Answering A Law Paper For A Beginne1
Answering A Law Paper For A Beginne1
There are several types of law exam questions for the non-law students:
ESSAY QUESTIONS
These are direct questions which require you to answer everything you know on
the area being asked.
You are expected to give detailed explanations on counter offer which is one of
the rules available under the element of acceptance.
You must remember to support your answer with legal authorities which are
cases and/or statutory provisions. If not, your answer, however logical and
reasonable it can be, will never be a legal answer.
Of course, in terms of marks, you will not get much because our (the examiners’)
main concern is to observe your legal knowledge in the aspect being examined.
ii
When you encounter this type of question, you will need to answer in a proper
systematic way so that your answer will flow smoothly to arrive at a convincing
conclusion. This type of question will give you a scenario or a case to be solved
by you using the knowledge you have in the area of law being taught. You may,
if you wish, imagine yourself as a lawyer trying to solve a case.
For example:
A offers to sell his cow to B at RM2500. B agrees to buy the cow but wants to
buy it at RM2000. A then sells the cow to C. B wants to sue A. Advise A.
In the above example, you need to use the IPAC/ILAC method to answer the
question, i.e.:
I = Issues
P/L = Principle/law that you are going to use to answer the question
A = Application, which is applying the law into the question
C = Conclusion
As per example, you can raise the following issues (among others):
The principle/law that can be used to solve this problem is counter offer where
an offer can be said to be no longer in existence when it is countered by the
offeree. A counter offer denies the original offer because the offeree does not
accept the offer according to its terms. (This is only a brief explanation of the
said principle/law)
In the application stage, you are required to apply the principle or the law that
you have mentioned in the above stage. This is where you need to use your
knowledge of the law and try to use it by adopting it to the facts of the problem.
As per example: When A offers to sell his cow to B, B is expected to accept the
offer unconditionally; that is, B must accept the offer as its original terms. In
this instance, B must buy the cow at RM2500. But, when B wants to buy the cow
at RM2000, RM500 less than the offered price, he is said to be making a counter
offer which is, under the law, is not an acceptance at all.
The case to support the above argument is Hyde v Wrench (you will need to
explain this case). Section 7(a) of the Contracts Act is also applicable here where
iii
the acceptance made by the offeree must be made absolutely or without any
conditions attached to it.
The conclusion is A is entitled to sell the cow to C because B does not make any
acceptance since B wants to buy the cow less than the original price, which is
considered to be a counter offer, not an acceptance.