Commercial Law - LAW2447

IRAC Guide
Legal problem solving becomes much easier when following a structured method. One of
the most simple and effective methods is IRAC. The following is a guide to help you use the
IRAC method to solve a hypothetical legal problem.

1. Issue(s)
2. Rule(s)
3. Application
4. Conclusion

Facts

Even if you are not required to submit a list of facts in your answer, it is a good idea to write
one. This will help you sort through the facts you have been given and determine which facts are
relevant and how you are going to use them. The following is a list of questions that may help
you do this

• Who is involved? (identify parties specifically by name, if possible) Who suffered?

• How?
• Why? (was it avoidable?)
• What is the known (relevant) information? Is there any missing information?
• Include specific details like dates and monetary figures.

Issues

After identifying the essential facts of the case, you must correctly identify the legal issue. The
legal issue is a question that, once it is answered, will help solve the legal problem. To correctly
identify the legal issue, you should
• Identify the Plaintiff and Defendant
• Identify the problem: what has gone wrong and for whom?
• Work out what area of law may govern the resolution of the problem. This could
include, but is not limited to the following bodies of law.
 o Tort of Negligence
o Contract law (be specific about which part)
o Australian Consumer Law (be specific about which section of the
Australian Consumer Law)
Sample Formula:
The issue is whether + (1) parties + (2) problem + (3) specific area of law (including
case names and/or specific legislation sections) + (4) relevant facts as they relate to the
specific law that resolves the dispute.
Good Example: Did (1) Sam (2) violate (3) the Road Traffic Act, 1985, Sec. 18 (RTA)
(4) when he was riding his bicycle on the sidewalk?
Bad Example: Did Sam break the law? – Not enough information.
Note: Assessment tasks are set around the work that you have done in class or will do in class.
You are not expected to go outside the content of the unit but you are expected to explore it

Rules

Following the identification of the legal issue, you should

• Set out the legal rules and principles that will be used to address the legal issue(s)
• Source the legal rules and principles from cases and legislation
• Only use the legal rules and principles that are necessary to address the legal issues.
Good example:
The rule of law is that it is a violation of the RTA for a person to drive a vehicle on
a sidewalk. According to section 18 of the Road Traffic Act, it is a violation of this
law for any “person” to “drive” any “vehicle” on any “footpath”;
For purposes of this law, the following words are defined as follows:
i. a “person” is any human being over the age of 16 years old;
ii. a “vehicle” is any method of mechanical transportation;
iii. to “drive” a vehicle means to control how fast the vehicle goes and the
direction the vehicle goes in; and
iv. a “footpath” is any sidewalk or path that is intended primarily for
people to walk on, not for vehicles;
Note: Make sure you are specific when stating the relevant legal rules and principles, and
always cite the sources of the relevant legal rules and principles.

Application
After identifying the relevant legal rules and principles, you should apply these legal rules and
principles to the facts of the case with a view to solve the legal issue. This is the most important
part in your answer and normally accounts for more than a half of your marks. In this part, you
should
• Form your own position as to how the legal issue should be answered. In doing so, you
should fully explain and justify your position based on the relevant legal rules and
principles that you have identified in the “Rules” part.
• Explain clearly why the Plaintiff’s claims are (or are not) reasonable, based on the
relevant legal rules and principles that you have identified in the “Rules” part.
• There are often several Plaintiffs involved. Take the time to examine each case
individually and analyse why their claims are (or are not) valid.
• It is acceptable to refer the reader to another point in the paper, rather than rewriting it
word for word, if the situation calls for the same legal recommendation.
• ALWAYS justify the claims you make! WHY do you think so?
Good example:
Applying section 18 of the Road Traffic Act to the facts of this question, it
can be argued that Sam is a person, and he actually drove a vehicle on a
footpath.
Indeed, Sam is a person because he is a human being and 22 years old.
According to section 18 of the Road Traffic Act, a person is any human
being who is over the age of 16.
Similarly, according to section 18 of the Road Traffic Act, a “vehicle” is
any method of mechanical transportation. Bicycle is obviously a method
of mechanical transportation because people normally use it to travel
from one place to another place.
Section 18 of the Road Traffic Act defines driving a vehicle as controlling
how fast the vehicle goes and the direction the vehicle goes in. In this
case, Sam was controlling how fast the bicycle was going and the
direction the bicycle was going in. As a result, it can be argued that Sam
was driving the bicycle. It is worth noting that we usually say “riding” a
bicycle, rather than “driving” a vehicle, but based on the definition of
“drive” provided in section 18 of the Road Traffic Act, Sam was driving
the bicycle.
Finally, the sidewalk on which Sam drove his bicycle was a footpath
because sidewalks are intended primarily for people to walk on, not for
vehicles to be driven on. Moreover, section 18 of the Road Traffic Act
defines clearly that a sidewalk is a footpath.

Note: Take time to discuss the contentious aspects of the case rather than the aspects that
 are most comfortable or obvious.

Conclusion

• Stand back and play ‘the judge.’

• Choose the argument you think is the strongest and articulate what you believe to be
the appropriate answer.
• State who is liable for what and to what extent.
• Consider how parties could have acted to better manage their risks in order to avoid
this legal problem.