How to Answer Law Problem Questions (The IRAC Method)

What a problem question is really testing

A problem question presents a scenario and asks you to advise a party. It is not testing whether you can recite the law; it is testing whether you can use it. That distinction governs everything about how the answer should be written.

The marks follow the reasoning. A student who states the rule perfectly and then writes 'therefore he is liable' has skipped the part being assessed.

I — Identify the issue

Start by naming the legal question precisely. Not 'this is about criminal law', but 'the issue is whether the defendant had the necessary mens rea for the offence, given that he claims he did not foresee the consequence'. A vague issue leads to a vague answer.

Where there are several issues, deal with them one at a time in a logical order, each with its own full IRAC cycle. Trying to handle three issues in one tangled argument is a reliable way to lose marks.

R — State the rule, with authority

State the legal rule accurately and cite the case or statute that establishes it. Authority is not decoration — an unsupported statement of law carries little weight, and citing the leading case is a straightforward mark.

Keep it tight. You do not need the full facts of the authority; you need the principle it established and why it applies here.

A — Apply the law to these facts

This is where the marks are, and where most answers fall down. Take the specific facts from the scenario and run them against the rule. Where the facts are ambiguous — and examiners make them ambiguous on purpose — argue both ways before deciding.

Compare with the authority: are these facts closer to the case where liability was found, or the case where it was not, and why? That comparative reasoning is what legal analysis actually looks like.

C — Conclude, and commit

Reach a conclusion and state it clearly: on balance, the defendant is likely to be liable, because… Hedging endlessly is not caution; it reads as an inability to apply the law. Where the outcome is genuinely uncertain, say so and explain what it turns on.

Learning cases efficiently

You cannot memorise every case, and you do not need to. For each leading case, know the principle it established and one memorable fact that lets you recall it. The principle is what you will use; the fact is the hook that retrieves it under pressure.

Group cases by the principle they establish rather than by chronology. That is how you will need to retrieve them in an exam, so that is how you should store them.

Essay questions need a different mode

Law papers usually mix problem questions with essays, and the essays want critical evaluation of the law itself — is it coherent, is it just, should it be reformed? That is argument, not application, and it needs its own practice.

Apply the law to these facts — not to law in general

The commonest failure in problem questions is writing everything you know about an area of law. Marks are awarded for applying the relevant rule to the specific facts in front of you: this defendant, this act, this consequence.

Quote the fact that triggers the rule. 'As Ali struck Bilal after the argument had ended, the question of whether the threat was immediate arises…' — that sentence is worth more than a page of general exposition.

Reach a conclusion, even an uncertain one

Students often avoid concluding because the law is genuinely unclear. But a problem question expects a reasoned conclusion — 'on balance, liability is likely to be established, although the position on causation is arguable' is exactly the kind of answer examiners want.

Hedging without deciding loses marks. Deciding, while acknowledging the counter-argument, gains them.

For further reading, OCR is a reliable, authoritative source. When you are ready for personal help, explore our law tutoring or book a free demo session.