How to write an IRAC essay: a step-by-step guide with UK law examples

IRAC is the standard framework for UK law problem questions because it forces you to show your legal reasoning in a sequence an examiner can follow: issue identification, rule statement, application, conclusion. But knowing the acronym and being able to execute it cleanly under exam conditions are two different things. This guide walks through each leg with worked UK law examples so the logic becomes second nature before you sit down to draft.

The most common reason capable students do not convert knowledge into marks is not missing cases—it is failing to make each IRAC move visibly on the page. Examiners cannot award reasoning credit they cannot find.

Step 1 — Issue: name the precise legal question

Issue is not a summary of the facts. It frames the specific legal uncertainty the facts create. Compare these two openings on the same scenario:

• Weak: "This question concerns whether there is a valid contract."
• Strong: "The central question is whether Emma's reply to the advertised price constitutes an acceptance capable of forming a binding contract, or whether it amounts to a counter-offer terminating the original offer."

The second version tells the examiner which legal doctrine is at stake and what the answer will turn on. You are not writing a novel—you are framing a legal question. Tight Issue framing is one of the five habits that distinguishes First-class scripts; the first-class essay guide unpacks all five.

Step 2 — Rule: state the law accurately and proportionately

Rule is where you set out the legal position—statute, case ratio, or both—at a level of detail that is useful without cannibalising word count. Two common failure modes:

• Too thin: naming a case without the operative test means Application has nothing to run.
• Too long: rehearsing every ratio in Carlill when only the unilateral offer point matters signals poor selectivity.

A good Rule paragraph for an offer and acceptance issue might read: "An offer is a definite promise to be bound on specific terms, communicated to the offeree (Storer v Manchester City Council [1974]). An advertisement is ordinarily an invitation to treat rather than an offer (Partridge v Crittenden [1968]), though this is displaced where the advertisement specifies performance conditions and a definite reward (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893])." That is precise, selective, and leaves room for Application to do the analytical work.

Step 3 — Application: run the test on the facts

Application is where most marks are lost and won. Narrating the facts is not the same as applying the law. Applying means taking the test from Rule and asking whether the facts satisfy it—explicitly, element by element where necessary.

Using the example above: "Applying Carlill, the defendant's notice here specifies a cash sum, performance conditions (using the product as directed), and was publicly displayed. The counterargument is that, unlike Carlill, no deposit was paid indicating sincerity—however, the specificity of the conditions is likely sufficient to displace the Partridge presumption." Notice how the facts from the scenario are mapped onto the test criteria, not retold in chronological order.

For a deep treatment of this specific move, see the Application deep-dive—it is the single highest-ROI article if marks are stalling.

Step 4 — Conclusion: resolve the issue you raised

Conclusion answers the question framed in Issue—nothing more. It does not introduce new reasoning, hedge indefinitely, or restate the rule. One sentence is usually enough: "On these facts, the advertisement is likely an offer; Emma's response therefore constitutes an acceptance, and a binding contract is formed." Where genuine uncertainty exists, a conditional conclusion ("if the court applies…") is stronger than a vague hedge.

Multi-issue questions: one IRAC block per head

Most UK problem questions raise several legal issues. Run a separate IRAC block for each—short ones for minor heads, longer Application depth for the contested issues. Signpost explicitly between heads ("Turning to consideration…") so the examiner follows your structure without having to infer it. This pacing skill matters most under time pressure; the timed exam tactics guide walks through it in detail.

The fastest way to improve

Writing full IRAC attempts and getting section-level feedback is the only reliable way to internalise the method. Reading model answers tells you the destination; drafting under pressure and receiving critique on your wording shows you the gap. Build a weekly problem question practice habit and use feedback to target whichever IRAC leg is weakest on that attempt.