IRAC Method Example: Structure Any Law Problem Question
Law tutoring · problem questions
A worked walkthrough of the IRAC structure, plus one contract law problem question answered well and badly, with marker-style comments on exactly what separates a 2:2 from a first.
Short answer: The IRAC method is a four-step framework for answering a law problem question: state the legal Issue, set out the Rule (statute and case authority), Apply that rule to the specific facts, then reach a reasoned Conclusion. In practice the IRAC method rewards the Application step above all: most marks are lost not because a student cannot recite the rule, but because they never argue how it bites on these facts. This guide shows the IRAC structure in a real contract law example, side by side with a weak version, so you can see the gap and close it in your own answer.
If you have ever stared at a two-paragraph hypothetical and not known where to begin, you are exactly who the IRAC method is built for. It is the most widely taught approach to problem questions in UK law schools, and once the IRAC structure becomes second nature you can attack contract, tort, criminal or land problems with the same confidence. We use it every day when we mentor students, and the pattern below is the one our tutors coach most often.
Before we work through the example, a word on what this page is and is not. We are a tutoring and feedback service: we explain the IRAC method, we model it, and we review your drafts against it. You write and submit your own answer. That distinction matters, because the whole point of learning the IRAC structure for law is that it becomes a skill you own in the exam hall, where no one can help you.
What the IRAC method actually stands for
IRAC breaks a legal answer into four moves. Keep them in this order for every discrete issue you spot.
Issue
Name the precise legal question the facts raise. Not "is there a contract" in the abstract, but "was the shop's window display an offer or an invitation to treat?" Good issue-spotting is narrow and specific. A single problem often hides several issues, so signpost each one.
Rule
State the law that governs the issue: the relevant statute, the leading cases and the principle each one establishes. Cite accurately. UK submissions use OSCOLA for legal referencing, so a case appears as its name and citation in a footnote, for example Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256. Australian readers should note their schools use AGLC instead, which formats citations differently, so check your own module handbook before you reference.
Application
This is where marks live. Take the rule and argue it against the facts in front of you, both ways where the law is genuinely arguable. Use the facts explicitly. If a student walked in and paid the marked price, say so and explain why that does or does not complete acceptance. Application is analysis, not narration.
Conclusion
Reach a clear, reasoned answer to the issue you raised. It does not have to be the "right" answer, because many problems are deliberately balanced, but it must follow from your application. Then move to the next issue.
A contract law problem question example
Here is a short scenario. Read it, then compare the two answers below. This is a classic contract law problem question example on offer, acceptance and revocation.
Scenario. On Monday, Amara emails Ben: "I will sell you my vintage camera for £400. This offer stays open until Friday." On Wednesday Ben posts a letter accepting. On Thursday, before the letter arrives, Amara sells the camera to Chloe and emails Ben to withdraw the offer. Ben's letter reaches Amara on Friday. Advise Ben.
The same question answered well and badly
The strong answer, and why it works
"Ben posted his acceptance on Wednesday. Under the postal rule in Adams v Lindsell, acceptance takes effect when posted, not when received, provided post is a reasonable means of reply. Amara's offer was made by email but did not exclude postal acceptance, so the rule can apply. Acceptance therefore took effect on Wednesday. Amara's attempt to revoke on Thursday was too late, because revocation is only effective on receipt (Byrne v Van Tienhoven), and by Thursday the contract had already formed. The sale to Chloe does not undo Ben's earlier acceptance. Amara's promise to keep the offer open until Friday was not supported by consideration, so it was not binding as an option, but that does not help Amara here because Ben accepted before any valid revocation."
The weak answer, and why it stalls
"There was an offer of £400 for the camera and Ben accepted it, so there is a contract. But then Amara sold it to Chloe and tried to cancel. The postal rule is about acceptance by post. Amara emailed Ben to withdraw. Ben's letter came on Friday. So there might be a breach of contract and Ben could sue Amara."
Notice that both answers reach a similar guess about who wins. The marks are not in the conclusion. They are in the Application step, where the strong answer argues from authority to the specific facts and the weak one simply retells the story. That is the single most useful lesson the IRAC method teaches, and it is the habit our tutors work on most when we review a draft.
Want feedback on your own IRAC draft?
Send us your attempt at a problem question and a subject-specialist tutor will mark it against the IRAC structure, then coach you on the Application gaps. You keep writing your own answer.
Get Quote WhatsApp usHow to apply the IRAC structure across subjects
The framework travels. A law assignment in tort uses exactly the same skeleton: the tort law essay structure still runs Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion, you simply swap in duty, breach, causation and remoteness as your rules. A case note example follows the spirit of it too, isolating the legal issue the court decided, the ratio, and how the court applied law to fact. Master the IRAC method once and you have a portable engine for most of the problem-based assessment you will meet across a UK law degree.
Common mistakes we see in drafts
| Mistake | What to do instead |
|---|---|
| Merging all issues into one block | Run a fresh IRAC cycle per issue and signpost each |
| Long rule sections, thin application | Keep the rule tight; spend most words applying it |
| Only arguing one side | Argue both ways where the law is genuinely open |
| Vague or missing citations | Cite cases and statute properly (OSCOLA in the UK, AGLC in Australia) |
| Conclusion with no reasoning | Make the conclusion follow visibly from your application |
For more on how these expectations shift by institution, our guides cover what markers expect across UK universities. If your module blends problem and report formats, our guides on how to write a case study pair well with the IRAC approach.
Related reading
Frequently asked questions
What is the IRAC method in law?
The IRAC method is a four-step structure for answering a law problem question: Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion. You identify the legal issue, state the governing statute and case law, apply that law to the specific facts, then reach a reasoned conclusion. It is the most widely taught problem-question framework in UK law schools.
Which IRAC step carries the most marks?
Application carries the most marks. Markers reward students who argue how the rule bites on the specific facts, ideally both ways where the law is open, rather than those who only recite the rule. In our example, the strong and weak answers cited similar law, but only the strong one applied it to the dates and facts, which is why it scored higher.
How do I reference cases in an IRAC answer?
UK law submissions use OSCOLA, so cases are cited by name and neutral or law-report citation, usually in footnotes, for example Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256. Australian universities use AGLC instead, which formats citations differently, so always check your module handbook for the required style before you submit.
Can I use IRAC for tort and contract law?
Yes. The IRAC structure is subject-neutral. A contract law problem question and a tort law essay both run Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion; you simply change the rules you plug in, such as offer and acceptance for contract or duty, breach and causation for tort. That portability is why learning it once is so useful.
Will AssignPro write my problem question for me?
No. We are a tutoring, coaching and feedback service. We explain the IRAC method, provide worked examples, and review the draft you write against the IRAC structure so you can improve it. You complete and submit your own answer. All our guidance is human-written, AI-free and plagiarism-free.
Need help choosing?
Send the brief on WhatsApp or email. The team will help identify the right service and tutor.