The IRAC method for law problem questions — a working guide

UAE law programs teach the IRAC method (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) for tackling problem questions. Some programs use ILAC instead (Issue, Law, Application, Conclusion), which is essentially the same structure with different vocabulary. Either way, the method exists for a reason: it produces legal analysis that a marker can grade quickly, fairly, and against an explicit rubric.

Students who skip the structure and write the problem question as if it were a discursive essay lose marks they didn’t need to lose. The marker can’t find the legal reasoning easily, so they assume it isn’t there.

This is the working guide we use at the studio when writing problem questions for UAE law students.

What a problem question actually is

A problem question presents a hypothetical fact pattern and asks you to advise one or more parties on their legal position. The brief usually ends with Advise X or Discuss the legal issues that arise. The fact pattern contains deliberately ambiguous elements — facts that could be read multiple ways under the relevant law — and the assessment is testing whether you can spot the issues, identify the relevant rules, apply the rules to the facts, and reach a defensible conclusion.

The mistake students make is treating the problem question as an opportunity to demonstrate legal knowledge in the abstract. The assessment isn’t asking what you know; it’s asking how you reason from facts to conclusion using the law you know.

IRAC, step by step

Issue

Identify the specific legal issues raised by the facts. There are usually multiple, sometimes overlapping. State each one as a precise question.

Bad: The issue is contract law.

Better: The issue is whether the email exchange between Ahmed and the supplier on 12 March constitutes a binding contract under Article 125 of the UAE Civil Code, given the absence of an explicit acceptance and the presence of conditional language.

A problem question typically has 2–5 issues. Address them in logical order — earlier-arising issues first, dependent issues after.

Rule

State the relevant legal rule for each issue. This is where you cite the source of law — UAE Federal Decree-Law, Civil Code article, case law if relevant, secondary authorities for explanatory purposes.

Bad: Contracts need offer and acceptance.

Better: Article 125 of the UAE Civil Code requires that contractual formation involves an offer (ijab) and a corresponding acceptance (qabul) that match the offer’s terms. Article 132 specifies that conditional acceptance constitutes a counter-offer rather than acceptance.

For UAE law courses at branch campuses (Heriot-Watt Dubai, Middlesex Dubai, Murdoch Dubai), the rule section often combines UAE Federal Law with UK case law as the underlying common-law principles your module teaches. Be explicit about which jurisdiction’s law you’re applying.

Application

This is the section where most marks are made or lost. Apply the rule to the specific facts of the problem question, working through the elements of the rule and showing how each element is satisfied (or not) by the facts.

Bad: The contract is valid because there was offer and acceptance.

Better: Applying Article 125 to the facts: the supplier’s email of 12 March constitutes an offer because it specified price, quantity, and delivery terms with reasonable certainty. Ahmed’s reply on 13 March, however, introduces a new term (“subject to delivery before 1 April”) that was not in the original offer. Under Article 132, this conditional reply constitutes a counter-offer rather than acceptance, and no contract was formed on these communications alone.

The application is where you demonstrate legal reasoning. It should be the longest section of your IRAC for each issue.

Conclusion

State your conclusion succinctly, tied directly to the question the problem asks.

Bad: In conclusion, there are issues.

Better: Ahmed should be advised that no enforceable contract was formed on 13 March because his counter-offer was never accepted by the supplier. He is not obliged to perform under the alleged contract; equally, he cannot enforce performance against the supplier.

If you’ve identified multiple issues, each gets its own conclusion. There may also be an overall conclusion at the end summarising the advice across issues.

Where students lose marks

Five common mistakes in problem-question writing:

1. Spotting too few issues. Markers usually have a predefined list of issues the fact pattern raises. Missing one or two issues caps your possible mark.

2. Stating rules in the abstract without citation. The marker wants to see Article numbers, case names, statute references. The law of contracts says is not a rule statement.

3. Skipping application straight to conclusion. Students sometimes state the rule and the conclusion but skip the working between them. The application is where the marks live.

4. Mixing IRAC sections together. A paragraph that contains issue, rule, application, and conclusion in jumbled order forces the marker to disentangle the legal reasoning. They will not work harder than you did.

5. Ignoring counter-arguments. Strong problem-question answers acknowledge where the application could go the other way and explain why their preferred conclusion holds. The supplier might argue that…; however, this fails because…

When The Essay Atelier writes law problem questions

Our law writers handle UAE Federal Law alongside common-law principles, OSCOLA citation throughout, and the specific IRAC conventions each UAE law program teaches. The writer-editor pair is matched to the jurisdiction your module covers.

If you have a problem question and want a second opinion on issue-spotting before you draft, send the editors the brief. Five minutes from us catches the issues that are easy to miss and easy to lose marks on.