Answering Law Exam Questions - Contract Law

Today, we will consider  Contract Law, and in particular, question 1 which was posed on the University of London LLB Programme’s 2011 Contract Examination paper. 

The Question reads:

On Monday, Angela telephoned Barney in response to an advertisement in the Weekly Chronicle, a local newspaper. Barney’s telephone was answered by Clara, his absent-minded wife. Angela introduced herself and stated, ‘I agree to buy the advertised car at the advertised price. I’ll send a fax confirming this.’ Clara replied, ‘Great – I’ll let Barney know when he gets in.’  When Barney returned home, Clara could no longer remember the details of her earlier conversation and told Barney, ‘Some woman rang about the car and she is willing to buy it.’ On Thursday Barney found the fax and replied immediately by email stating, ‘I agree that the car is yours at the agreed price.’ Unfortunately Angela received only part of this message due to a defect in her email programme. On Wednesday of that week the value of the car had dropped by half because of the introduction of a new model. Angela refused to take the car.  Advise Barney.

Contract Formation questions tend to be a staple of any LLB Contract law exam paper.  The examiner details various communications which have taken place between 2 (or more) parties, and then the issue invariably turns on the effect of these communications in determining the contractual status between the parties because one party now either seeks to enforce the various communications as a contract; or seek to not abide by the agreement.

The most important thing to bear in mind in contract formation questions, is that YOU should determine the status of each communication.  Don’t let the examiner TELL you what it is.  So for example, a question might say X placed an advertisement on his windscreen offering his car for sale for £10,000.  B was passing by his house and saw this and called A to accept his offer.  Well, by any stretch of the imagination, legally, this is not an offer and an acceptance given what you know about adverts.  So just because the Examiner uses the work offer in respect of the advertisement and uses the word acceptance in relation to the telephone call, does not mean that’s what it is.  YOU have to explain the effect of the advertisement on the windscreen and you make your own submissions and tell the examiner the status of the communication, not simply take the words the question uses as being gospel.

Consider the chronology of the events as they happen as well.  So here, although the call is from Angela, we see that it is in response to a newspaper advertisement as we are told:

“…in response to an advertisement in the Weekly Chronicle, a local newspaper”

What you will need to do is to tie down an analysis for that first communication as everything you do will flow from that.  Because if you start off saying it’s an ITT, then Angela’s response is an offer.  Equally, if you say it’s an offer, Angela’s response will either be an acceptance or counter offer.  So that is why examinees’ answer papers will differ.  Because one person might say it’s an offer (depending on the discussion of course) and another might say it’s an invitation to treat (again depending on the discussion).  Much depends on your discussion and your submission here - - so are you saying it’s an offer or invitation to treat?

Notice how the examiner frames Angela’s response when she calls responding to the ad:

‘I agree to buy the advertised car at the advertised price. I’ll send a fax confirming this.

You would need to discuss the main cases for offer because it appears she thinks she is accepting so you need to discuss what is required for an offer, as she can only accept an offer, and also discuss invitation to treat given that we are told it is a newspaper advertisement.  So you would have to briefly focus on the relevant cases; Storer v MCC and Gibson v MCC for offer; and Carlill and Partridge v Crittenden for ITT.  You also need to make submissions.  This seems to be one of the biggest downfalls of law students…failing to 'nail their colours to the mast' as it were.  They discuss, but make no submissions.  It is good form to make submissions.  So once you have done the discussion, submit that, based on how you have argued, it is an advertisement or ITT.  And then move on to discuss the status of the next communication in light of your submission.  So if you end up saying the advert is an ITT, then discuss the next issue as the offer that Angela makes and how that offer comes into being, particularly, you would need to focus on the offer being communicated as the message was given to Clara.  If you submitted that the ad was an offer, then you would need to discuss the effect of the acceptance by Angela and, again, as the message was given to Clara.

The question says ‘Advise Barney’ so that’s what you do – answer the question and advise Barney.  What are you going to advise him about - - look at the end of the question, 

Angela refused to take the car

You have to advise Barney about this.  The issue is - - Is there a validly formed contract?  Because if there is, Angela will be liable to Barney but if there isn’t she is not.  I would certainly suggest an introduction that started along the lines of:

In advising Barney as to whether there is a validly formed contract between him and Angela, giving rise to liability on her part, it is necessary to consider the status of each communication between them in determining whether such a liability exists.

