With law/business law subjects there's normally a certain way of responding to the questions ('hypotheticals')
The structure they probably want is something like IRAC.
Issue: After reading the question you identify and state the issue(s) (e.g for Contract Law, an issue may be whether there is a contract - this issue potentially involves other smaller issues e.g Whether there is an Offer, whether there's Acceptance... how you separate issues is up to you, but I'd reccommend using sub-headings in exam responses so your answers have structure & clarity).
Rule: State the relevant rule/principle of law -e.g stating a section of the ACL or stating the principle of Donoghue v Stevenson
Application: Apply the facts to the rule of law. This is important, probably a lot of marks here. Parts of the story/hypothetical are there because they relate to rules of law, e.g facts that are similar/slightly different to cases, or that contravene sections of legislation - usually there will be a fair bit to talk about because the facts are borderline, ie it can be argued both ways - this is usually what the marker wants to see.
Conclusion: Conclude on the issue, stating the likely resolution, e.g 'A court would likely conclude that there is no contract between the parties, however this would depend on the element of consideration being satisfied, and as stated earlier this element is difficult to make out on the facts given because...'
Also, you generally want to read the question as many times as you can in order to identify issues - a lot of marks depend on just identifying the issues.
IRAC is one structure/system, it's the common one at monash but there are others (google is good for general hints on answering law qns)
And yeah, in general business law is similar to Law, although business law units will generally have less readings (cases/legislation) and may be structured quite differently (covering multiple areas of law in one unit).
Home
Help
Search
Login
