13 Appendix – Answering Case Study Questions
In some respects, we begin with the end. For many readers, this textbook is part of an educational journey in law which will require the successful completion of written examinations. It is extremely typical in post-secondary law exams to see the use of “case study questions” and this section offers some tips to navigate such as style.
While every professor will be different, law case study questions tend to follow a similar style of answer and demand that students tackle a few major sections. The format for answering a case study question is commonly referred to as:
IRAC
IRAC is an acronym that stands for Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion. The purpose behind requiring the IRAC format for answers is to ensure that a student has provided a structured approach to organizing and presenting their legal analysis.
Each of the IRAC letters pinpoints a different section for a student’s answer:
Issue – The first step is to identify and state the legal issue or topic being raised in the case question. This involves correctly identifying the specific legal problem or dispute that needs to be resolved.
Rule – Once you have identified the issue, you move on to discussing the relevant legal rules or principles that apply to the situation. What is the key law? This typically involves referencing a legal test, statutes, case law, or any other legal authority that you have been taught by your professor and is relevant to the issue at hand. Importantly, students are not reaching conclusions, they are merely stating the principles of the law.
Application – After stating the applicable legal test or legal rules, you proceed to apply them to the facts of the question. Is the law met based on the facts that were presented in the question? This involves analyzing how the rules or principles relate to the specific facts and circumstances of the case. As to the “Application”, the purpose is to test whether students can merge the facts and law together to create arguments or an application about the underlying issue.
Conclusion – Finally, draw a conclusion based on the application of the legal rules to the facts. What is the final answer? In this section, you provide a clear and concise answer to the legal issue or question raised in the case study. Your conclusion should be supported by the analysis and reasoning you have presented throughout the IRAC process.
In terms of grading, the “Rule” and “Application” sections tend to be worth the most marks.
While there has been some push back against the rigidity of the IRAC method over the years, it remains the gold-standard method for answering law-based case study questions.
Interestingly, the IRAC method is also what is typically used by judges and tribunal members in formulating their judgments. After stating the facts of the dispute, the judge or tribunal member then typically, discusses the issues, rules, application, and a final conclusion.
External Resource
See Bonnett v. Tolsma, 2018 BCCRT 302 for a good example of a decision-maker using “IRAC” in their judgment. The case is available at the following link:
https://canlii.ca/t/hstx2
Ultimately, one of the keys to understanding IRAC is to see it in action. You can refer to the following short case question dealing with a topic we discuss later in the textbook — the Good Samaritan Act. The IRAC-styled answer follows the fact pattern.
Example – Sample IRAC Case Answer
Question Facts
Mr. Jordan was driving home from work when he came across a terrible fire that was engulfing a small house. Seeing no one else around, Jordan rushed into the house and began to search for anyone that might have been inside. He managed to find a young man, Suresh, pinned under a cabinet which had crashed down in the fire. Being highly stressed and wanting to get out, Jordan, rather than attempting to lift the cabinet, instead yanked as hard as he could on Suresh’s arms. While the cabinet moved enough for Suresh to wiggle free unfortunately, Jordan’s actions caused both of Suresh’s wrists to break in multiple spots. Would Jordan be liable for the injuries he caused to Suresh’s arms?
Sample IRAC Answer
Issue
The issue is whether Jordan would be liable for the injuries he caused to Suresh’s wrists while rendering emergency aid during a fire.
Rule
The applicable law is the Good Samaritan Act. According to the Act, a person who renders emergency medical services or aid to an ill, injured, or unconscious person at the immediate scene of an accident or emergency is not liable for damages for injury or death caused by their act or omission, unless they are grossly negligent.
Application
In this situation, although Jordan’s actions resulted in injury to Suresh’s wrists, it can be argued that his conduct does not amount to gross negligence. Given the stressful and time-sensitive circumstances, it is reasonable to assume that Mr. Jordan’s actions were driven by the urgency of the situation rather than a gross disregard for Suresh’s safety. Further, Jordan’s intention was to save Suresh from the fire, and he managed to free him from the pinned cabinet. His actions, although resulting in harm, were not indicative of gross negligence. Therefore, because the injuries occurred while Jordan was acting as a good samaritan and he was not grossly negligent, he would not be liable.
Conclusion
Jordan would likely be protected from liability for the injuries caused to Suresh’s wrists.
Throughout this textbook, there will be a number of case study questions available which should help students practice the IRAC method. Look at the end of each individual chapter for sample case study questions.
