Frameworks for Legal Analysis and Writing

In professional legal analysis, a lawyer or legal counsel does not rely on reasoning alone but works from established frameworks, used in preparing legal memoranda, submissions and legal opinions. The frameworks that follow are among the best-known instruments in this field.

The IRAC framework

• Issue
• Rule
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: it begins by identifying the legal issue, then sets out the statutory rule or legal principle, applies it to the facts, and ends with a legal conclusion.

• Use: this academic framework is the most widely used in law faculties across the world. It is used in writing legal memoranda before the courts, and is common in academic training and in first-stage regulatory analysis.

• A worked example:
  • Issue: is a tenant's refusal to pay the rent a ground for rescinding the lease?
  • Rule: the article of the tenancy regulations provides that non-payment of rent justifies rescission.
  • Application: the tenant was three months in arrears despite notice.
  • Conclusion: the landlord is entitled to seek rescission under that article.

• Sources:

• Bryan A. Garner, Legal Writing in Plain English, University of Chicago Press.
• A Practical Guide to Legal Writing and Legal Method by Dernbach et al.

The CRAC framework

• Conclusion
• Rule
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: it begins directly with the legal conclusion, then sets out the rule and its application to the facts, and closes by confirming the conclusion.

• Use: ideal for delivering a brief and rapid legal opinion. It is used in urgent legal advice, and in presenting concise legal opinions to management.
• A worked example:

• Conclusion: the owner is entitled to rescind the contract.
• Rule: rescission is lawful upon a fundamental breach of contract.
• Application: the defendant did not comply with the contractual period.
• Conclusion: rescission is justified under the law.

• Where it is used: it is recommended in law firms that value brevity and executive reporting; among its common corporate applications are executive legal briefs.
• Sources:

• The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style – Bryan Garner.

The ILAC framework

• Issue
• Law
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: similar to IRAC, but it attends to the direct legal texts — the articles of a statute or its regulations — rather than to general principles alone.

• Use: it is used in civil law systems, and particularly in Britain and Australia. It is generally used where a matter calls for resort to clear statutory texts.

• A worked example:

• Issue: is a worker entitled to compensation for unfair dismissal?
• Law: the relevant article of the Saudi Labor Law.
• Application: the dismissal was made without lawful cause.
• Conclusion: the worker is entitled to compensation under the applicable law.

• Sources:

• Routledge Legal Skills Series – Legal Method and Reasoning, Sharon Hanson.

The MIRAT framework

• Material Facts
• Issues
• Rules
• Application
• Tentative Conclusion

• Description: a complete analytical framework, beginning from the material facts, passing through the legal issues and then the statutory rules, to application, and ending with a tentative conclusion.
• Use: suited to analyzing complex matters raising several issues. It is used in judicial training and in detailed litigation memoranda.
• A worked example:

• Material facts: a company rescinded the contract on account of the contractor's delay.
• Issues: is rescission available? And is the delay fundamental?
• Rules: Article 80 of contract law.
• Application: the contractor was two months late and breached a principal obligation.
• Tentative conclusion: rescission is lawful, with a right to compensation.

• Where it is used: in law faculties in Australia, and particularly in professional training programs for lawyers such as Practical Legal Training (PLT).
• Sources:

• John Holland & Julian Webb, Learning Legal Rules, Oxford University Press.

The CLEO framework

• Claim
• Law
• Evaluation
• Outcome

• Description: it begins with the claim, then sets out the statutory rule, followed by an evaluation of the strength of the legal position, and ends with the expected outcome.

• Use: it is used in assessing the prospects of an action, and in writing legal risk assessments.
• A worked example:

• Claim: the worker claims an end-of-service award.
• Law: the relevant article of the Labor Law.
• Evaluation: the worker completed the statutory period.
• Outcome: the award is due.

• Sources: – CLEO (Community Legal Education Ontario) – Guide to Legal Reasoning.