I would then continue and consider the chronology of each communication.

Now in the discussion relating to the advertisement of the car in the newspaper, as I’ve already discussed, you would want to draw on the law relating to ITT and offer in discussing this.  Now based on Carlill, we know that an ad can amount to an offer, but it must meet the criteria for an offer.  The question is deliberately vague and so it is possible to submit it is an offer.  But the safer approach based on the facts you have, is to submit it is an ITT.  The offer would then be when Angela speaks to Clara and, of course, it must get to Barney.  But even if you said the ad was an offer, you would need to mention the case you know about a third party passing on… meaning the case of Dickinson v Dodds and the reliable third party in respect  of the message to Clara.

The examiner has also raised the issue of communication by fax.  You would need to consider the rules and cases in relation to instantaneous communication, the minute a fax machine or even email is used.  So you would need to discuss Entores v Miles Far East; Brinkibon v Stahag Stahl and the Brimnes.  If Barney was purporting to accept Angela’s supposed offer, then you would need to explain the issue of the failure of the entirety of the email to get to her and the defect in that communication.

Now that is my suggestion on your approach to answering this question.

Answering a CLRI/ELS Question - Supreme Court

As promised today, let's consider a question from Common Law Reasoning and Institutions (as it is named on the University of London International Programmes Syllabus) or English Legal System as named by some other Universities' syllabus.

This is a question previously posed on the University of London Internationl LLB Programme’s 2010 CLRI (ELS) Examination paper. It reads:

"The role and functions of a court of appeal and a supreme court are different. The United Kingdom has created a Supreme Court in name but not in function; it would be better if no change had been made." Discuss. 

This is a very good question for you to display your research and analysis skills.  The first thing to do in preparing to answer the question, is to not only consider the framework of the UK Court system but also think what 'a' Supreme Court does.  So the basic approach to this question can be broken down into five sub-parts:

1. What is an appeal Court?
2. What is a Supreme Court?
3. What are the functions of the two?
4. A statement is made – it would have been better if no change had been made - - what do you think (but not using the words ‘I think’ - - but making submissions)
5. What about the fact the HL sat in the Legislative upper chamber? 

SO AN INTRO MIGHT START WITH: 

Whilst the first statement appears a truism, taken as a whole the entire statement does not necessarily appear accurate.  Indeed, the role and function of an appeal court is largely to exercise appellate jurisdiction for lower courts.  Conversely, a Supreme Court suggests a more constitutional role, with the ability to scrutinise and, where possible, intervene in unconstitutional matters.  The Supreme Court in the UK has been the result of an evolution in the UK, which has seen a physical change.  However, whether in substance, i.e., whether it has been more than a name change, has to analysed and, further, reviewed as to whether maintaining the status quo would have been better......... [THIS SHOWS THE PATH YOUR ESSAY WILL TAKE]

YOU WOULD THEN CONTINUE INTO A SECOND PARAGRAPH ALONG THE LINES OF:

In 2009, the Supreme Court of England and Wales came into being, moving into new premises in the London Guildhall and discarding its cloak and nomenclature of the House of Lords.  The functions of the HL had been not only to consider appeals, but where difficult areas of law required intervention, this was undoubtedly considered, for example, when one considers a case such as FCC v Anisminic.  The fact though, is that given Parliamentary supremacy, the role of the Supreme Court is arguably of an appellate nature as, unlike in the USA where unconstitutional laws can be struck down, that cannot be the case in the UK.  An appeal court - - (at this point, you would say what it does),  Whereas a Supreme Court - - (at this point, you would say what it does)....[THIS SHOWS DEFINITION, THAT IS,YOU DEFINING CERTAIN KEY MATTERS]

YOU WOULD THEN:

1. Go on to then discuss the differences
2. Any cases that show the conflict – e.g., Burmah Oil v Lord Advocate

So in the structure of your answer you should, by say paragraph 3 to 5 (depending on how long or short your paragraphs), have given an indication as to the arguments for, and maybe do a couple of paragraphs on that, and by say paragraph 4-7 (again depending on length of paragraphs), do a couple of paragraphs which show the argument against. 

