Beginning the study of law can feel overwhelming. Many students open a textbook and are immediately confronted with unfamiliar terminology, long appellate judgments, and complex doctrinal rules. Without structure, the subject can feel fragmented and abstract.
This Starter Path is designed to prevent that experience.
Law is not a collection of disconnected subjects. It is a system. That system has architecture. If you understand the architecture, each subject becomes manageable. If you do not, every case appears isolated and every rule feels arbitrary.
Before moving into Contract, Criminal, Tort or Public Law, you must first understand how English law is built and how legal authority operates. That foundation is not optional. It is the intellectual groundwork of your degree.
Part I — English Legal System and Legal Foundations
This section establishes the structure of law in England and Wales, how legal rules acquire authority, and how courts apply and develop those rules. It is the starting point for all substantive modules because it explains what law is, where it comes from, and how it is used.
1 The Nature and Purpose of Law
Law is a system of rules recognised and enforced by the state. However, this definition alone is insufficient. A legal rule must possess institutional authority. It must be identifiable, enforceable, and capable of authoritative interpretation. Unlike moral rules or social conventions, legal rules derive legitimacy from recognised constitutional structures, primarily Parliament and the courts.
Law in England and Wales develops through interaction between legislative authority and judicial reasoning. Parliament creates statutes. Courts interpret and apply them. Through interpretation and precedent, courts also articulate principles that become part of the legal system. Law therefore operates as both a set of formal rules and a method of structured reasoning.
The function of law is not merely to regulate conduct. It provides predictability, stability, and mechanisms for resolving disputes. It structures relationships between individuals, and between individuals and the state.
A foundational distinction exists between public law and private law. Public law governs the relationship between individuals and the state and controls the exercise of public power. Private law governs relationships between private parties, such as contractual obligations, liability for negligence, and proprietary rights. Understanding this distinction matters because it shapes remedies, procedures, and the legal tests applied.
A further distinction exists between civil and criminal law. Criminal law addresses wrongdoing against society as a whole and is prosecuted by the state, with guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt. This reflects the presumption of innocence, a foundational principle of criminal justice. The burden of proof rests on the prosecution throughout the trial, and the defendant is not required to prove their innocence unless a specific statutory exception applies. Civil law resolves disputes between private parties on the balance of probabilities. These categories reflect different objectives: criminal law is primarily concerned with punishment and public protection, while civil law is concerned with compensation and allocation of responsibility.
2 Constitutional Foundations: Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law
Two core constitutional principles underpin the English legal system: parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law.
Parliamentary sovereignty means that Parliament can make or unmake any law. Courts must apply validly enacted legislation, and no court can invalidate an Act of Parliament. This principle explains why statute law has supreme authority within the domestic legal order.
The rule of law requires that power be exercised lawfully, rationally and fairly. It demands that no individual or authority is above the law, and that government action must be authorised by law and carried out through lawful procedures. The rule of law is expressed through legal certainty, equality before the law, fair processes, and access to independent courts.
These principles can exist in tension. If Parliament is sovereign, in what sense can law limit power? The answer lies in how courts supervise the legality of executive and administrative action and how constitutional principles shape interpretation. Understanding this tension is central to public law and explains why legality matters independently of political merit.
3 Sources of Law
English law is derived primarily from legislation and case law.
Legislation consists of Acts of Parliament and delegated legislation made under authority granted by Parliament. Statutes can create new legal frameworks, modify existing rules, and override common law principles. Delegated legislation allows technical detail to be developed without full parliamentary process, but remains subject to legal limits and review.
Case law is the body of law developed through judicial decisions. Courts interpret statutes and apply existing legal principles to new factual situations. Through reasoning by analogy and distinction, the common law evolves incrementally. Case law therefore operates both as a source of legal rules and as a method of disciplined legal reasoning.
Because statutory language can be ambiguous, courts interpret legislation using recognised approaches. The literal rule applies the plain meaning of the words. The golden rule modifies literal meaning to avoid absurdity. The mischief rule considers the problem Parliament intended to remedy. The purposive approach focuses on the broader legislative purpose. Students must understand that interpretation is not guesswork; it is structured reasoning within constitutional limits.
