ROLE OF LEGAL REASONING IN DRAFTING A LEGAL DOCUMENT

ASSIGNMENT # 1 SEMESTER SPRING -2021

Submission Date (April 8, 2021)

BY

HUSNAIN UL HASSAN

ROLL # 17161624-006

LAW-421 (Legal Drafting-II)

LL.B. (HONS) CA

Submitted To

Ms. Rabia Ilyas

School of Law

UNIVERSITY OF GUJRAT

Page 1 of 6
 What is Legal Reasoning?

Technical Meanings of Legal Reasoning:

The phrase, “Legal Reasoning” may be defined in its technical and legal sense as:

“The process through which a legal problem is solved by the application of a legal
principle on a legal problem and to infer certain conclusion.”

It means that when a person uses his mental capabilities in deciding a case or arguing
in such case, he is said to have applied legal reasoning.

Literal Meaning of “Legal Reasoning:

The phrase “legal reasoning” literally means the action of thinking about something in a
logical or sensible way. It is typically understood to be the practice of identifying the legal
rules applicable to a particular legal issue. Applying those rules to a legal issue or problem
in order to reach to a reasonable conclusion concerning legal issue or problem.

Examples of Legal Reasoning:

Legal reasoning is a mental activity through which certain conclusions are drawn from
certain available facts. For instance:

 When smoke is seen it is inferred that there is a fire;

 When there are 50 students in the class upon counting they are turn 49, it is inferred
that one student is missing.

In both of above cases reasoning is used for reaching to a conclusion.

The Main Object of Reasoning:

The main object of legal reasoning is to reach to certain conclusion concerning the facts
of a case and to use such conclusion as an argument;

Elements of Legal Reasoning

Legal reasoning reveals why and how the court, lawyer or judge came to their decision or
argument on the case.

There are core elements that must appear and be addressed in the reasoning:

 The question or the legal issue before the court

 The relevant facts of the case

Page 2 of 6
 The legal rule

 Other considerations that may be brought before the court

As such, there is the burden to address the stated elements clearly and concisely. This may be
done using a deductive or analytical reasoning.

1. Deductive Reasoning
This is a means of drawing out ruling from another judicial opinion, or existing constitution,
legislative provision and applying it in another case. The rule statement is mostly broad rather
than narrow when using deductive reasoning. This approach is mechanical and is therefore
effective only in ideal situations and often unsatisfactory.

The approach faces many challenges among them being:

 Semantic difficulty – due to the various meanings that words hold, it is often impossible
to attribute one particular meaning to a specific word and so to be understood by all parties

 There may arise unremunerated circumstances that would demand a different legal
treatment

 The occurrence of obstacles preventing the upholding of previous rule statements

 Rules based on ontological principles being insufficient to determine between conflicting

interests

2. Analogical Reasoning
This involves the identification of the similarities and differences of the facts in the precedential
and the case to be determined. After the identification, then deciding whether the case to be
determined is similar or different from the precedent in the important aspects with regards to the
matter being decided. Following the findings, the case precedent may then be followed or
distinguished.

It is important to note that there are peculiar situations where both of the above methods will not
suffice in determining a case, and the judge may then rule according to personal preference.

Circumstances that may prompt such a treatment include but are not limited to:

 Where the law is obscure: the rules are too fragmentary, imprecise or partial to describe
the present case facts

 Where there are no rules provided

Page 3 of 6
 Precedent and Analogy
The two central forms of legal reasoning are arguments from precedent and analogy. These are
found in many legal systems such as the common law which is found in both England and the
United States.

 Precedent is where an earlier decision is applied in a later case because the two cases are
same.

 Analogy involves an earlier decision being used in a later case because the later case is
similar to the earlier one.
Precedent and analogy do however present philosophical problems. For instance, when are two
cases deemed ‘same’ so as to apply precedent? When two cases are considered ‘similar’ to
justify analogy? In both situations, why should the decision in the earlier case affect the decision
in the latter case?

