The difference between a legal problem style question and a theory question is obviously the “problem”- the set of facts provided, and the answer being asked. So, the first task after reading and understanding the question is to analyse the facts. The question provides you with the direction or perspective that you use when conducting this analysis.
In the previous section we mentioned all the aspects of a problem: (e.g. problems are complex, law is uncertain, don’t be dogmatic, advise not answer, use all forms of relevant rules- statutes, precedent or judge-made law, and soft laws etc etc.). What possible answer methodology can do all of that??
Read the above table carefully. As you can see each of the variations above use the same components listed above (issue, rule etc.) but use them in in a different order or may repeat a component. Two points to note:
(1) Provided that you use the components in your answer then you will most likely satisfy the expectations of the marker. I say “most likely” because examiners’ will have preferences- some “hate” IRAC/ILAC and some love it. So it is very important for the preparation of the assignment that you check first with your examiner/ Unit Convenor to see if they have any preferences.
(2) You can adapt IRAC/ILAC to suit your personal writing style- but be wary. Your own style may not be suitable, once again check first with your examiner/ Unit Convenor to see if they have any preferences