4 Court Structure in England and Wales
Understanding legal authority requires understanding hierarchy.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United Kingdom for civil cases and for criminal cases from England and Wales. It is also the final court for civil cases from Scotland and Northern Ireland, and criminal cases from Northern Ireland (but not Scottish criminal cases). Below it sits the Court of Appeal, divided into Civil and Criminal Divisions. Below the Court of Appeal is the High Court, which includes the King’s Bench Division, Chancery Division, and Family Division. Lower courts include the Crown Court, County Court, and Magistrates’ Court.
Hierarchy matters because it determines appellate routes and the binding force of decisions. It also explains why some authorities must be followed while others may only be persuasive. Court structure is therefore not background information; it is the mechanism through which legal certainty is produced. Courts may exercise either original jurisdiction or appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction refers to the power to hear a case at first instance, where evidence is examined and facts are determined. Appellate jurisdiction involves reviewing decisions of lower courts for errors of law or procedure. Understanding this distinction clarifies the different institutional roles courts perform within the hierarchy.
5 The Doctrine of Precedent: Binding Authority and Legal Certainty
The doctrine of precedent promotes consistency and predictability by requiring courts to follow earlier decisions in materially similar cases. The doctrine of precedent operates through the principle of stare decisis, meaning “to stand by things decided,” which requires courts to follow previously established legal principles in materially similar cases.
Vertical binding precedent means lower courts must follow decisions of higher courts within the hierarchy. Horizontal precedent concerns whether a court is bound by its own prior decisions. The Supreme Court is not strictly bound by its own previous decisions. The Court of Appeal is generally bound by its own decisions, subject to limited exceptions. These rules help maintain stability while allowing the law to develop where necessary.
Students must understand that precedent does not mean every sentence in a judgment is binding. The binding component is the legal principle necessary for the decision.
6 Ratio Decidendi and Obiter Dicta
When courts decide cases, they provide judgments explaining their reasoning. Not every statement within a judgment has binding force.
The ratio decidendi is the legal principle necessary for the decision. It is derived from the material facts of the case and the reasoning used to resolve the legal issue. The ratio is binding on lower courts in materially similar cases.
Obiter dicta are statements not strictly necessary for the outcome. They may be persuasive, particularly if made by senior courts, but they are not binding.
Extracting the ratio is a core legal skill. It requires disciplined analysis. Students must identify the material facts, frame the legal issue precisely, track the reasoning that connects rule to facts, and isolate the principle required to resolve the dispute. Without this skill, cases cannot be deployed effectively in exams.
7 How to Read a Case Properly
Many students read cases passively. This is ineffective because legal assessment tests structured deployment, not vague familiarity.
A reported appellate case will usually include citation and court, procedural background, facts, issues, decision, and reasoning. Your task is not to copy narrative detail. Your task is to extract structure.
For each case, record: the case name and year, the court level, the material facts in no more than four lines, the legal issue framed as a question, the ratio expressed clearly, and why the case matters doctrinally. This method trains precision, strengthens recall, and ensures authority can be used confidently under exam conditions.
8 Legal Reasoning and Structured Analysis
Legal reasoning is structured argument grounded in authority. It involves identifying issues, selecting relevant legal rules, applying those rules to facts, and reaching justified conclusions.
The IRAC structure provides discipline. The issue must be framed precisely as a legal question. The rule must be stated accurately and, where relevant, supported by authority. Application is the analytical core: you must compare facts to legal principles, reason by analogy and distinction, and justify the conclusion. The conclusion must follow logically from the analysis.
Legal writing is not descriptive. It is analytical. It is not enough to state rules; you must apply them.
Part II – Introduction to Substantive Law: Contract Law (Formation)
1 The Nature of Contractual Obligation
Contract law governs voluntary obligations. It enforces promises that the law recognises as legally binding.
Not every agreement is enforceable. A legally binding contract requires:
- Offer
- Acceptance
- Consideration
- Intention to create legal relations
- Certainty of terms
Each element performs a structural function. If one is absent, the contract fails.
2 Offer
An offer is a clear expression of willingness to contract on specified terms, made with intention to be bound upon acceptance.
An invitation to treat is not an offer. It is an invitation to negotiate.
Shop displays, advertisements and auction catalogues are generally invitations to treat.
An offer must demonstrate intention to be bound immediately upon acceptance.
Unilateral offers are promises made in exchange for performance. Bilateral offers involve mutual promises.
In problem questions, ask whether the statement shows commitment or merely negotiation.
3 Acceptance
Acceptance is the unqualified assent to the terms of the offer.
It must correspond exactly to the offer. A counter-offer rejects the original offer.
