Case facts

Is it necessary to give the facts for every single case you mentino in an essay?

Ive used the case of Pao On Lau Yiu Long in my contract essay, but all ive done is refer to is and state the rule that came out of it and analysed that... i didnt really think that the facts were hugely important because the essay is only on pre-existing duty and the facts raise other questions not relevant to teh essay.

Juyst wondered if i'm supposed to have summarised the facts? The word count is only 1250 and im struggling to get under it.

Reply 1

dragon_1706

No, I wouldn't summarise the facts unless they're particularly relevant - the legal principles coming out of the case are the most important aspect to be discussed.

Reply 2

Ethereal

I used to give the principle as established in case name then footnote case reference at the bottom. I only ever mentioned facts if they were materially identical or suitably similar as to be able to directly apply without room for possible disapplication.

Reply 3

Lewisy-boy

Distinguishing issues should be mentioned, otherwise I wouldn't bother like the others.

Reply 4

Katy200

yeah like has been said before definaltly focus more on the outcome of the case.

Reply 5

Lauren18

I'd agree.. but in situations where you're given facts which are almost but not quite identical to the facts of a previously decided case, it is often useful to analyse the facts of that case in greater detail than you would otherwise. It gives you great scope to suggest that the case could have been decided differently - the difference between the two sets of facts will often go to the root of the issue.

However, as everyone else has suggested, it's usually a waste of words to summarise facts - you'll either waste too much of your word limit on reciting irrelevant detail, or over-summarise and miss a material fact - neither gives a good impression. Sometimes I do feel, though, that a footnote is useful (particularly if you leave them out of the word count!) - to say something like 'in this case the subject matter was X and so in line with previous decisions the court was more likely to hold that consideration was past rather than to follow the more recent approach applied in cases where the subject matter is Y'.

I've written way too much but can't be bothered to edit.. basically on the whole just state the principle, but it doesn't hurt to mention facts concisely but accurately if they are particularly relevant or useful in getting to your conclusion. Good luck!

Reply 6

Lewisy-boy

the facts are always what makes the difference... it's fair enough applying the case and poitning out differences in problems but listing off facts like "in the case of X Billy went to the shops...." etc, waste.