Legal Research Research Strategy – IRAC
Legal research is an essential lawyering skill (&
studying law).
Lawyer’s duties to:
- give clients advice based on adequate consideration
of the applicable law
-inform the court of relevant material authorities
-keep abreast of developments in law
-To fulfill these duties will require legal research.
A lawyer is not required to know all the law
applicable to the performance of a particular legal
service, but he should have a basic & sufficient
knowledge of the fundamental principles of law
applicable to the particular work he has undertaken.
-This will enable him to perceive the need to
ascertain the law on relevant points.
-To discover those additional rules of law which,
although not commonly known, may readily be
found by doing legal research.
-The process of identifying & retrieving legal
authorities necessary to solve a legal issue and
support a legal argument
(submission/opinion/judgment).
-Finding legal authorities is the main part of legal
research.
-Although we have more tools for conducting legal
research than before, the research task has become
harder rather than easier.
-Computer research has introduced the need to be
completely current, and to develop new sets of skill.
-There has been a dramatic increase in the volume of
case law and statutory material.
-Secondary sources also have grown exponentially.
-The law of other jurisdictions must often be
researched.
-In order to cover this large volume of material,
lawyers need to conduct efficient and effective legal
research.
ISSUE: Issue identification is crucial for effective
research.
-Must reflect what you going to say onwards. In the
IRAC method of legal analysis, the "issue" is simply
a legal question that must be answered. An issue
arises when the facts of a case present a legal
ambiguity that must be resolved in a case, and legal
researchers (whether paralegals, law students,
lawyers, or judges) typically resolve the issue by
consulting legal precedent (existing statutes, past
cases, court rules, etc.). We tend to ask questions
like what happened ? Who did it happen to? Where
did it happen? What is the the area of law?
RULE/LAW: Finding the law is the main important
part of legal research. The law is constantly
changing. Need to be updated.
-It is to identify the relevant case law & legislation.
It would gather background information and locate
key case law or legislation. Rules in a common law
jurisdiction derive from court case precedent and
statute. The information included in the rules
section depends heavily on the specificity of the
question at hand
ANALYSIS: Researcher must be able to analyze what
he has found.
The Application (or Analysis) section of an IRAC
applies the rules developed in the rules section to
the specific facts of the issue at hand. This section
uses and utilizes all the rules stated including
exceptions as is required by the analysis. It is
important in this section to apply the rules to the
facts of the case and explain or argue why a
particular rule applies or does not apply in the case
presented. The application/analysis section is the
most important section of an IRAC because it
develops the answer to the issue at hand. It is useful
to think like a lawyer, arguing the facts of the
matter from both sides while sticking to the rules
before coming to a decision
CONCLUSION: At the end, he should have reach a
conclusion (or formulate an argument) based on the
analysis he has done
Stand back and play judge - who is liable and to
what extent? How could this have been avoided?
This section is use to directly answers the question
presented in the issue section of the IRAC. It is
important for the methodology of the IRAC that the
conclusion section of the IRAC not introduce any
new rules or analysis. This section restates the
issue and provides the final answer. Conclusion is a
vital process where the final calls are distributed
upon the previous cases and are redefined by the
judge.
Legal Research Techniques/Resources
The resources available to find legal authority are
vast and complicated.
(i) Library /Printed Resources:
- Traditional method
-Finding authorities from printed sources in the
library.
-Books, journals, law reports etc.
(ii) Online/Internet Resources
-Modern technique
-Finding authorities from electronic, non-printed
resources using online tools/search engine.
Google, e-books, online journals, online law reports
Both provide valuable tools in the research process,
and it is important to think carefully before choosing
one or the other
Online/Internet Research Technique
Advantages
-Easy access
-The speed at which documents become available.
: Some documents are available for download on the
same day they are issued or appear on an official site
before a paper version becomes available.
-Broad range of documents that are available.
: Obscure documents include policy statements,
forms, studies, reports, and smaller information
collections. Law libraries do not necessarily carry
these documents in print within their collections.
Disadvantages
-Rarely authoritative and credibility of sources is
always a question: cannot cite to Google in court,
Wikipidea
-The format of a document taken from the Internet
may be difficult to cite.