Acceptance must generally be communicated.
Silence does not amount to acceptance.
Where post is an appropriate method of communication, acceptance may take effect upon posting. For instantaneous communication, acceptance takes effect upon receipt.
Students must apply these principles precisely to factual scenarios.
4 Consideration
Consideration is the price paid for the promise.
It must move from the promisee. It must not be past. It must be sufficient but need not be adequate.
Past consideration is generally invalid unless performed at the promisor’s request with an implied understanding of payment.
The doctrine of consideration ensures that contracts reflect reciprocal exchange rather than mere promises.
5 Intention to Create Legal Relations
In domestic contexts, there is a presumption against legal intention.
In commercial contexts, there is a presumption in favour.
This presumption may be rebutted by evidence.
Students must assess context carefully.
6 Certainty
A contract must be sufficiently certain to be enforceable.
If essential terms are vague or incomplete, the contract may fail.
However, courts prefer to uphold agreements where possible, especially in commercial contexts.
Outcome of the LLB Starter Path
By completing this Starter Path, you should:
- Understand the structure of English law.
- Understand the hierarchy of courts and precedent.
- Be able to extract the ratio of a case.
- Interpret statutory language at a foundational level.
- Construct structured legal reasoning.
- Analyse the formation of a contract with doctrinal precision.
Only once this foundation is secure should you proceed to deeper substantive modules in Contract, Criminal, Tort or Public Law.
Part III – Criminal Law Foundations
Structure, Responsibility and Liability
Introduction to Criminal Law
Criminal law regulates conduct that the state considers sufficiently serious to warrant punishment. It defines offences, sets standards of responsibility, and determines when an individual may be subject to criminal liability.
Unlike civil law, criminal proceedings are brought by the state. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This high standard reflects the seriousness of criminal conviction and the potential loss of liberty.
At its core, criminal liability requires proof of two essential elements:
- The actus reus (the guilty act).
- The mens rea (the guilty mind).
Both elements must generally coincide. Without proof of both, liability will usually fail.
This structural framework governs the analysis of most criminal offences.
1 The Actus Reus
The actus reus refers to the external element of the offence. It consists of the conduct, circumstances, and (where relevant) consequences prohibited by law.
It is not limited to a positive act. In certain circumstances, a failure to act (an omission) may satisfy the actus reus.
1.1 Voluntary Conduct
Criminal liability generally requires voluntary conduct. An involuntary act, such as one performed during a seizure, does not ordinarily attract liability.
The law punishes actions that are willed and controlled by the defendant.
This principle reflects moral culpability: liability requires conscious conduct.
1.2 Omissions
As a general rule, there is no liability for failing to act. English law does not impose a general duty to rescue.
However, liability may arise where there is a recognised legal duty to act. Such duties arise in specific circumstances, including:
- A contractual duty.
- A statutory duty.
- A special relationship.
- Voluntary assumption of responsibility.
- Creation of a dangerous situation.
Where a defendant is under a legal duty and fails to discharge it, that omission may constitute the actus reus.
Students must identify whether a duty exists before concluding that an omission is criminal.
1.3 Consequence Crimes and Causation
Some offences require proof of a specific result. For example, unlawful act causing death requires proof that the defendant’s conduct caused the victim’s death.
Causation has two elements:
- Factual causation.
- Legal causation.
Factual causation is assessed using the “but for” test: but for the defendant’s conduct, would the consequence have occurred?
If the answer is no, factual causation is satisfied.
Legal causation requires that the defendant’s conduct be a substantial and operating cause of the consequence.
Intervening acts (novus actus interveniens) may break the chain of causation if they are sufficiently independent and unforeseeable.
Students must analyse causation carefully in result-based offences.
2 The Mens Rea
Mens rea refers to the mental element of the offence. Different offences require different mental states.
The most common forms of mens rea are intention and recklessness.
2.1 Intention
Intention is the highest level of culpability.
Direct intention exists where the defendant’s purpose is to bring about the prohibited consequence.
Oblique intention arises where the consequence is not the defendant’s primary aim but is virtually certain to result from their actions, and the defendant appreciates that virtual certainty.
Students must distinguish between foresight of possibility and foresight of virtual certainty.
Intention involves a high level of moral blameworthiness.
2.2 Recklessness
Recklessness involves conscious risk-taking.
A defendant is reckless if they are aware of a risk and unreasonably proceed despite that risk.
