Two kinds of business law assignment
When you write a business law case analysis, first check which of two tasks you have been set. A case brief summarizes and analyzes a real decided case. A problem question gives you an invented set of facts and asks you to advise one of the parties.
| Case brief | Problem question | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | A real court decision | A hypothetical scenario |
| Main job | Explain what the court decided and why | Predict how the law applies and advise a party |
| Typical headings | Facts, procedural history, issue, holding, reasoning, significance | Issue, rule, application, conclusion for each issue |
| Common mistake | Retelling the story without the reasoning | Stating the law without applying it to the facts |
Both depend on accurate law for the right jurisdiction. Business law courses in the United States, the UK, Canada and Australia share common law roots but differ in statutes and leading cases, so use the materials your course provides.
The IRAC method
IRAC is the standard structure for problem questions, and many instructors expect it by name. Repeat it for each separate issue.
| Step | What to write | Tip |
|---|---|---|
| Issue | The precise legal question raised by the facts | Frame it narrowly: was the advertisement an offer, not simply is there a contract |
| Rule | The legal principle, with the case or statute that establishes it | State the test accurately and cite authority |
| Application | How the rule applies to these particular facts, including arguments for both sides | This is where most marks are; use the facts the question gives you |
| Conclusion | The likely outcome on that issue | Be decisive but acknowledge uncertainty where it exists |
When the facts involve several parties, run a separate IRAC for each pair whose rights are in question, for example the buyer against the seller and then the seller against its own supplier. Label each one clearly with a subheading. Mixing parties in one block is the quickest way to confuse both yourself and the marker, and it often hides an issue you would otherwise have spotted, such as whether an employee had authority to bind the company.
Variations such as CREAC (conclusion, rule, explanation, application, conclusion) put the answer first. Use whichever your instructor prefers; the logic is the same.
Spotting the issues
Read the facts twice. On the second reading, mark every fact that could matter legally: dates, promises, payments, words such as "guarantee", injuries, and anything that changed after an agreement was made. Fact patterns rarely include details by accident.
- Contract formation Offer, acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations, capacity and legality.
- Contract terms and breach What was promised, whether it was broken, and what damages follow.
- Negligence Duty of care, breach, causation and damage.
- Agency Whether an employee or agent could bind the business.
- Business organizations Liability of partners, directors and shareholders.
- Sale of goods In the United States, Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code; elsewhere, the relevant sale of goods statute.
List the issues in a logical order before writing. Formation comes before breach, and breach before remedies.
Stating rules accurately
Rules should be stated precisely and supported by authority. A few landmark cases appear across many common law courses:
| Case | Principle commonly cited for |
|---|---|
| Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893, England) | An advertisement can be a unilateral offer when it shows a clear intention to be bound |
| Hadley v Baxendale (1854, England) | Damages for breach cover losses arising naturally or within the parties' contemplation when they contracted |
| Donoghue v Stevenson (1932, UK House of Lords) | A manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer; the neighbor principle |
| Palsgraf v Long Island Railroad Co (1928, New York) | Liability in negligence is limited to harm to foreseeable plaintiffs |
Always use the cases and statutes from your own course materials first, and check how your jurisdiction has developed the principle since. Never invent a case or guess at a citation; an inaccurate authority does more damage than a missing one.
A worked IRAC example: a contract problem
Advising a supplier (hypothetical facts)
Facts. Delta Print emails Ortiz Café on 1 March: "We can supply 5,000 branded cups for $1,500. Offer open until 10 March." On 6 March Ortiz replies: "We accept, but the price must include delivery." Delta does not respond. On 8 March Ortiz emails: "Fine, we accept your original terms." Delta has meanwhile sold its stock elsewhere.
Issue. Was a contract formed when Ortiz sent its 8 March email?
Rule. Acceptance must mirror the offer exactly. A reply that changes a term is a counter-offer, which rejects the original offer and ends it, as established in Hyde v Wrench (1840) in English law and reflected in the common law mirror image rule in the United States. A rejected offer cannot later be accepted unless the offeror renews it.
Application. Ortiz's 6 March reply added a new term on delivery, so it was a counter-offer and terminated Delta's offer, even though the 10 March deadline had not passed. Delta never accepted the counter-offer. Ortiz's 8 March email therefore did not accept a live offer; at most it was a fresh offer, which Delta was free to ignore. Ortiz might argue the 6 March email was only a request for information, but "the price must include delivery" reads as a condition, not a question.
Conclusion. No contract was likely formed, and Delta is probably not liable for selling the cups elsewhere.
Note one wrinkle worth a sentence in a US answer: for sales of goods between merchants, UCC section 2-207 can treat an acceptance with additional terms differently. Here, the reply made acceptance conditional on the new term, which supports the counter-offer reading, but flag the point if your course covers the UCC.
Got a business law problem question to answer? A writer can work through the issues with you.
Order your business law case analysisMistakes that cost marks
- Writing an essay about the topic Answer the question asked and advise the named party.
- Skipping the application Stating the rule and jumping to a conclusion earns few marks.
- Ignoring the other side Show the strongest counter-argument and why it is weaker.
- Mixing jurisdictions Do not apply a UK statute to a US scenario or the reverse.
- Missing remedies If there is a breach, say what the injured party can claim.
- Inaccurate citations Check every case name, year and court.
Remedies: finishing the analysis
When an answer finds a breach, it should go on to say what the injured party can recover. Problem questions often hide a remedies issue in the last few lines of the facts.
| Remedy | Purpose | Points to check |
|---|---|---|
| Expectation damages | Put the claimant where it would have been had the contract been performed | Remoteness of loss and the duty to mitigate |
| Reliance damages | Recover money spent relying on the contract | Used when expected profit is too uncertain to prove |
| Specific performance | Order the party to perform | Discretionary; usually only where money is inadequate, such as unique goods or land |
| Injunction | Stop a party doing something | Common for breaches of restrictive covenants |
Calculating expectation damages (hypothetical)
A buyer contracts for 1,000 units at $20 each, a total of $20,000. The seller fails to deliver, and the buyer reasonably buys the same units elsewhere at $23 each, paying $23,000. Expectation damages are the extra cost: $23,000 - $20,000 = $3,000.
The buyer also claims $8,000 of profit lost on an unusually lucrative resale deal it never mentioned to the seller. Under the remoteness rule from Hadley v Baxendale, that loss is unlikely to be recoverable, because it was neither a natural result of the breach nor within the parties' contemplation when they contracted.
Writing a case brief
If your task is to brief a real decision, work from the full judgment rather than a summary, and keep each heading tight.
- Citation Full case name, year, court and law report reference.
- Facts Only those the court relied on, in a few sentences.
- Procedural history The route through the lower courts and which party brought the appeal.
- Issue The legal question the court had to answer, phrased as a question.
- Holding The answer, in one or two sentences.
- Reasoning Why the court decided as it did, including any dissent.
- Significance What the case means for businesses and how later courts have treated it.
The reasoning section deserves the most words. Markers want to see that you understood why the rule was adopted, not only what it is.
How we help with business law case analyses
A writer familiar with business and commercial law can prepare a custom case brief or problem question answer from your fact pattern and course materials, using IRAC or the structure your instructor prefers. Each issue is identified, the rules are stated with accurate authority, and the application uses the facts you were given.
Each answer is researched and drafted new for your fact pattern, then checked for plagiarism, and nobody is told who placed the order. Any correction within your original brief is made without charge. You are refunded in full if we are late or if you cancel before a writer picks the order up. Deadlines begin at 3 hours. This is study support for coursework, not legal advice on a real dispute.