IRAC METHOD of Law

Is it true that when presenting an IRAC method to a problem question you should have to do it 4 times ? IE; issue 1,’ initial question ‘for that first IRAC, then issue 2 ‘Intention ‘towards the initial question for second IRAC,then issue 3 ‘Necessary act’ in relation to the initial question on third IRAC ,& lastly Issue 4 ‘was it reasonable ?’ In relation to the initial question ? So that to Answer the problem question given all 4 representations involving(1) ‘the question it’s self ‘ , (2)intention,(3) Necessary(4),reasonable , are all taken into account ? OR could you just put all aspects into one complex IRAC relating to all issues included in THE issue ?

Reply 1

CatusStarbright

Original post by matt197699

It all depends on the scenario you are given.

If there's one offence/issue involved (e.g. your question is about whether a murder has been committed), then you'll need to break down the elements of that offence/issue and thoroughly do IRAC for each one. Don't spend too much time on elements that are obviously satisfied however (e.g. it's rare you'll have to debate whether someone was a 'reasonable creature in being') and drill down into the elements that are more up for debate in the situation.

If you have multiple offences/issues involved, then you can generally do one IRAC for each offence/issue. The same advice re not spending time on easily satisfied elements also applies very well in these sorts of scenarios!