I am from the school of thought that you SHOULD make submissions in favour of a position, although you will get examiners who will say you don’t have to choose a side, rather, you can simply give the arguments for and against and conclude.  I feel that it makes your discussion ‘cleaner’ if you lean in favour of a position because your discussion then seems like a better analysis leading to a particular conclusion, and it forces you to think about, analyse, and put forward the alternative arguments.  But that is my personal view and you have to see what works for you.

Finally, you would want to then conclude BASED on your discussion.  One of the biggest problem areas I find in law students' writing, is their conclusion.  Never, introduce new points in your conclusion and always try to use the essay statement's words in your conclusion.  So you shouldn't be raising something you have not mentioned at all in the body of your discussion.  The conclusion is to pull your discussion together and if you have put forward a strong argument in favour of the position you have taken (if you have leaned in favour of a particular position) then say that and also briefly remind about the weakness(es) of alternative arguments.  But your conclusion should not be a rewrite or re-hash of what you have just written.  However, the examiner is not stupid (we hope!) and so if you have just 'waffled' in your discussion and given a descriptive account, it is not going to make a good conclusion to then say in your conclusion,....Therefore, the role and functions of a court of appeal and a supreme court are different and the United Kingdom has created a Supreme Court in name but not in function, and it would be better if no change had been made... [THIS WILL NOT 'FOOL' THE EXAMINER IF SUCH A CONCLUSION IS NOT BORNE OUT BY YOUR DISCUSSION IN YOUR ESSAY]

Assuming that you have done your discussion, made valid arguments, and discounted any weaker contrary arguments, your conclusion may look like this:

"It is clear from the overwhelming arguments, that the United Kingdom has appeared to simply have created a Supreme Court in name only but not in function.  The UK Supreme Court appears impotent in striking down actions by the legislature which arguably borders on unconstitutionality such as occurred in Burmah Oil.  Indeed, when one compares its role and function to the Supreme Courts of other jurisdictions, for example, the High Court of Australia, or the Supreme Court in the USA, there is a stark difference in their respective approaches.  Overall, the description in the UK of a 'Supreme Court' has a certain hollow effect, however, its importance and significance cannot be underestimated and it would certainly appear a step too far to suggest that it would have been better not to make a change, not least, its location required, if not demanded, change."

That is today's suggestion.  Tomorrow, we will consider Contract Law.

Answering a Public Law Question: Parliamentary Sovereignty

Let's consider answering specific questions. Today I will do Public Law and focus on a Sovereignty question in Public law.  This question is from the UOL LLB past exams, question 3 of 2011:

With reference to statute and case law, discuss the extent to which the United Kingdom is ‘sovereign’ in relation to the European Union. 

In any question on sovereignty, you must know what are the contemporary issues which affect it.  You must know what PS is, and you must know that the two biggest impacts on PS are HRA and EU membership.  So if this is a topic that interests you then you need to know the two areas of HRA and EU law as well.

In answering an essay question, you must look at what the examiner asks…so words and phrases here which are important include: "With reference to statute and case law"…"discuss" - - "extent", "sovereign"…and the most important of all - - IN RELATION TO THE EUROPEAN UNION.  So it is not just a question in relation to Parliamentary Sovereignty - - it has a specific focus -- it asks you to contextualize Parliamentary Sovereignty vis-a-vis the European Union.

You may want to start with definitions or paths.  A good starting point is to explain the concept of 'sovereignty', briefly discussing the difference between legal and political sovereignty before proceeding to focus on legal sovereignty. On legal sovereignty, given you are under exam conditions, the best course would likely be to adopt AV Dicey‟s three-part explanation.

You would then need to focus on, and turn your attention to, the European Union, (which is the crux of the question) and give a brief explanation of its origins and evolution. Because The question called for ‘reference to statute and case law’ this would require you to explain the major cases decided by the Court of Justice of the EU, on the issue of sovereignty, as well as the major cases on the subject by the domestic courts. In relation to the European case law, you would need to include the seminal cases of Costa v ENEL, Van Gend en Loos, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft and Simmenthal. In giving a well rounded answer, it would raise your marks to show you understand the workings of the EU, and therefore you would want to briefly discuss the concepts of direct and indirect effect and state liability, again making good use of case law. From the domestic standpoint, the European Communities Act 1972 would need to be discussed, and you would then need to explain how s.2 of the Act operates as the conduit through which EU law enters and becomes effective in domestic law.