Inherent within legal reasoning is the acceptance of the law and a leaning towards working
within the existing legal framework. It is true to say that there is a bias towards maintaining the
existing rules. Nevertheless, the bias does not presume the law as it is to be just, fair or practical
and thus immune from change.

Judges have often in the past made use of provisions in the law to avoid applying precedent or
analogy in instances where such an application would result in unfair or undesirable outcomes.

Five Methods of Legal Reasoning

•Rule-Based Reasoning:

Rule-based reasoning is the most important type of legal reasoning.

•Reasoning by Analogy.

Reasoning by analogy concerns finding similarities. ...

•Distinguishing Cases.

Distinguishing cases is the opposite of reasoning by analogy. ...

•Reasoning by Policy.

• Inductive Reasoning

I.R.A.C Method of Legal Reasoning

What is I.R.A.C-I:

I.R.A.C is a methodology for legal reasoning, I.R.A.C stands for:

Page 4 of 6
I- Issue;

R- Rule;

A-Application;

C- Conclusion.

Step-I in the IRAC methodology is to identify the issues.

Step-II is to state the relevant rule of law that will apply in resolving the issue.

Step-III is to apply those rules to the facts of the question, that is, to 'analyze' the issue.

Step-IV is to offer a conclusion as to the most likely result.

Although IRAC method was introduced for legal reasoning, it is mostly used for solving
problem based questions of law school examinations in the universities of Western World. IRAC
is an extremely useful tool in organizing an answer to a problem based question. This method of
legal reasoning helps to understand a legal problem in a better way.

Importance of legal reasoning in drafting a legal document:

 Legal reasoning is often identified with the intellectual processes by which the rationality
and consistency of legal doctrines are maintained and justified.
 It is characteristic of legal reasoning that it strives toward consistency both of legal rules
and of legal judgments while drafting legal document
 So legal reasoning plays an important role in legal drafting of an instrument
 Legal decisions are the result of the legal reasoning processes, and they may be more or less
explicit.
 Legal decisions may be, for instance, visible in the way that they have a direct effect due to
formal reasons (e.g. the decision of a judge closing a court proceeding, or the decision of a
solicitor performing a transaction on behalf of a client).
 On the other hand, legal decisions may be also indirect and their effects may be hidden due to the
fact that they are elements of complex situations. This is what happens in the usual counsel
situation, with or without trial or connection to a dispute, and also in the legal teaching situation.
The advice, the argument, or the description of the law is founded on a previous decision of the
lawyer concerning the ways in which to handle the issue of the situation at hand.
 If the client follows the advice, if the court is in favour of the proposal, or if the student accepts
the guidance, the decision may have effect. Naturally, due to misinterpretation, negligence or
poor quality, legal decisions may also lack any effect, and between these extremes, many possible
consequences may be perceived.
 A legal reasoning process starts when a lawyer is confronted with a legal issue. For example, a
potential client may visit a lawyer in a legal office and describe a situation, or a district attorney
may put forward an alleged crime before a judge in a court-proceeding, or a company lawyer may
receive a telephone-call from his manager to be informed of a possible legal problem emerging in

Page 5 of 6
 a contracting situation, or a civil servant may find in his morning mail an unusual request from a
citizen, regarding partly classified documents with references to the freedom of information act.
 Rarely does the initial confrontation with a problem give the lawyer enough information to let
him arrive at a legal decision.
 On the contrary, the lawyer usually has to find additional information. Depending on how
familiar he is with the situation, the effort that he will have to make may be more or less time
consuming and cumbersome.

Conclusion:

Legal drafting is most important instrument of legal communication. A legal document must be
drafted in a way that it categorically specifies the legal issues with legal reasoning.

Legal drafting skills also include the art of drafting authentic and reasonable documents rather
than using template format for every contract and notice drafted. Legal reasoning is essential to
construct basic structure of legal document and enables the court to relate to its content
effortlessly. A legal reasoning process may be also very comprehensive and drawn out. It may also
engage several individuals.

Page 6 of 6