: The current standard is to recognize print
collections as the official source of cases when both a
print and online version exists.
-Lack of research aids comparable to those in print.
: Legal opinions on the web are usually without
reference to citations as they appear in printed
reporters.
-Costly
: Must pay a considerable amount for a better search
: Free online legal materials are frequently in the
rawest form available and often do not link to other
relevant documents, even those which may be
available in the same online collection
Legal Authorities
Primary Authorities: The rules of law that are
binding upon the courts, government, and
individuals.
Secondary Authorities: Commentaries on the law
that do not have binding effect but aid in explaining
primary law and legal theory. Cited by lawyers to
persuade a court to reach a particular decision in a
case, but which the court is not obligated to follow.
Subsidiary Legislation
Laws made by persons/bodies (e.g. YDPA, ministers,
directors, local authorities, councils and boards)
under powers delegated on them by the legislature
via a parent statute (aka delegated legislation)
S.3 Interpretation Act 1948 and 1967(Consolidated
and Revised 1989)[Act 388]).
“any proclamation, rule, regulation, order,
notification, by-law or other instrument made under
any Act, Enactment/other lawful authority and
having legislative effect”
JUDICIAL DECISIONS/CASE LAW
-Legal principles formulated & laid downs by judges
when passing decisions.
--Only decisions of the superior court (i.e. the High
Court, Court of Appeal & Federal Court) form part of
Malaysian law.
-The decisions become precedents to be followed in
future similar cases - known as the doctrine of
binding judicial precedent or ‘stare decisis’
Doctrine of Stare Decisis = (‘to stand by
decision’)
-A judge is bound to follow decision made by
previous higher court (and in some courts its own
prior decisions & prior decisions of a court of the
same level) where the material facts are the same.
-If he fails to follow a binding precedent, the decision
will be legally wrong and it is likely to be reversed on
appeal.
-This doctrine depends on a court’s position in the
hierarchy of courts & works in 2 ways: (i) vertically
& (ii) horizontally.
-Vertical operation: a precedent which comes from
a court superior in the hierarchy to the court in
which the present case is being tried, binds all the
inferior courts. Example: Harris Solid State (M).
-Horizontal operation: a superior court is bound by
its own previous decisions and the decisions of courts
of co-ordinate jurisdiction. Example: Kesultanan
Pahang.
-Reason to use stare decisis is to ensure uniformity &
predictability of decisions.
- Refer to the following websites or use the search
engines
CLJ Law: http://www.cljlaw.com
LexisNexis – Legal Research for Academics:
https://www.lexisnexis.com
Westlaw Asia: https://login.westlawasia.com.
LawNet: http://www.lawnet.com.my
AG Chambers – LOM: http://www.agc.gov.my
Parlimen - Hansard: http://www.parlimen.gov.my/
Legal Information Institute (LII):
http://www.asianlii.org/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/world/asia#malaysia
ILBS: http://www.malaysialawbooks.com/
GlobaLex:
http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Malaysia.h
tml
HeinOnline
Justia
World Legal Information Institute
Commonwealth Legal Information Institute
Asian Legal Information Institute
Australian Legal Information Institute
British and Irish Legal Information Institute
Singapore Statutes Online
International Labour Organization
Library:
The index volumes or annotations for statutes and
regulations compilations provide a quick guide to
relevant rules and regulations. Annotated Statutes
of Malaysia (LexisNexis)
Case reporters contain the decisions in cases that
have been deemed important enough to publish.
CLJ, MLJ, AMR
The Jurnal Hukum
Industrial Law Journal (LexisNexis) [ILJ]
Personal Injury Reports [PIR]
Shariah Law Reports (LexisNexis) [ShLR]
Syariah Reports/Laporan Syariah [CLJ(Sya)];
All Malaysia Commercial Reports [AMCR]
Malaysian Consumer Law Journal [My.Consum.LJ]
2011.
-The law is constantly changing. In discharging his
duties, lawyer need to apply current authorities, not
outdated or repealed law.
-Ignorance is no excuse.
-Lawyer are not expected to search out unreported
cases, however if counsel knows of an unreported
case on point, he must bring it to the court’s
attention.