The risk must be unjustifiable in the circumstances.
Recklessness reflects a lower level of culpability than intention but still demonstrates fault.
2.3 Negligence
Some offences are satisfied by negligence rather than subjective awareness.
Negligence involves falling below the standard of a reasonable person.
Gross negligence, in particular, may give rise to serious criminal liability where the breach is exceptionally serious.
Students must identify whether the offence requires subjective awareness or objective fault.
3 Coincidence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea
Criminal liability generally requires that the actus reus and mens rea coincide.
The mental element must exist at the time of the conduct constituting the actus reus.
However, where conduct forms part of a continuing act, coincidence may be satisfied even if mens rea develops slightly later.
Students must analyse timing carefully in problem scenarios.
4 Strict Liability
Some offences do not require proof of mens rea.
These are known as strict liability offences.
They are often regulatory in nature, particularly in areas concerning public health or safety.
In strict liability offences, once the actus reus is proven, liability follows regardless of fault.
Courts are generally reluctant to impose strict liability unless Parliament’s intention is clear.
Students must identify whether the offence requires fault before analysing mens rea.
5 Defences
Even where actus reus and mens rea are established, liability may be avoided if a valid defence applies.
Defences may be categorised as:
- Complete defences, which result in acquittal.
- Partial defences, which reduce liability.
5.1 Self-Defence
Self-defence is available where a defendant uses reasonable force to protect themselves or another.
The force used must be:
- Necessary.
- Proportionate in the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be.
The test contains both subjective and objective elements.
Students must assess whether the force used was reasonable in light of perceived threat.
5.2 Loss of Control (Partial Defence)
In homicide cases, loss of control may reduce murder to manslaughter where statutory criteria are satisfied.
It requires:
- Loss of self-control.
- A qualifying trigger.
- That a person of normal tolerance might have reacted similarly.
Students should understand that partial defences reflect reduced moral culpability rather than full justification.
6 Structured Criminal Law Analysis
When answering a criminal law problem question, structure is essential.
Step 1: Identify the relevant offence.
Step 2: Analyse actus reus.
Step 3: Analyse mens rea.
Step 4: Consider causation (if relevant).
Step 5: Assess any defences.
Step 6: Reach a reasoned conclusion.
Avoid discussing defences before establishing liability. Maintain logical sequence.
Outcome of the Criminal Law Foundations Module
By completing this module, you should be able to:
- Identify and analyse actus reus.
- Distinguish between intention, recklessness and negligence.
- Apply causation principles to result-based offences.
- Recognise strict liability.
- Assess potential defences.
- Structure criminal problem answers with clarity.
This structural understanding forms the foundation for deeper study of specific offences such as homicide, theft and non-fatal offences against the person.
Part IV – Tort Law Foundations
Negligence, Responsibility and Civil Liability
Introduction to Tort Law
Tort law governs civil wrongs. It provides remedies where one party has suffered harm as a result of another’s wrongful conduct.
Unlike criminal law, tort law is primarily concerned with compensation rather than punishment. Its purpose is to allocate responsibility for loss.
The most significant tort in modern law is negligence. Negligence governs liability for careless conduct that causes foreseeable harm.
To establish negligence, a claimant must prove:
- The defendant owed a duty of care.
- The defendant breached that duty.
- The breach caused the claimant’s loss.
- The loss was not too remote.
Each element must be established in sequence. If one fails, the claim fails.
1 Duty of Care
The first question is whether the defendant owed the claimant a duty of care. The existence of a duty of care is a question of law determined by the court, not a question of fact for a jury.
A duty of care arises where the law recognises that the defendant was under an obligation to take reasonable care to avoid causing foreseeable harm.
1.1 Foreseeability and Neighbour Principle
The modern law of negligence begins with the neighbour principle.
A person must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which they can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure their neighbour.
A neighbour is someone who is so closely and directly affected by one’s act that they ought reasonably to be in contemplation.
Foreseeability is therefore central. If harm was not reasonably foreseeable, no duty arises.
However, foreseeability alone is not always sufficient.
1.2 The Modern Approach to Duty
Courts now adopt a structured approach to duty.
In established categories — such as road users, employers and employees, or manufacturers and consumers — duty is usually recognised.
In novel situations, courts consider broader policy factors. These include:
- Proximity between the parties.
- Whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty.
Students must understand that duty is not purely mechanical. It involves normative judgment. Courts are cautious about expanding liability too far.