So in writing, a good start may seek to ensure the statement (and the words) in the question are taken account of.  So I would suggest a start like this:

In determining the extent to which the UK is sovereign, when considered in the context of the European Union, it appears clear from the case law that some degree of sovereignty has been abrogated.  The relevant statute appears to suggest that primacy has been given to EU law and this will also be examined in respect of the statement.

In the next paragraph, then a definition of Sovereignty would be needed and possibly the first indication of the EU’s impact by virtue of the ECA 1972.

In the following paragraphs, an exploration of the caselaw, in a logical fashion, infused with the examples of your knowledge of the EU framework, would show that you have a goodg grasp of the topic and  make your essay a strong one.

In the conclusion, you would then draw on the main thread(s) of your argument and show how you have answered the question.

The danger for this type of question, is discussing parliamentary sovereignty while ignoring the impact of the European Union. This would definitely show a failure to read and interpret the question with sufficient care.  Again, it is an essay question, it is short, and I would remind you that you should read it THREE times to get the full flavour.

Tomorrow.........we consider a question from CLRI/ELS

JH

Actually Answering the Law Exam Question...

Well today is the tomorrow I promised you that I would continue....

Now then, what about your question answering ability?  First, if it is an essay question, make sure you read it at least twice.  Then consider, what is the examiner asking me?  Do not just see ‘an adverse possession question’ - - look at what exactly ABOUT adverse possession the examiner is asking.  Then you answer the essay question logically.  Meaning, you start with a path, then definition (or definition then path) then you set out your arguments in favour of the position advanced, then any arguments against your position, and then you conclude. 

One of the ways to stay focused in an essay question, is to keep referring to the words used in the question after you write a paragraph or a couple of short paragraphs.  Then it means that you are answering THAT question…the question asked by the examiner, not just ‘an adverse possession’ question which generally tends to be a general ‘everything I know about adverse possession’ type answer.

In an essay, read the question carefully to make sure you understand what is required. Look carefully at the key words and phrases, which indicate the sort of answer you are expected to give. Very few essay questions require merely factual descriptions of what the law is; you will almost always be required to analyse the factual content in some way, usually highlighting any problems or gaps in the law, and suggesting possible reforms. If a question asks you to analyse whether the land registration system has now made the position better in relation to adverse possession you should not write everything you know about adverse possession and finish with one sentence saying the system is now better. Instead you should select your relevant material and your whole answer should be targeted at answering whether or not the system is better.

What about Problem Questions? These consist of facts, usually with the direction to 'Advise X [one of the parties]'. The aim will be to analyse the facts to identify the legal issue(s), and analyse the law to find the relevant legal rule(s). Next will be the application of the law to the issue(s), and reaching a conclusion. Remember I R A C : Issues Rules Application Conclusion...OR - C L E O - Claim   Law    Evaluation    Outcome - - So the structure of the entire entire essay, from paragraph 1 to the end, should reflect the structure of IRAC/CLEO, e.g., paragraph 1 could reflect I/C; paragraphs 2-3 could reflect R/L; pararagraphs 4-5 could reflect A/E; and paragraph 6 could reflect C/O.  So as a reader reads through the answer, it is logical and coherent...please DO NOT do sub-headings which say Issue, Rule, etc., etc...that is wrong.

This is general advice on how to approach a special type of exercise to which law students have been subjected from time immemorial, whether in seminars or examinations - namely the problem-type exercise.

You can identify these because typically they begin with a statement of hypothetical (and sometimes faintly improbable) facts and end by asking you to "Advise" one of the parties, although sometimes you will be asked to "Discuss the case" or "Discuss the liability of one of the parties".

Again, don’t visualise the facts as being ‘real’ rather, focus on the legal rules and principles which arise.