-If there is lacuna in the law, you may need to
research the law of other jurisdictions.
Secondary Sources
Library:
(i) Encyclopedic Works - covering various areas of
law is useful for searching the current legal position
on a given point of law. Halsbury’s Laws of Malaysia
(ii) Articles:
Law Review (“LR”) by Sweet & Maxwell; Quarterly
Law Review (“QLR”) by CLJ; INSAF, Infoline and
Praxis. MLJ, Jurnal Hukum
(iii) Case digests: enable a researcher to look up a
particular area of the law and find a list of case
decisions that are "reported" in relevant case
reporters. E.g. Malal’s Digest
(iv)Precedents and Forms
Malaysian Precedents and Forms by LexisNexis
contain a variety of precedents to assist in the
drafting of legal documents.
(v) Court Forms
Atkins Court Forms Malaysia by LexisNexis provide
the main procedural documents required for civil
proceedings before the court.
(vi) Court Practice Books
Malaysian Court Practice by LexisNexis covering
Trial Courts and Appellate Courts is an aid to
practitioners appearing in particular courts. It sets
out all relevant legislation and rules which govern
practice in courts. They also set out informal rules
such as Practice Directions which must be
followed. A desk edition is also available for quick
reference.
(vii)Textbooks
(viii) Practice Directions/Court Circulars
Practice Directions issued by the court are intended
to supplement the Rules of Court by clarifying the
proper practice under the rules and the manner of
compliance therewith.
(ix) Bar Council Rulings
The Bar Council issues Rulings from time to time,
which relate to matters of practice, to preserve
fundamental principles required in maintaining the
dignity of the legal profession, and serve as a guide
to Advocates and Solicitors as well as pupils reading
in chambers.
The Rulings are also accessible on the Malaysian Bar
website.
HOW TO DO LEGAL RESEARCH?
1. Identify the ISSUE or scope of the legal question.
Identify: key sources and search terms
2. Begin research by using online and secondary
sources.
Halsbury’s Laws, key articles, can give perspective on
how your specific issue fits into a broader legal
context and will assist you in finding on-point
primary authority.
These are particularly useful if you have no
experience of the area of law as they will act as a
background.
Note references to pertinent statutes and case
citations.
Search for articles on the topic.
3. Identify relevant statutes.
If you located an applicable statute in your review of
secondary sources, look up the statutes.
Look also at any analysis available on the statutes.
4. Identify the cases that are on-point for your
specific facts.
When reading secondary sources, note cases that
relate to your set of facts. Follow up the cases,
checking headnotes and reading judgments that
seem applicable. One good case can be a great
starting point for research on narrow topics.
5. Confirm that your authority is still good law.
Use Westlaw Case Analysis, Lexis Case Search to
check that your cases are still good law and provide
the most current, direct authority available for your
set of facts.
 Chapter 2- Legal Analysis
Introduction - The legal problem-solving process
used in this course requires students to: analyses
the facts, frame research questions, conduct their
own legal research, state the relevant law, apply
that law accurately to the facts, and reach a
conclusion that is justified by the analysis.
The first step in analyzing a legal problem is to
gather the facts, usually from a client interview.
The more familiar you are with the law that
governs the client’s problem, the more valuable the
information you will obtain at first. If you know
nothing about the law that affects the problem, you
always can use the five “W’s” — who, what, when,
where, why — as a fact gathering guide. You always
must identify the client objectives and priorities as
part of initial fact gathering.
Analyze the facts involves determining which
facts may be legally significant. At this stage, fact
analysis can lead to formulating the tentative,
overall issues in the case. The more you know
about the law that affects the problem, the more
precise your issue statement tends to be. This
analysis also may change as you research the law
and gather more facts. No matter how tentative,
however, such an analysis serves to focus your
research and fact discovery. Must discover the
hidden facts that might affect the credibility.
R v Button [2001]
"Frank Alan Button was Australia's first wrongly
convicted person exonerated by DNA evidence
after being falsely convicted of rape in Queensland,
Australia. He was wrongly imprisoned for 10
months. The results of post-conviction DNA testing
persuaded Queensland's Court of Appeal to
overturn the conviction of Frank Button for the
1999 rape of a 13-year old girl. Prior to his trial
tests were not performed on the sheets from the
bed where the rape occurred. The post-conviction
DNA testing have identified another suspect.”