2 Breach of Duty
Once a duty is established, the claimant must show that the defendant breached it.
Breach occurs where the defendant fails to meet the standard of care required.
2.1 The Standard of Care
The standard is that of the reasonable person.
The reasonable person is objective. It does not depend on the defendant’s personal characteristics, except in limited circumstances.
The court asks:
Did the defendant fall below the standard of a reasonably careful person in those circumstances?
2.2 Factors Relevant to Breach
Courts consider several factors:
- The likelihood of harm.
- The seriousness of potential harm.
- The practicality of precautions.
- The social utility of the defendant’s conduct.
The greater the risk, the greater the precautions required.
If a risk is small and precautions are burdensome, failure to take them may not amount to breach.
Students must analyse these factors carefully rather than simply asserting negligence.
2.3 Professional Standards
Where the defendant is a professional, the standard is that of a reasonably competent professional in that field.
The law does not demand perfection. It demands reasonable competence.
3 Causation
Even if a duty exists and has been breached, liability only arises if the breach caused the loss.
Causation has two components:
- Factual causation.
- Legal causation.
3.1 Factual Causation
The “but for” test is applied.
But for the defendant’s breach, would the claimant have suffered the harm?
If the harm would have occurred anyway, factual causation is not established.
3.2 Legal Causation
The defendant’s breach must be a substantial and operative cause of the harm.
Intervening events may break the chain of causation if they are sufficiently independent and unforeseeable.
Students must distinguish between foreseeable intervening acts (which do not break the chain) and truly independent ones.
4 Remoteness of Damage
Even where causation is established, the defendant is not liable for all consequences.
The damage must be reasonably foreseeable.
The type of damage must be foreseeable, though its precise manner need not be.
If the damage is of a completely different kind from what was foreseeable, it is too remote.
Students must focus on the category of harm, not the specific details.
5 Defences to Negligence
Even where negligence is established, liability may be reduced or avoided.
5.1 Contributory Negligence
If the claimant contributed to their own harm through lack of reasonable care, damages may be reduced proportionately.
The court assesses the extent to which the claimant’s conduct contributed to the loss.
5.2 Voluntary Assumption of Risk
Where a claimant voluntarily and knowingly accepts a risk, the defendant may not be liable.
However, this defence is narrowly applied.
6 Structured Negligence Analysis
When answering a negligence problem question:
Step 1: Identify whether a duty of care exists.
Step 2: Analyse whether the duty was breached.
Step 3: Apply the “but for” test.
Step 4: Assess remoteness.
Step 5: Consider defences.
Step 6: Conclude proportionately.
Maintain logical order. Do not discuss breach before establishing duty.
Outcome of the Tort Law Foundations Module
By completing this module, you should be able to:
- Identify when a duty of care arises.
- Apply the objective standard of care.
- Analyse breach using relevant factors.
- Apply causation principles accurately.
- Assess remoteness and defences.
- Structure negligence problem answers coherently.
This framework prepares you for deeper study of occupiers’ liability, economic loss, psychiatric harm, and vicarious liability.
Part V – Public Law Foundations
Judicial Review, Constitutional Principles and Control of Public Power
Introduction to Public Law
Public law governs the relationship between individuals and the state. It regulates how public power is created, exercised and limited.
Unlike private law, which concerns disputes between individuals, public law is concerned with constitutional structure and accountability. It asks whether public authorities have acted lawfully.
The central mechanism through which courts supervise public power is judicial review.
Judicial review is not concerned with whether a decision is correct on its merits. It is concerned with whether the decision was made lawfully.
To understand judicial review, students must first understand the constitutional principles that underpin it.
1 Parliamentary Sovereignty
Parliamentary sovereignty is a foundational principle of the UK constitution.
It means that Parliament can make or unmake any law. No court may question the validity of an Act of Parliament.
Courts must apply primary legislation even if they disagree with its content.
However, parliamentary sovereignty does not mean that all exercises of power are immune from review. While courts cannot invalidate Acts of Parliament, they can review:
- Decisions of ministers.
- Actions of public bodies.
- Exercises of delegated authority.
Judicial review therefore operates within the framework of parliamentary sovereignty. It does not challenge Parliament itself, but it ensures that public authorities act within the limits set by Parliament.
2 The Rule of Law
The rule of law requires that public authorities act within legal authority and in accordance with established procedures.
