Of the two question types in a law exam — essay questions and problem questions — most students find problem questions harder. Not because the law is more difficult, but because the format is unfamiliar.

An essay question asks you to discuss, analyse, or critically evaluate. A problem question drops you into a fictional scenario and asks you to advise one of the parties. The law is the same. The approach is entirely different.

Here is the method that works.

What examiners want from a problem question answer

The examiner is not asking whether you can recite the law. They are asking whether you can use it. A strong problem question answer takes the relevant legal rules and applies them to the specific facts of the scenario to reach a reasoned conclusion.

The word “advise” in the question is important. You are acting as a lawyer giving advice to a client. That means your answer must be practical, precise, and concluded. “It depends” is not an answer. “Based on the facts given, it is likely that X will succeed because…” is an answer.

The IRAC method

The most reliable structure for problem question answers is IRAC: Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion.

Issue — identify the specific legal issue raised by the facts. Do not try to address everything at once. Take each issue in sequence.

Rule — state the relevant legal rule clearly and accurately. Cite the case or statute from which the rule derives. One sentence is often enough: “Under the neighbour principle established in Donoghue v Stevenson, a duty of care arises where harm is reasonably foreseeable and the parties are in a relationship of sufficient proximity.”

Application — this is where most marks are earned or lost. Take the rule and apply it directly to the facts of the scenario. Use the names of the parties in the question. Be specific. Do not just repeat the rule — show how it operates on these particular facts.

Conclusion — reach a clear conclusion on this issue. Is there liability? Has a contract been formed? Does the defendant have a valid defence? Commit to a position and state it clearly.

Then move to the next issue and repeat.

A worked example

Imagine a Tort Law question involving a driver who fails to stop at a red light and injures a pedestrian. A student using IRAC would:

Identify the issue: whether the driver owes a duty of care to the pedestrian, and whether that duty has been breached.

State the rule: duty of care is established using the three-stage Caparo test (foreseeability, proximity, and fairness). Breach is assessed against the standard of the reasonable person under Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks.

Apply the rule: injury to a pedestrian from a driver’s negligence is clearly foreseeable. The parties are proximate — they share the road. It is fair and reasonable to impose a duty. On breach, failing to stop at a red light falls below the standard of a reasonable driver.

Conclude: the driver owes a duty of care to the pedestrian, and on the facts, that duty has been breached.

This structure is clear, logical, and directly responsive to the question. It earns marks at every stage.

Common mistakes to avoid

Do not begin your answer with a general introduction to the area of law. The examiner knows what Tort Law is. Begin immediately with the first issue.

Do not list all the cases you know on a topic. Select the cases that are directly relevant to the specific facts in the question and apply them precisely.

Do not forget conclusions. Many students write strong issue and rule sections and then simply stop. Every issue needs a conclusion.

Do not ignore facts in the scenario. Every detail the examiner includes is there for a reason. If a fact is mentioned — the claimant’s age, the time of day, the nature of the property — consider whether it is legally relevant and address it.

Practice is everything

The IRAC method becomes instinctive only through repetition. Take a past paper problem question and work through it using this structure — one issue at a time, one IRAC cycle at a time.

After your first attempt, read the examiners’ report for that paper. Compare what you wrote to what the examiners said they were looking for. The gap between those two things is your revision priority.

Close that gap and your marks will rise.