How (not) to answer the question asked - Guest Post by Professor Christopher Bisping
It is an honour to welcome Professor Christopher Bisping to my blog.
Christopher Bisping is Professor of comparative private law at Bucerius Law School in Hamburg, Germany, and Dean of the Amster of Law and Business program (MLB/LLM) there. He is also an associate professor at the University of Warwick and was a lecturer at the University of Leicester, both UK. He received his legal education in Germany and Scotland, and has extensive teaching experience in Europe, Australia and Asia.
His blog post is full of actionable advice on how (not!) to answer the question asked - I am sure you will enjoy reading it!
“Le Président de la République” – How (not) to answer the question asked
Guest Post by Professor Christopher Bisping
Assessment methods differ between educational systems. German law students struggle with the Gutachtenstil of analysing problem questions. French students labour within the framework of the méthodologie juridique française. Students in common law countries tend to enjoy greater freedom in their approach to questions, in particular when it comes to writing essays, rather than problem questions.
One common problem with legal essays is that most of them invite a discussion of one particular aspect of a legal topic, or the interplay between several legal phenomena. The question is almost never to write an essay about “all you know about” a legal problem. France might be an outlier in this respect, where the famous essay title referenced in the header here, “Le Président de la République”, requires students to compile their knowledge of this office within its constitutional context; their free flowing creativity is tamed by the framework of the méthodologie juridique.
Typical essays follow a different style of question. They invite a discussion of a rather narrow question rather than an offloading of stored knowledge. The task is to apply knowledge of an area of law to the specific question asked. This involves providing a brief overview of pertinent aspects of the area of law, but then a clear focus on the problem raised by the question. Sometimes an identification of the relevant areas of law is also involved.
An example might be the following question from the area of contract law: “English law should allow reliance as a cause of action.” Here students need to identify first that the legal topics affected are the law of consideration and promissory estoppel, and need to briefly explain the functions and interplay between these two branches. The emphasis then needs to be on the stance taken by English law that promissory estoppel is a shield only, not a sword, and a discussion of the reasons behind that decision. One might point out different attitudes taken in other jurisdictions. A simple description of the underlying areas of law would not yield a good result.
So, to sum up, how should one approach an essay? Read the question carefully. Identify the area of law that the question is set in and briefly sketch their relevant aspects and structures. Then address the specific question asked by locating its significance within the wider area of law affected. Highlight pros and cons of different views and conclude by giving a clear position on the question asked and by showing the significance for the wider area of law.