The TRACC framework

• Thesis
• Rule
• Analysis
• Counterargument
• Conclusion

• Description: this framework is used in legal articles and in argumentative analysis. The legal proposition is set out, the rule is stated, a detailed analysis follows taking in an opposing view, and then the conclusion.

• Use: useful in matters involving legal disagreement or divergent judicial reasoning. It is used in argumentative analysis, or where conflicting legal views are to be set out — particularly in questions admitting of more than one statutory or legal interpretation, such as constitutional challenges or a differing legal characterization.

• A worked example:

• Thesis: the penalty imposed is disproportionate.
• Rule: a penalty must be proportionate to the breach.
• Analysis: the fine was imposed without notice.
• Counterargument: the breach had been repeated previously.
• Conclusion: the penalty is open to challenge for lack of proportionality.

• An example of its use: constitutional challenges, or cases admitting of several legal readings.
• Sources:

• Richard K. Neumann, Legal Reasoning and Legal Writing, Aspen Publishers.

The CREAC framework

• Conclusion
• Rule
• Explanation
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: it widens the CRAC framework by adding an explanation step, setting out the rule before applying it.

• Use: excellent for preparing judicial or legal memoranda requiring a detailed exposition of the statutory rule. It is common in American law schools, and is used in preparing detailed legal memoranda addressed to the courts or to official bodies, where the rule needs extended explanation before it is applied — particularly where reliance is placed on unfamiliar or intricate texts.

• A worked example:

• Conclusion: rent may not be charged for a period of forced closure.
• Rule: rent is the counterpart of enjoyment.
• Explanation: where enjoyment is impossible, no rent is due.
• Application: the business was closed by government order.
• Conclusion: the rent is not due under the law.

• Sources:

• The Legal Writing Handbook, Laurel Currie Oates & Anne Enquist.

The FIRAC framework

• Facts
• Issue
• Rule
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: an expanded version of IRAC, beginning with a statement of the facts.

• Use: useful for presentation before a court, or for legal reports required to state the facts at the outset. It is much used in student legal assessments and in some moot courts, and is used in drafting legal reports or memoranda containing a detailed narrative of the facts — particularly where the facts are central to the dispute, as in compensation, negligence or criminal matters.

• A worked example:

• Facts: a tenant fell into arrears despite three notices.
• Issue: is eviction available?
• Rule: the contract permits rescission upon default.
• Application: the default continued despite the period of grace.
• Conclusion: eviction is available at once.

• Sources:

• Deborah Corey Fowler, A Student's Guide to Legal Analysis.

The IREAC framework

• Issue
• Rule
• Explanation
• Application
• Conclusion

• Description: an academic framework requiring the rule to be explained before it is applied.

• Use: it is used in complex matters requiring a statutory text to be taken apart or its reading justified, and in construing statutory articles that are unclear or whose sense is in dispute. It is used in taking a legal rule apart and explaining its construction before application — ideal in legal research, or where reasoning is required to understand general or obscure statutory texts.

• A worked example:

• Issue: does Article 77 apply to this dispute?
• Rule: the article applies to unlawful dismissal.
• Explanation: the text speaks of cases without lawful cause.
• Application: the dismissal was made by email without justification.
• Conclusion: the article applies and the worker is entitled to compensation.

• Sources:

• Charles R. Calleros, Legal Method and Writing.

The PREAC framework

• Point
• Rule
• Explanation
• Analysis
• Conclusion

• Description: it is used to divide a subject into several points, each analysed on its own.

• Use: in defence memoranda addressing more than one claim or more than one plea. It is used to divide the analysis into independent points — a plea as to form, then a plea of lack of jurisdiction, then a plea on the substance — which makes the legal argument easier to follow.
• A worked example:

• Point: a plea of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
• Rule: jurisdiction lies where the defendant resides.
• Explanation: the law provides precedence to the place of residence.
• Analysis: the defendant is from Jeddah, and the action was brought in Riyadh.
• Conclusion: the court lacks territorial jurisdiction.

• Sources:

• Terrill Pollman et al., Legal Writing: Examples & Explanations.