The writing is critical - - ANSWER THE QUESTION ASKED - - Legal writing is about formality.  If I ask you – what is your name? - - the answer is not ‘Jennifer’ - - it is ‘My name is Jennifer Housen’.  As such, when the examiner gives you a set of facts and at the end say ‘Advise X’…the answer is not ‘A lease is an interest in land etc, etc.’ - - no that is the answer to the question, ‘what is a lease’.  Even if the question is about a lease, If the question asks you to  ‘Advise X’, The correct answer is - - in advising X, etc., etc.,

There is an American TV programme called Jeopardy and the idea behind it is, you are given an answer and you have to phrase the question, so for example the host says ‘Queen Elizabeth the Second’ and the contestant says ‘who is the queen of England’.  Well, your answers should reflect something like that.  When a reader reads the first line, sentence or paragraph of your answer, without knowing what the question asked, that reader should be able to look at your answer and know the question, simply by seeing the structure and response you have given.  So if in relation to my example on X, if my answer was:

In advising X, the status of A, B and C’s occupation will be considered to determine whether or not their occupation is binding on X as the purchaser of Blackacre…then in that less than 2 line introduction, the person reading my answer becomes aware of X, and A, B and C, and know that they are apparently occupying Blackacre which X has purchased...that says my job is done...I have answered the specific question asked.  

Finally, be succinct, be precise, and write in the third person.

Over the next few days, I will consider specific questions and how you would answer them...tomorrow, I will start with contract.

What Does the Examiner Want? Answering Law Exam Questions

Now it doesn’t matter how many hours spent studying and revising – the law examiner doesn’t know that.  He meets you one time…for 3 hours…on paper…and you have to make it count.

The two biggest criticism of law exam Candidates are (1) they do not answer the exam question (2) Poor time management.

As it relates to not answering the exam question –Examiner say that the law students do not answer the exam question.  The law students will of course disagree - - as far as they are concerned, they have just come out of a 3-hour exam and they wrote for 3 hours, so they must have answered the question.  Well you the law student as well as the examiner are both right - - the law student did answer the exam question - - he or she just didn’t answer the exam question the examiner asked.  What do I mean by that?  Well, there is the exam question asked by the examiner.  And there is the exam question answered by the examinee.  There is a book – Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus.  The title might as well be - - Law Examiners are from Mars and Law Examinees are from Venus.  Because if I had a dollar for every time a law student says to me - - I don’t know how I failed land…I felt really good after the exam.  All of my topics I studied for were on the exam.  In fact, I thought I had failed tort and I got a 60 in that…If I had a dollar for every time I hear that, I would be a very rich woman indeed.  The point is (let's take land law - - yes I know, I LOVE land law), an examiner will ask a question such as:  What does it mean for someone to be in “adverse possession” of land and In what circumstances does time stop running in favour of an adverse possessor?

What a law student reads is:  What is everything I can possibly remember in the area of adverse possession and write down in 45 minutes?  And they answer that question, briefly mentioning the meaning of adverse possession and completely ignoring the time stop running bit.

I must admit that sometimes the exam question is written as if the exam writer is living in a parallel universe in his own head; but if you read the question carefully, it does actually make sense.  What you need to do is to consider the question as a legal hypothesis, and dissect it for legal principles, DO NOT try to visualise the characters as actual persons and the situation as something in real life.  It is not.  It is a hypothetical situation constructed to encapsulate legal principles for you to identify, in context, and answer.

Now, As to the second criticism of poor time management, I want you to understand the significance of poor time management.  If you have four questions to complete in 3 hours, and you decide to do 2 to the best of your ability, you don’t need to be a mathematician to realise, that even if you wrote each answer, worthy of a Law Lord, you simply cannot get more than 25% of the entirety of the marks for each question, so you cannot get more than 50% of the available marks.  So by doing 2 questions, you are already setting yourself up to get a reduced percentage of the available marks. 

So, if you can address these two main criticisms, you are more than half way there.  Starting with the latter first, how do you deal with time management?  Well, one of the biggest mistakes I see law students make, is to spend hours and hours reading.  I will say this, I have never met the law student who didn’t have the knowledge and pass.  But I have met the law student who has had the knowledge and failed.  Because the knowledge alone is not enough.  The primary piece of advice that I will give you about time management is this - - if the first time you are writing under timed conditions is in the exam…you have already failed - - yourself.  Because in your preparation, what you need to do, is to ensure that you write out in full, at least one question to a past exam question from your University; and write at least one under timed conditions.  If you are sitting an examination of three hours, in which you are required to write 4 questions, then you have 45 minutes per question but that is NOT 45 minutes writing time - - you will need about 5 minutes to prepare the question and 5 minutes to re-read the question.  So you effectively have 35 minutes writing time.  No Before you go into the examination, you should know EXACTLY what 35 minutes of YOUR writing looks and feels like.  So some examinees ask - - how much should I write?  You need to be able to write 35 minutes worth of an answer!  So if you practice, and you know that a topic with which you are extremely familiar, and which you are prepared, you can write 6 sides of an A4 sheet, then you know that is the very best you can do in the exam, so you ensure that in the exam, after you have written 4 sheets, you keep an eye on the clock to make sure you are on target time wise.

