, or prohibits drugs and alcohol.

Critics also said lower court rulings were ambiguous, making them unworkable in practice. Localities have faced dozens of lawsuits over the details of what’s allowed. And they argued that homelessness is a complex problem that requires balancing competing interests, something local officials are better equipped to do than the courts.

"We are trying to show there's respect for the public areas that we all need to have," Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison told NPR earlier this year. She wrote a legal brief on behalf of more than a dozen other cities. "We care for people, and we're engaging and being involved in the long-term solution for them."

The decision will not solve the larger problem of rising homelessness

Attorneys for homeless people in Grants Pass argued that the city’s regulations were so sweeping, they effectively made it illegal for someone without a home to exist. To discourage sleeping in public spaces, the city banned the use of stoves and sleeping bags, pillows or other bedding. But Grants Pass has no public shelter, only a Christian mission that imposes various restrictions and requires people to attend religious service.

"It's sort of the bare minimum in what a just society should expect, is that you're not going to punish someone for something they have no ability to control," said Ed Johnson of the Oregon Law Center, which represents those who sued the city.

He also said saddling people with fines and a criminal record makes it even harder for them to eventually get into housing.

Johnson and other advocates say today’s decision won’t change the core problem behind rising homelessness: a severe housing shortage, and rents that have become unaffordable for a record half of all tenants. The only real solution, they say, is to create lots more housing people can afford – and that will take years.

• homelessness
• Supreme Court

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

US Supreme Court says cities can punish people for sleeping in public places

A homeless person walks near an elementary school in Grants Pass, Ore., on March 23. The rural city became the unlikely face of the nation's homelessness crisis when it asked the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold its anti-camping laws.

Jenny Kane / AP

In its biggest decision on homelessness in decades, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that cities can ban people from sleeping and camping in public places. The justices, in a 6-3 decision, overturned lower court rulings that deemed it cruel and unusual to punish people for sleeping outside if they had nowhere else to go.

The court’s decision is a win not only for the small Oregon city of Grants Pass, which brought the case, but also for dozens of Western localities that had urged the high court to grant them more enforcement powers as they grapple with record high rates of homelessness. They said the lower court rulings had tied their hands in trying to keep public spaces open and safe for everyone.

But advocates for the unhoused say the decision won’t solve the bigger problem, and could make life much harder for the quarter of a million people living on streets, in parks and in their cars. “Where do people experiencing homelessness go if every community decides to punish them for their homelessness?” says Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Today’s ruling only changes current law in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes California and eight other Western states where the bulk of America’s unhoused population lives. But it will also determine whether similar policies elsewhere are permissible; and it will almost certainly influence homelessness policy in cities around the country.

Cities complained they were hamstrung in managing a public safety crisis

Grants Pass and other cities argued that lower court rulings fueled the spread of homeless encampments, endangering public health and safety. Those decisions did allow cities to restrict when and where people could sleep and even to shut down encampments – but they said cities first had to offer people adequate shelter.

That’s a challenge in many places that don’t have nearly enough shelter beds. In briefs filed by local officials, cities and town also expressed frustration that many unhoused people reject shelter when it is available; they may not want to go if a facility bans pets, for example, or prohibits drugs and alcohol.

Critics also said lower court rulings were ambiguous, making them unworkable in practice. Localities have faced dozens of lawsuits over the details of what’s allowed. And they argued that homelessness is a complex problem that requires balancing competing interests, something local officials are better equipped to do than the courts.

“We are trying to show there’s respect for the public areas that we all need to have,” Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison told NPR earlier this year. She wrote a legal brief on behalf of more than a dozen other cities. “We care for people, and we’re engaging and being involved in the long-term solution for them.”

The decision will not solve the larger problem of rising homelessness

Attorneys for homeless people in Grants Pass argued that the city’s regulations were so sweeping, they effectively made it illegal for someone without a home to exist. To discourage sleeping in public spaces, the city banned the use of stoves and sleeping bags, pillows or other bedding. But Grants Pass has no public shelter, only a Christian mission that imposes various restrictions and requires people to attend religious service.

“It’s sort of the bare minimum in what a just society should expect, is that you’re not going to punish someone for something they have no ability to control,” said Ed Johnson of the Oregon Law Center, which represents those who sued the city.

He also said saddling people with fines and a criminal record makes it even harder for them to eventually get into housing.

Johnson and other advocates say today’s decision won’t change the core problem behind rising homelessness: a severe housing shortage, and rents that have become unaffordable for a record half of all tenants. The only real solution, they say, is to create lots more housing people can afford – and that will take years.

