.
Writing a legal argument
The example paragraphs below demonstrate the things you need to include to write a successful legal argument.
Use the menu on the right hand side to navigate through the resources in this tutorial and how to write a legal argument.
To successfully write a legal case study
You need to:
- identify relevant legal issues
- apply the law to the facts
- structure your answer clearly and logically (use the model plan)
- use appropriate language for a legal argument.
Identify relevant legal issues and apply the law to the facts
These model paragraphs show how a student has successfully identified the legal issues and applied those issues to the facts of the law.
Select the text in these examples to see which part of the structure the sentences belong to.
Example 1
In this model, the first sentence identifies the relevant legal argument while the second applies the law to the facts of the case.
Lord Atkin's neighbour test suggested that person A owes a duty of care if B is sufficiently proximate to A. In other words, the test will hold if A's actions or omissions may affect B in a reasonably foreseeable manner and consequently cause damage or suffering or damage to B. In this case, Groovy Clothing Store owes Bert a duty of care because Bert was in their premises and such duty of care is non-delegable (and hence could not be discharged) to Groovy Clothing Store's contractor who was hired to renovate the premises. According to the 'neighbour' test, occupiers of land owe a duty of care to their entrants (neighbours) in respect of premises because of their control over the premise. Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna. Since Bert's presence in the store was organised and controlled by the store, and it is reasonably foreseeable that Groovy Clothing Store's actions and omissions could cause damage to Bert and other shoppers, it is hence sufficient for Groovy Clothing Store to owe Betts duty of care.
Example 2
Here the application of the law to the facts and the identification of legal issues have been interwoven together in one sentence.
Although a shopper entering a shop like Groovy Clothing Store would not assume voluntarily (volenti non fit injuria) the risk of falling down a collapsed staircase, in defence a its breaching duty of care, Groovy Clothing Store could probably claim that Bert was partly liable for his injury due to his failure to take reasonable care of himself (contributory negligence) on the grounds that an ordinary, reasonable and prudent person would not force him or herself up the stairs at the same time with so many people because of the foreseeability of an accident Wyong Shire Council v Shirt [1980] HCA 12. If this is the case, then not all the losses and damages Bert suffered would be recoverable.
[Identifying and defining the legal issues] Lord Atkin's neighbour test suggested that person A owes a duty of care if B is sufficiently proximate to A. In other words, the test will hold if A's actions or omissions may affect B in a reasonably foreseeable manner and consequently cause damage or suffering or damage to B. [Applying the law to the facts] In this case, Groovy Clothing Store owes Bert a duty of care because Bert was in their premises and such duty of care is non-delegable (and hence could not be discharged) to Groovy Clothing Store's contractor who was hired to renovate the premises. [Identifying and defining the legal issues] According to the 'neighbour' test, occupiers of land owe a duty of care to their entrants (neighbours) in respect of premises because of their control over the premise. Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna. [Concluding the issue] Since Bert's presence in the store was organised and controlled by the store, and it is reasonably foreseeable that Groovy Clothing Store's actions and omissions could cause damage to Bert and other shoppers, it is hence sufficient for Groovy Clothing Store to owe Bert duty of care.
Example 2
Here the application of the law to the facts and the identification of legal issues have been interwoven together in one sentence.
[Applying the law to the facts] Although a shopper entering a shop like Groovy Clothing Store would not assume voluntarily[Identifying and defining the legal issues] (volenti non fit injuria) [Applying the law to the facts] the risk of falling down a collapsed staircase, [Identifying and defining the legal issues] in defence a its breaching duty of care, [Applying the law to the facts] Gropovy Clothing Store could probably claim that Bert was partly liable for his injury due to his failure to take reasonable care of himself [Identifying and defining the legal issues] (contributory negligence) on the grounds that an ordinary, reasonable and prudent person [Applying the law to the facts] would not force him or herself up the stairs at the same time with so many people because of the foreseeability of an accident Wyong Shire Council v Shirt [1980] HCA 12. [Concluding the issue] If this is the case, then not all the losses and damages Bert suffered would be recoverable.