That’s your time management.  What about your question answering ability?  Let's talk about that tomorrow............

As promised, I want to consider a question and attack it from two different perspectives.  Now I am rather partial to land law and, therefore, I want to start with a topic from land law.  If we consider a question from 2010 of the University of London International Programmes.  It read:

“The Land Registration Act 2002 marks a significant development. In particular it strikes an appropriate balance between the needs of the purchaser and those who are entitled to other interests in the land being purchased.” How far do you agree with this assessment of the provisions in the Land Registration Act 2002 other than those relating to adverse possession?  

It is a short question.  Read it three times.  The first time...read it normally...as if you were reading a novel.  Just to see what it says.  The second time, pause after each sentence and try and work out what are the key words/phrases.  The third time, try and read it with a plan in mind.  Let's try and see if it will work.

Go back and read it through once.  You should have at least picked up that it had to do with the LRA 2002 (at the beginning) and that you shouldn't discuss adverse possession issues (at the end).

Now go back and read it a second time.  You should have seen certain key words/phrases like: 'significant development', 'strikes an appropriate balance' and 'do you agree'.  So now you should be getting a flavour of what you need to answer.

As you read it a third time - - now for the plan.  Do you agree with the statement (so 'how far' as you are asked)?  Or not (again...'how far')?.

I have deliberately chosen this question because in doing English land law, you need to get to grips with the LRA and the changes it has made to conveyancing.  By way of background, you must remember that the 2002 Act had a predecessor…the LRA 1925 and the case law under that Act.  Also, the old s.70(1)(g) has been ‘refined’ by Schedule 3 to the LRA 2002. 

I want to focus on the question first by agreeing with it and then by disagreeing with it.  I am going to keep it short as I don’t wish this to bore you.  The idea of the exercise is for you to understand persuasive writing.  Also, it assumes you have read the section on Registration of Title in your University’s handouts or Textbooks.

[DISCUSSION BASED ON ARGUING IN FAVOUR OF THE STATEMENT - - I WILL DO AN INTRODUCTION AND THEN THE DISCUSSION]

The clear and untenable flaws in The Land Registration Act 1925, gave birth to its successor, the Land Registration Act 2002.  The LRA 1925 had come into force with the hopeful expectation that it would address the cumbersome nature of unregistered conveyancing, and having to prove good root of title on each sale.  With the advent of registration of estates and interests in land being easily determinable, the essence of the 1925 legislation was to provide a degree of transparency in conveyancing with a single register premised on a mirror principle, curtain principle, and insurance principle.

Although the LRA 2002 has its roots in the 1925 legislation, this in no way suggest that it is simply a repeat of the old law, rather, its implementation marks a significant development in registered land conveyancing.  Indeed, one of the most striking aspects of the 2002 Act, is that it has sought to address the clear shortcomings of its predecessor, not least, ensuring that the troublesome issues which arose under s.70(1)(g) of the LRA 1925 are unlikely to be repeated.  There is arguably no doubt, that the appropriate balance as to the competing needs of the purchaser and other interested persons has been struck as the impact of the 2002 Act is such, that the unsatisfactory judgment in Chhokar v Chhokar (1984) is arguably, confined to history.  The Land Registry and the Law Commission have sought to produce a response, culminating in the enactment of the LRA 2002, that appears to have met the various shortcomings and provided a degree of certainty not previously available under the 1925 legislation.

[Further discussions going into the essay would then be necessary]

------------------------------------

[DISCUSSION BASED ON ARGUING AGAINST THE STATEMENT - - I WILL USE THE SAME INTRODUCTION AND THEN THE DISCUSSION]

The clear and untenable flaws in The Land Registration Act 1925, gave birth to its successor, the Land Registration Act 2002.  The LRA 1925 had come into force with the hopeful expectation that it would address the cumbersome nature of unregistered conveyancing, and having to prove good root of title on each sale.  With the advent of registration of estates and interests in land being easily determinable, the essence of the 1925 legislation was to provide a degree of transparency in conveyancing with a single register premised on a mirror principle, curtain principle, and insurance principle.

