How to answer a law problem question: an analysis worksheet

Answering a law problem question means making the path from the question to your answer visible. A paragraph can contain accurate rules yet leave the reader unable to see why a particular outcome follows. This worksheet helps you find that missing connection before you turn a draft into an assessed answer.

UNSW Library presents IRAC as issue, rule, application and conclusion. Open University emphasises explaining the application. These Australian and UK teaching resources offer useful starting points. Your course instructions determine the required method, permitted assistance and source conventions; this guide does not prescribe a universal examination format.

Define the task before drafting

Record what you have been asked to do, whose position you must consider and which subject and materials are in scope. A problem answer, a case note and an essay need different work. Keep the actual question at the top of your notes so that a useful background explanation does not quietly replace the task.

Read once for the whole situation and again to mark details. Separate stated facts, ambiguous wording and information that is missing. A plausible inference belongs in your analysis rather than being silently added to the facts. Retain details that challenge your first impression as well as those that support it.

Build one worksheet for each issue

Give each worksheet a precise question. Separate questions governed by different rules, and mark any dependency between them. This makes it possible to revise a provisional answer without untangling several unrelated points from the same paragraph.

Copy these fields: issue | relevant facts and location | source and version | requirements to examine | supporting argument | counterargument | missing information | provisional conclusion.

Add a final question: “Which change in the facts would change my answer?” Difficulty answering it may reveal that you remember an outcome without understanding what controls it. The worksheet organises preparation; it does not dictate the headings or length of your submitted answer.

Give each requirement its own factual link

Leave space for each requirement of the rule you have selected. Beside it, identify the particular fact that supports or undermines satisfaction of that requirement. Include a location in the problem text. An empty space makes a gap easier to recognise than a polished paragraph that hides it.

Do not let “the requirements are met” carry the whole analysis. Explain which detail you rely on, how you interpret it and why it matters to the requirement. Where another reading is credible, compare the reasons for each. Merely adding “therefore” cannot supply an inference that you have not explained.

Keep a separate source register

Use these fields: proposition supported | source consulted | precise location | jurisdiction | relevant date or version | unresolved check. Enter sources you have actually opened and read. A reference proposed by an AI system is a research lead until you have verified it.

Use the jurisdiction and time period specified by the exercise. A current rule from another country does not automatically answer a historical problem set in your course. If your materials do not settle the point, record a question for your tutor instead of selecting a rule because it uses the same language as the problem.

Ask AI to challenge your own attempt

Write an initial analysis first. If your academic rules allow AI assistance, share only exercise material you are permitted to provide. There is no need for personal documents or a real client file. Legal Assistant AI offers explanations and study questions; checking the authority and reasoning remains part of your work.

Review prompt: “Use only this draft and the materials I supply. Identify places where I jump from a rule to a conclusion without connecting the facts. Ask questions about omitted requirements and opposing arguments. Do not add facts, statutes, cases or quotations. Mark unsupported propositions for checking. Do not write my final submission.”

Audit the answer against the question

Return to the task at the top of the page. Check that each conclusion answers it, each factual statement comes from the problem and each cited source can be located. Explain when an absent detail could alter the outcome. Where your analysis supports an answer, give that answer rather than ending with an unexplained list of possibilities.

Keep a short error log: imprecise issue, missing requirement, weak factual link or unchecked reference. Read it before the next exercise. Reusing the worksheet then becomes a way to recognise your own recurring gaps, rather than a routine of filling boxes.