For EUT440 Students

Guideline for answering problematic law questions

Case study scenario (for law students, we refer it as problematic question) usually requires students to
identify problems and issues in a scenario, to demonstrate their developing knowledge of theories (or
legal provisions) and professional policies and to make decisions and recommendations based on these
to either prevent or solve some of the issues in that scenario.
At the undergraduate level, most problems students will encounter, commonly only contain one type of
law.
The purpose of these case studies is both to engage the students in problem solving and to consider the
issues relevant to the nature of study. Thus, case studies test students ability to:
(1) Issues

Identify a problem that has occurred for one or more of the parties. That is, what has gone
wrong? Who has suffered?

Work out what area of law may govern the resolution of the problem.

(2) Law (Rules/Principles)

Set out the legal principles that would be used to address the problem. These are sourced
from cases and legislation. Sometimes, the questions already guide the students to give
their answer by referring to specific cases and legislation. For example: .Support your
answer with the relevant provisions of the Contracts Act 1950 and ONE relevant decided
case.

(3) Analysis

Understand each different partys perspective, i.e. what each would argue to win (i.e.
achieve a fair outcome) [either as a plaintiff bringing a claim or as a defendant successfully
defending itself against the plaintiffs claim].

Test the legal arguments of the parties (based on legal principles and precedent cases and,
if appropriate, legislation).

(4) Conclusion

Stand back and play the judge and decide who has the best argument.

Consider how the parties could have acted to better manage their risks in order to avoid this
legal problem.

EUT440 Answer Guideline KM

Example of case scenario: CONTRACTS

QUESTION
Jason is a tenant of a home unit owned by Statham. Ten days ago Jason received a letter from Statham
in which Statham stated that he (Statham) was interested in selling his flat and asking Jason to let him
know if he (Jason) was willing to buy the home unit for the price of RM400,000. Three days later Jason
posted a letter to Statham in which he agreed to buy the home unit for the price set out in Stathams
letter. After receiving Jasons letter, Statham telephoned Jason and told him that he had decided that he
did not want sell the home unit.
Jason seeks your advice as to whether he has a contract with Statham for the sale of the home unit.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Introduction
For a contract to arise in the circumstances of the question, one of the parties has to make and offer
which is duly accepted by the other. If there is an offer followed by an acceptance there will be a contract
between the parties.
Issue
The issue raised by the question is whether Stathams letter constitutes an offer. If it does, Jasons reply
is an acceptance of the offer, with the consequence that a contract exists between the parties. However,
if Stathams letter is only an invitation to treat, no contract exists between the parties because Jasons
reply will not be the acceptance of an offer.
The Law (must contain legislations and/or cases)
Legislation
An offer has been defined in section 2(a) of the Contracts Act 1950 as
An acceptance has been defined in section 2(b) of the Contracts Act 1950 as
S.4(1) CA 1950 A proposal/offer is only effective if it is communicated to the acceptor.
S.6 CA 1950: A proposal is revoked.
Case
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1 (or any cases relevant to the question
asked) explain brief fact and what the court decided in that case
Analysis (Application of the Law to the Facts of the Problem)
The significant fact in the problem is the statement in Stathams letter that he is interested in selling his
unit. This raises the question of whether the letter displays the will or intent to bound in contract by the
terms otherwise stated in his letter.
Based on the provisions of sectionsand the case of ..discussed above, it may be
inferred in this case that (your argument)
Conclusion
On the basis of the meaning of the words in Stathams letter, as informed by the guiding authority of
Carlils case, Stathams letter is not an offer. This means that Jasons reply is an offer. This offer has been
rejected. The advice to Jason is that there is no contract between himself and Statham.

EUT440 Answer Guideline KM