Although the Land Registry and the Law Commission collaborated to produce ‘Land registration for the twenty-first century: a conveyancing revolution’ (Law Com. No. 271), the implementation of the LRA 2002 appears to have fell well short of expectations and certainly appears to have ‘missed the mark’ rather than ‘a balance being struck’.  The clear intention appears to have been to address the shortcomings in the LRA 1925.  However, Schedule 3 to the LRA 2002 appears no more than a restatement of s.70(1)(g) of the 1925 legislation, and it is not difficult to foresee a decision in Chhokar v Chhokar (1984) being repeated under the 2002 Act.  With interests and rights still ‘hidden’ behind a trust, and actual occupation a continuing feature under the restated Schedule 3, the needs of the purchaser and those with an interest in land, remain as tenuous as it was before the implementation of the 2002 Act.

[Further discussions going into the essay would then be necessary]

---------------------------------

What these two approaches do, is to allow you to see how you would start attacking a question, regardless of the slant you take.  You can use the same information, the same law, the same facts, and use it in the way you wish to discuss your argument.  Also, notice that I focused on the words used by the examiner and not go off at a tangent.  Also, there was no need to labour any issues relating to unregistered land conveyancing.

As we build up over time, I will offer some fuller length discussions. 

[PLEASE DO NOT TRY TO MEMORISE WHAT IS WRITTEN, RATHER LEARN TO ENGAGE WITH THE WRITING…LEARN THE RULES…YOU CAN THEN WRITE ON ANYTHING]

Welcome to Law Sessions with me, Jennifer Housen.  I have spent the last 10 years dedicated to legal training and this Blog is support for the website, http://www.lawsessions.com.  This Blog will not seek to 'teach' law, rather to guide law students on how they should 'think like a lawyer'.  I am always happy to see the excitement, anticipation and promise on the law students' faces on day one of starting their exciting law career journey.  However, too often, by the end of the course (exams, actually - - and receipt of the marks)...such promise, eager anticipation and keenness give way to heartache, despondency and genuine unhappiness as students receive their exam results and either fail to get the marks they hoped for or, worse, fail the subject.  Too often, the reason for failure is the way students write, and the way they discuss the answer to a law exam question.

It matters not whether you have a first class degree in History, English, Maths or any other degree (even an MBA or PhD!) the simple fact is, approaching law is completely different from anything you have ever done before.  My two favourite sayings when it comes to the law are (1) He is no lawyer who cannot argue both sides and (2) the only reason you are working for your client, is that the other side did not come to you first.  The reason I quite like these quotes, is that it pierces at the heart of how a law student should engage him/herself, i.e., you should be able to take the same law and facts, and argue for two different sides i.e., for the Plaintiff (or Prosecution) and the Defendant.  No matter how strong an argument you see for one (or the other), always, always remember that the other side also has arguments in their favour (albeit weak in your estimation).  Remember, the lawyer for Mrs Donoghue had lost a similar case only two weeks before; and Parker CJ in Fisher v Bell, was actually initially intrigued as to how a lawyer was going to convince him that a flick knife in a shop window was not an offer.

What this Blog will seek to do each week, is to take various LLB topics (or exam questions) and argue them from two sides.  Examiners are concerned with your ability to assess a set of facts and, using the law you know, apply them to those facts to give a cogent and reasonably argued outcome.  So the first thing you need as a law student, is to have done some reading (yes...I know...it's a lot)...but you must know the basics and have read at least one case.  My two personal favourites are Donoghue v Stevenson and Fisher v Bell.  They are simple and understandable and allow you to appreciate a legal discussion .

I will ask that you check each week to review the topic I have discussed (for and against) in this Blog.  Even if it is not a topic or subject you are currently covering, I would ask you to read it for style, focus and arguments, so that you can understand how you can approach answering exam an assignment questions.  I am pained when I see services which offer assignment writing.  Simply put, it is wrong, and it is cheating.  It doesn't help you and it doesn't help the future client.  If law is what you want to do as a career, then learn the rules.  Once you know the rules you can manipulate it the way you choose.  You will hone your writing skill and understand how to analyse the law.  Using an assignment writing service will not assist you.

I hope you will join me each week.

JH