Apply the knowledge acquired in the module to respond to moderately complex legal questions in both essay and problem question form
How to Apply Legal Knowledge to Essay & Problem Questions
Step 1: Understand the Question
Identify the type of question: Essay or problem.
Spot key issues or topics within the question.
Look for facts that trigger legal principles.
Step 2: Organize Your Answer
For Essays:
Introduction: Briefly state your understanding of the topic.
Main Body: Analyze legal principles, applying them with examples or case law.
Conclusion: Summarize key points and your viewpoint.
For Problem Questions:
Identify legal issues.
State relevant legal rules/principles.
Apply these rules to the facts (this is crucial!).
Conclude with reasoned answers or advice.
Step 3: Use the IRAC Method (common for problem questions)
Issue: What is the legal problem?
Rule: What law applies (statutes, case law)?
Application: How does the law apply to the facts?
Conclusion: What is the outcome?
Example: Applying Knowledge with Case Law
Question Type: Problem Question (Administrative Law)
Example Question:
A public corporation refused to issue a license to a company without giving reasons. The company claims the decision was unfair and unlawful. Advise.
Step-by-Step Answer Using IRAC
Issue:
Is the refusal of a license without reasons a breach of natural justice or administrative law principles?
Rule:
Administrative decisions affecting rights/interests must comply with natural justice (right to a fair hearing).
Duty to give reasons is not absolute but often necessary for fairness (see R v Secretary of State ex parte Doody (1994)).
Wednesbury unreasonableness applies to review unreasonable decisions (see Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury (1948)).
Application:
The refusal without reasons denies the company an opportunity to understand or challenge the decision, violating the fairness principle.
Lack of reasons could be unreasonable if it impairs the company’s ability to appeal or respond.
Courts in R v Secretary of State ex parte Doody held that reasons are often required when fairness demands it.
Conclusion:
The public corporation likely acted unlawfully by not providing reasons, and the company can seek judicial review.
More Case Laws to Support Your Answers
1. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody (1994)
Established when reasons must be given for administrative decisions.
2. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
Introduced the test of reasonableness in administrative decisions.
3. Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ case) (1985)
Confirmed that executive decisions are subject to judicial review on grounds like illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety.
4. Ridge v Baldwin (1964)
Reinforced natural justice principles, stating that failure to provide a fair hearing invalidates decisions.
5. Padfield v Minister of Agriculture (1968)
Held that discretion must be exercised to promote the purpose of the law, not arbitrarily.
Summary: Tips for Applying Legal Knowledge to Questions
Always identify the core legal issue first.
Use authoritative cases and legal principles relevant to the issue.
Apply the law logically to the facts given.
Explain both sides if the issue is debatable, then state your conclusion.
Be concise, structured, and focused.
RELATED Blog
0 comments