The IRAC method is the most widely taught framework for structuring legal analysis in UK law schools.
Issue
Begin each paragraph by identifying the legal issue at stake. In a problem question, this means spotting the relevant area of law raised by the facts. For example: "The central issue is whether the advertisement constitutes a binding offer or merely an invitation to treat."
Rule
State the relevant legal rule, citing the authoritative source. This might be a statutory provision (e.g., s.2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967), a leading case (e.g., Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256), or an established legal principle. Be precise — quote the ratio decidendi, not obiter dicta, unless you are using obiter to support a broader argument.
Application
This is where most students lose marks. Application means connecting the rule to the specific facts or argument at hand. Do not simply restate the rule; explain how and why it applies. Use phrases like "Applying the principle in Carlill to the present facts...". This is also where you should introduce counter-arguments and academic criticism.
Conclusion
Each IRAC paragraph should end with a brief conclusion on the issue. This need not be definitive — in law, acknowledging uncertainty is a strength. For example: "On balance, the court would likely hold that the advertisement constitutes an offer, following the reasoning in Carlill, although the position remains arguable."
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Describing without applying: Stating the rule from a case but never connecting it to the question.
- Skipping the issue: Jumping straight into the rule without framing what you are discussing.
- One-sided analysis: Failing to consider counter-arguments or alternative interpretations.
- Treating IRAC as rigid: IRAC is a guide, not a straitjacket. Experienced writers weave the elements together naturally.