It demands:
- Legal certainty.
- Equality before the law.
- Access to independent courts.
- Accountability of government officials.
Judicial review gives practical effect to the rule of law. Without it, unlawful administrative action could go unchecked.
Public law therefore embodies a balance between parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law.
3 What Is Judicial Review?
Judicial review is the process by which courts supervise the legality of decisions made by public bodies.
It is not an appeal. Courts do not substitute their own decision for that of the public authority. Instead, they examine whether the decision was made lawfully.
A claimant must show that:
- The defendant is exercising public power.
- The decision is reviewable.
- There are recognised grounds of illegality.
Judicial review is concerned with legality, not desirability.
4 Grounds of Judicial Review
The traditional grounds of review are commonly grouped into three categories:
- Illegality.
- Procedural impropriety.
- Irrationality.
Modern developments also recognise proportionality, particularly in human rights cases.
4.1 Illegality
Illegality arises where a public authority acts outside the powers granted to it.
This is often described as acting ultra vires (beyond powers).
Illegality may occur where:
- A decision-maker misunderstands the law.
- A power is exercised for an improper purpose.
- Relevant considerations are ignored.
- Irrelevant considerations are taken into account.
Public authorities must exercise powers within the limits set by statute.
If a statute grants power for a specific purpose, it cannot be used for a different objective.
Students must identify the statutory source of power before assessing legality.
4.2 Procedural Impropriety
Procedural impropriety concerns fairness in decision-making.
Even where a public authority has legal power, it must exercise that power fairly.
Procedural fairness includes:
- The right to be heard.
- The rule against bias.
A person affected by a decision should generally have an opportunity to present their case.
Decision-makers must be impartial. Even the appearance of bias may invalidate a decision.
Procedural fairness reflects the principle that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.
4.3 Irrationality
Irrationality arises where a decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made it.
This is a high threshold.
Courts are reluctant to intervene merely because they would have reached a different conclusion. The decision must fall outside the range of reasonable responses.
Irrationality protects against extreme or arbitrary exercises of discretion.
Students must avoid overstating this ground. It is not enough to argue that a decision is harsh or unwise.
4.4 Proportionality
Proportionality has become particularly significant in cases involving fundamental rights.
A decision may be unlawful if it:
- Pursues a legitimate aim.
- But uses measures that are not suitable or necessary.
- Or imposes excessive burdens relative to the objective.
Proportionality involves a more structured balancing exercise than traditional irrationality.
It requires courts to assess whether the interference with rights is justified.
5 Human Rights and Public Law
The incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law strengthened the role of courts in reviewing executive action.
Public authorities must act compatibly with protected rights.
Where legislation is incompatible with human rights, courts cannot invalidate it, but they may issue a declaration of incompatibility.
This reflects the continuing influence of parliamentary sovereignty alongside enhanced rights protection.
Students must understand that public law increasingly involves balancing individual rights against public interests.
6 Remedies in Judicial Review
If a court finds a decision unlawful, it may grant remedies, including:
- Quashing orders (setting aside the decision).
- Prohibiting orders (preventing unlawful action).
- Mandatory orders (requiring action).
- Declarations.
Remedies are discretionary. Even where a ground of review is established, the court may decline relief if appropriate.
Judicial review therefore combines legal principle with judicial discretion.
7 Structured Public Law Analysis
When answering a judicial review problem question:
Step 1: Identify the public body and source of power.
Step 2: Confirm that the decision is reviewable.
Step 3: Analyse potential grounds of review.
Step 4: Apply each ground carefully to the facts.
Step 5: Consider possible remedies.
Step 6: Conclude proportionately.
Maintain focus on legality rather than policy preference.
Outcome of the Public Law Foundations Module
By completing this module, you should be able to:
- Explain the relationship between parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law.
- Define judicial review and its purpose.
- Identify and apply grounds of illegality, procedural impropriety and irrationality.
- Understand proportionality in rights-based cases.
- Structure judicial review answers coherently.
This completes the foundational structure of the LLB Starter Path.
Completion of the LLB Starter Path
By completing Parts I–V, you now possess:
- Structural understanding of the English legal system.
- Authority awareness (courts, precedent, hierarchy).
- Case extraction skills.
- Structured legal reasoning ability.
- Foundational knowledge in Contract, Criminal, Tort and Public Law.
You are now ready to enter full substantive modules with intellectual confidence and structured discipline.