Copyright 2024 NPR

OPB’s First Look newsletter

Streaming Now

Think Out Loud

The Daily Show Fan Page

Explore the latest interviews, correspondent coverage, best-of moments and more from The Daily Show.

The Daily Show

S29 E68 • July 8, 2024

Host Jon Stewart returns to his place behind the desk for an unvarnished look at the 2024 election, with expert analysis from the Daily Show news team.

Extended Interviews

The Daily Show Tickets

Attend a Live Taping

Find out how you can see The Daily Show live and in-person as a member of the studio audience.

Best of Jon Stewart

The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart

New Episodes Thursdays

Jon Stewart and special guests tackle complex issues.

Powerful Politicos

The Daily Show Shop

Great Things Are in Store

Become the proud owner of exclusive gear, including clothing, drinkware and must-have accessories.

About The Daily Show

• Subject guides
• Law research and writing skills

Getting started

Law research and writing skills: Getting started

• Approaching law assignments This link opens in a new window
• Legal problem solving This link opens in a new window
• Research skills
• Note-taking This link opens in a new window
• Writing legal essays This link opens in a new window
• Writing case notes This link opens in a new window
• Writing legal memos This link opens in a new window
• Writing policy papers This link opens in a new window
• Citing and referencing
• Exam preparation This link opens in a new window
• Juris Doctor
• Graduate researchers
• Learn HQ This link opens in a new window
• Back to Law guide

New to Law at Monash? This page provides links and tips to help you through your first semester or trimester.

Week 1 and 2

• Take our interactive tutorial about academic integrity .
• Learn essential research skills in Library workshops. Workshops are run as part of first-year Law units for both undergraduates and postgraduates.
• Read the resources on your unit Moodle sites , which include important information from your lecturers about the units you'll be studying as well as information from the library to help you learn legal research and writing skills.

Your first assignment

Understanding your assignment.

• Check your unit guide or Moodle site for assignment requirements and marking rubrics.
• Use legal dictionaries and encyclopaedias to look up terms and concepts you're not familiar with.
• Learn how to approach law assignments .

Doing your research

• Learn about legal research skills .
• Use the key law databases .
• Find relevant cases , legislation and commentary .

Writing the assignment

• Read our tutorials on writing case notes or writing legal essays .
• Make sure you cite and reference your sources correctly.

Throughout the year

• Take good notes in lectures to help you revise.
• Get advice from our librarians at a drop-in session .
• Use these resources to learn more about cases and the courts.
• Read our guide to exam preparation .
• << Previous: Home
• Next: Approaching law assignments >>

• Advanced Search

A home hospitalization assignment and routing problem with multiple time windows, mandatory returns and perishable biological samples: : A Chilean case study

New citation alert added.

This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:

You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.

To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.

New Citation Alert!

Please log in to your account

Information & Contributors

Bibliometrics & citations, view options, recommendations, a set-covering based heuristic algorithm for the periodic vehicle routing problem.

We present a hybrid optimization algorithm for mixed-integer linear programming, embedding both heuristic and exact components. In order to validate it we use the periodic vehicle routing problem (PVRP) as a case study. This problem consists of ...

Lagrangian matheuristics for the Quadratic Multiple Knapsack Problem

The Quadratic Multiple Knapsack Problem (QMKP) is a challenging combinatorial optimization problem combining the well-known Quadratic Knapsack Problem with the Multiple Knapsack Problem. After a long stream of research devoted to ...

• First matheuristic for the Quadratic Multiple Knapsack Problem.
• Competitive ...

A fix-and-optimize heuristic for the high school timetabling problem

The high school timetabling is a classical combinatorial optimization problem that takes a large number of variables and constraints into account. Due to its combinatorial nature, solving medium and large instances to optimality is a challenging task. ...

Information

Published in.

Pergamon Press, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Author tags.

• Home care services
• Staff allocation
• Visit routing
• Matheuristics
• Research-article

Contributors

Other metrics, bibliometrics, article metrics.

• 0 Total Citations
• 0 Total Downloads
• Downloads (Last 12 months) 0
• Downloads (Last 6 weeks) 0

View options

Login options.

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Share this publication link.

Copying failed.

Share on social media

Affiliations, export citations.

• Please download or close your previous search result export first before starting a new bulk export. Preview is not available. By clicking download, a status dialog will open to start the export process. The process may take a few minutes but once it finishes a file will be downloadable from your browser. You may continue to browse the DL while the export process is in progress. Download
• Download citation
• Copy citation

We are preparing your search results for download ...

We will inform you here when the file is ready.

Your file of search results citations is now ready.

Your search export query has expired. Please try again.