IRAC Method

What is The IRAC Method?

One of the most often encountered difficulties among law students is how to respond to problem-style legal questions in the most logical manner feasible. What is the iRAC Methodology? The IRAC method, consists of four components: the issue, the rule, the analysis, and the conclusion, is often recommended by law professors. It is possible to answer problem-style questions within law using the IRAC method. Problem-style questions in law are queries that require you to provide advice to any parties engaged in a legal dispute. The advantage of this method is that it allows you to break down scenario questions into four components, which is not always the case when answering law problem questions in a straightforward manner. I educate students on how to use the IRAC method in my law tutoring sessions. This is what I do as part of my service as a law tutor.

1.   Issue

First and foremost, while responding to a question of the problem-style or scenario-based kind that includes a discussion, you must determine what the underlying issue is. In general, problem-style questions do not ask you about the requirements directly; instead, they depend on your legal knowledge and intelligence to identify the most important issue. It is important, as a law tutor, to emphasize to students during a law tutoring session that it is necessary to first identify and describe the legal problem since if you do not do so, you will have no clue what legal rules apply to the situation or how to guide the parties involved.

If you are unsure about the problem, consider the legal question that you must answer as well as the material that the examiners are attempting to test you on. This will eventually influence the advice you will provide to the individuals that are mentioned in the factual scenario. For example, during a law tutoring session, a student may inquire as to whether the case is winnable?  This is not an issue.   In addition to being too vague, it refers to the overall conclusion of the advice that the individuals stated in the scenario could encounter. It is not detailed enough, and it does not assist you in determining which legal rule should be used in the given situation. For my part, as a law tutor, I am often asked the question "how do we know if consideration has passed?"  This is a problem that can be resolved. If you look for particular examples, you will be able to learn more about what constitutes consideration and whether is past. Consider the question in terms of the components that must be demonstrated in order to answer it.

Lastly, keep in mind that the legal problem may include a number of different legal issues. The more you practice with your legal tutor on these sorts of questions, the simpler it will become for you to identify and diagnose the issues. Factual scenarios typically will include between three and five legal actions (issues). If you want to offer good advice to the client who is mentioned in the case, you must first identify each legal issue and then provide a separate rule and analysis for each one. This is how you will arrive at the advice you will give to them. If you need to further understand more about how to tackle problem-type questions, you can book some law tuition.

2.   Rule

The rule specifies which laws apply to the legal problem(s) you have indicated in your problem inquiry. Identifying the legal rule that applies to your situation requires some digging through your study materials, either by you or your law tutor, to locate the appropriate cases and/or statute sections that will assist you in answering the legal question that you posed in the first step (the legal issues). The rule should be stated as a broad concept rather than a conclusion to the problem that you are trying to solve. Promissory Estoppel, for example, is a rule that states that if you promise someone something and that person depends on it, you cannot rely on earlier agreements that have been amended or postponed by that promise.

In contract law, promissory estoppel may work as an equitable exception to the normal rule that part payment of a debt without fresh consideration does not discharge the debt obligation, as stated in the case of Central London Property v High Trees House [1947] KB 130. This would be one of the legal rules from which you would use the general principle in order to respond to the hypothetical legal problem. "So the problem is whether the contract was binding or was it Estopped?" a student will inquire in the law tutoring session. However, this is far from the sole legal norm that applies to that situation. It's just one. You would very certainly have to explain additional contract law rules developed from a number of other cases. For instance, you may begin by explaining that a binding contract is made up of three parts: offer, acceptance, and consideration. When there is alleged estoppel, you would then consider many possible standards for determining whether a contract is binding.

At this stage of the problem resolution process, identifying and debating relevant legal rules is crucial because it offers the clarity needed to analyze the case and apply the right rules to arrive at the best outcome. It also shows the examiner that you can discern between a legal issue and the relevant legal rule, which is an important skill for any law student or professional. This is something I teach regularly in my law tuition sessions, and it's something that every law student will face. It is advisable to can focus your law tutoring around the IRAC method

3.   Analysis

When using the IRAC method, all other law tutors will agree that the analytical component of your answer will be the longest and most important section. Here, you will apply the rule to the specific circumstances of the scenario at hand. You must show how the rule you are using may lead to a conclusion based on evidence. It is crucial that you talk about all sides of the issue. As a law tutor, I also advise you to never distort the facts to meet the rule. There is no claim if the facts do not fit the conditions of the rule. Follow my suggestions and you will become a better lawyer.

Ascertain that you are not just asserting a conclusion without presenting evidence to back it. Evidence is critical. During my law tutoring session, I will provide a compelling argument and then back it up with proof. If you do not provide authority to support your argument, you are not employing the IRAC method. For instance, if you reach a conclusion that is not backed up by evidence, it indicates that you lack the authority of a court, and in the same way applying the legal rule to the facts in the problem scenario shows proper analysis. The legal issue identified must be supported by the rule and backed with analysis. Here, a proof will be used to substantiate a fact, whereas a case will be used to substantiate your legal argument and general principle.

When analyzing the applicable legal rules, you will almost definitely need to resort to specific circumstances from earlier cases. Comparing and distinguishing the facts in those instances with the facts in the problem situation is the most effective way to apply them. Law tutors continually remind students that they must examine the court's decision in the case and consider if the court would reach the same judgment if given under identical circumstances. The fundamental criterion is that if the scenario's conditions are sufficiently similar to the facts of the case, the judges are likely to follow the case's decision. If some components are similar, you may "distinguish the cases," which in law tutoring terminology means discussing why the instances are similar and should be utilized by the court.

4.   Conclude

You will almost certainly need to refer to the facts of particular cases that you identified when studying the relevant topics. The most effective approach to use them is to compare and contrast the information included in those situations with the facts contained in the issue scenario. Then, you should review the court's ruling in the case, to determine if the court would reach the same conclusion in the same circumstances. The basic premise is that if the scenario's circumstances are sufficiently close to those of the case, judges are more likely to follow the case's outcome.

As a law tutor, I constantly emphasize to my pupils the need of communicating simply and without legal jargon. This is the manner in which you will communicate with clients. However, if some components of the scenario do not provide sufficient information to make a conclusive statement, you may still use phrases such as "is likely to." You may also state that something "is more likely than not" going to happen, but whether it occurs or not, depends on other circumstances. When analyzing legal rules and applying them to disputes - be certain to clarify the variables and other relevant circumstances.

Advanced methods of IRAC

Answering scenario-based legal questions may be difficult since these inquiries are seldom straightforward. Nonetheless, with the assistance of a law tutor, adopting the IRAC method writing style may aid you in constructing your answer and leading you through the problem scenario. Following the procedures given above is the optimal way to utilise IRAC. Although the IRAC methodology is not the only way to approach a legal challenge, it is widely used by universities as a universal method since it may aid law students in recognising the problem, applying the rule, doing scenario analysis, and reaching a final judgment. One example is the Fact Law Sandwich - It separates the topic into four logical steps, which makes the explanation easier to comprehend for law students. Other alternatives exist, and if you are interested in learning more sophisticated techniques, contact me to arrange for some law tutoring.