Tutor HuntResources Law Resources

How To Structure An Answer To A Simple Scenario Or Problem Question

The sets out a clear structure for answering any type of problem or scenario question. The example used is a very simple one; however the same structure works with even complex scenario questions.

Date : 27/11/2019

Author Information

Richard

Uploaded by : Richard
Uploaded on : 27/11/2019
Subject : Law

This is a very simple example designed to demonstrate how to structure an answer to any problem or scenario type question. The example is taken from criminal law but the same approach can be used for any civil law (eg tort or contract) question. It uses a distinct structure namely the ISEAC structure.

The purpose of the ISEAC structure (Issue / State and Explain / Apply / Conclude) is to ensure that students fully state and explain the relevant law before they apply it to the facts of the scenario. It provides greater focus on consideration of what the law is and acts as a restraint on rushing to a conclusion.

A common error is to either apply the law directly to the facts without properly explaining what the relevant law is or to try and explain the law and apply it in the same sentence or paragraph, which often leads to superficial or incomplete explanations of the law.

The ISEAC approach therefore sets out the relevant law in one section or paragraph and then applies it in a separate section. Time spent focusing on explaining the law is never wasted and usually allows for a better understanding of how the law applies to a set of facts.

Depending on the complexity of the problem the structure might be a repetitive structure (State / Apply / State / Apply / State / Apply etc or it could be a simple State all the relevant law in one section and apply it in a separate section (as in the example below)

The Issue section provides a convenient opening paragraph (even if of only one sentence) in that the student identifies the area of law that is relevant to the scenario. The Conclusion ensures that the student states clearly whether they consider there to be criminal (or civil) liability on the part of a Defendant. Alternatively the question might be framed from the perspective of the other side and require an indication as to the likely success of the Prosecution or Claimant. Again the structure demands that a student focuses on the result and therefore answers the question.

The example below is based on a simple Non Fatal Offences prosecution for common assault. It indicates or sets out in full possible content in each part of the structure, there is additional commentary in italics.

Example Scenario

Davina says to Valerie I am going to get you . She then slaps her round the face. Is Davina guilty of an offence of common assault?

Assume that a jury or magistrates would determine that the facts are as stated in the problem. If the facts are unclear or ambiguous, then you may need to make this clear.

Section 1. Identify the legal ISSUE lt;sup>[These are planning headings only do not use in your essay answer]

Here the issue concerns a criminal assault It will be necessary to consider the nature of the Defendant s ( D ) actions and her state of mind. Common assault is a common law offence and charged as a summary offence in the magistrates court: Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.39 ( CJA 88 ).


This possible opening paragraph is set out in full.


Note the way in which the Act is cited with an abbreviation given for future use in the answer to save writing out the full Act each time. The same technique is used to refer to the Defendant, Davina who can now be known as D for the rest of the answer, thus saving time and ensuring that the examiner / marker is clear as to what you mean by the use of these abbreviations.

Section 2. STATE and EXPLAIN the law

Here deal with the actus reus of assault and the mens rea of assault.

Define assault / battery . Explain the mens rea (eg intention and recklessness). Define all the technical terms that are used eg intention .


This indicates possible content (rather than writing it out in full)


You should try to cite authority to show where the law comes from by referring to cases or statutes. The more complex the law, the more you will want to cite. Here the cases of R v Cunningham and R v Mohan would be relevant.

You will only need to cite the facts of cases where you want to show the material similarity or difference between the case and the scenario.

Section 3. APPLY the law to the facts of the problem and to the D s actions

Davina s words indicate a clear intention to inflict some sort of retribution on the victim ( V ). Her action in slapping V amounts to the clear application of force on V. The effect of the application of force is not relevant here ie it does not matter if there is no apparent injury suffered. Therefore both the actus reus and mens rea of assault can be made out..

Section 4. CONCLUDE

Davina is likely to be found guilty of common assault which could subject her to a maximum of sentence of six months imprisonment.

This resource was uploaded by: Richard