Search and analyze the law - Must always check
the law if only to confirm that the memory of it is
correct. Given the uniqueness of each fact situation
and how quickly the law changes, every problem
merits a fresh look at the governing law’s language.
Once you have analyzed a problem’s facts and law,
identified the legal issues, and closed as many fact
gaps as possible, you must formulate, evaluate and
select legal theories of the case. A legal theory may
be defined as how you conceptualize the
relationship between law and facts that entitle the
client to relief.
Problem solving technique
- Bullseye method is use to identify relevant law.
-MIRAT method use to solve legal problem.
The Bullseye framework consist of the clear core,
need to “reason”, and apply new policy.
The first task is the search for “binding precedent”
for any given factual scenario. This involves the
traditional examination of legislation and case law
in the hunt for an authoritative answer via
statutory interpretation, ratio, and obiter. Next
come the “analytical reasoning “tools of induction,
deduction and analogy as the search widens in the
absence of a bindings precedent or an unavoidable
statutory enactment. Finally we examine we
examine the extent to which a judge is free to apply
consideration of principle and policy.
Stage 1= “Certain law” An unavoidably applicable
statutory provision; or – a previous case that
similar with the present one.
Stage 2= “Predictable law” –A previous statutory
provision or case precedent which may be quoted
in aid of one legal argument by means of one or
more of – inductive/ deductive reasoning – or
reasoning by analogy.
Stage 3= “Policy or principle” argument- in the
absence of any precedent, an argument based on
what would be the most appropriate outcome in
the case.
MIRAT- Material facts, Issue of law and policy,
Rules and resources, Arguments or application,
Tentative conclusion.
The facts will ultimately dictate the legal outcome
and, for that reason, if for no other the lawyer
interviewing the client for the first time must
ensure that there are no “material facts” missing.
The relevancy of law can only be fully assessed
once the current legal “rules” are identify. It is this
legal rules which identifies the “issues” which arise
in the problem with which the student/lawyer is
presented.
The “resources” referred are partly those of the
client can he afford to litigate, or is this a problem
must be “negotiated out” at all costs? Client
prospect of success may be increased by seeking promisor knew was going to be acted on by the
outside assistance. person to whom it was made was enforceable
despite a lack of consideration. The time had come
In order to identify the legal rules which apply to for this to be recognized as giving rise to an
the case in hand legal personnel need to engaged in estoppel. Here, the plaintiffs had made a binding
something called “legal analysis”, during the course promise. However, the evidence showed this only
of which they would encounter “argements” and applied during the war. Therefore, after the war the
“tentative conclusion” .This legal analysis is the defendants were liable for the full rent.
next stage in the overall “problem solving”
processs. Analytical of Reasoning- analytical reasoning,
deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, reason
Statutory interpretation is the process by which by analogy.
courts interpret and apply legislation. Some
amount of interpretation is often necessary when a
case involves a statute. Sometimes the words of a
statute have a plain and straightforward meaning.
(The literal rule, The golden rule, The purposive
rule)
Mechanism of Precedent
1. Doctrine of stare decisis
R v Bedingfield (1879) 14 Cox CC 341
R Ramachandran v The Industrial Court Malaysia
[1971] 1 MLJ 145
2. Ratio decidendi
3. Obiter dicta
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees
House Ltd [1956] 1 All ER 256
The defendants, High Trees, leased a block of flat
from the plaintiffs, Central London Property Trust.
The property suffered from falling occupancy rates
due to the outbreak of World War II in 1940, so the
parties agreed to reduce the rent by half. However,
it was not expressly agreed how long this would
last for. After the war had ended plaintiffs sued
High Trees for the full rent from 1945 onwards.

The defendants argued that the agreement to pay

the rent at a reduced rate applied to the whole term
of the lease. They argued that the plaintiffs were
estopped from claiming that the rent should be
higher.
Held: The court reviewed the past case law,
especially Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co
(1877), where the House of Lords had held that
parties should be prevented from going back on a
promise to waive certain rights. Denning J stated
that the cases showed that a promise which the