LLAW6259 Understanding Common Law
The Complete Study & Assessment Guide · LLAW6259 Overview
- The University of Hong Kong
- Ten seminars over two weeks
- Postgraduate skills course
- Law
- No exam; take home written assessment
A skills course, taught alongside the subjects it borrows from
Understanding Common Law is a short, intensive course at The University of Hong Kong that teaches the techniques of reading and understanding cases and statutes, and of analysing and answering problem questions.
- Assessed by An in-course oral assessment worth twenty per cent and a one-week take home written assessment worth eighty per cent. Both must be passed, and the grade reported is pass or fail.
- The skill being tested Turning a set of facts into a numbered list of issues, then answering each one with a rule, an authority, an application to these facts and a conclusion.
- Hardest step Identifying every issue before drafting. In an answer capped at 1,250 words, a missed issue cannot be recovered later, and the criteria ask for all of them.
- Where marks leak Stating the law correctly and then concluding without applying it to the facts of the problem, which the course names as a common mistake in its own list.
- A condition, not a tip Anything written after the 1,250th word is not marked, so a conclusion placed past the ceiling does not exist.
How LLAW6259 is assessed
| Component | Weight | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Oral Assessment | 20% | Assessed in class during the course. The written assessment instructions record that this component carried the remaining twenty per cent of the marks. |
| Written Assessment | 80% | One problem question, taken home and completed within a week. Not more than 1,250 words, Arial 11, single spacing, submitted as a Word document with a separate Submission Sheet. |
Two official statements describe this assessment and both are set out here rather than one being chosen. The course outline states that this is a non-credit bearing course, that there will be an in-course oral assessment and an end of course written take home assessment to be completed within a week, that both will be marked on a pass or fail basis, and that you will need to pass both assessments. The written assessment instructions state that the written assessment counts towards eighty per cent of the marks and that the remaining twenty per cent was assessed by oral assessment during the course. Read together, the eighty and twenty are the internal weighting and the pass or fail is the grade you receive. The two numeric rows sum to 100. Confirm the current position on the course site before you plan your time.
Assessment structure
Current LLAW6259 dates
| Date | Item | Control |
|---|---|---|
| 11 September 2026 | Written assessment released | 13.00 on Friday 11 September 2026, stated in the assessment handout for this offering; the submission point on the course site opens the same day. |
| 18 September 2026 | Written assessment due | 18.00 Hong Kong time on Friday 18 September 2026, stated in the written assessment instructions and matching the due time on the course site. |
Dates are as published in the assessment handout and the written assessment instructions for this offering, cross-checked against the submission points on the course site. Confirm exact deadlines and submission settings in the live LMS.
What LLAW6259 covers
Ten chapters follow the published seminar sequence, from the common law system and the sources of Hong Kong law through precedent, judgments, Ordinances, statutory interpretation and legal research to reasoning, issue identification and the written advice itself.
The Common Law System and the Laws of Hong Kong
three senses of the phrase common law · the four sources Article 8 maintains · Articles 2, 18 and 84 · what came across in 1843 and the three conditions on it02Precedent, Ratio, Obiter and Binding Force
binding against persuasive · follow, distinguish, overrule, reverse · the two-limb test for a ratio · seven weight factors and seven routes past a precedent03Court Hierarchies and Overseas Authority
the hierarchy before and after 1 July 1997 · when the final court may depart from itself · the plainly wrong test · Privy Council appeals from here and from elsewhere04Reading a Reported Judgment
reported against unreported · priority of report series · citation components and neutral citation · catchwords, headnote and judgments · burden and standard of proof05How an Ordinance Is Made and Laid Out
seven stages from drafting to commencement · delegated legislation · fourteen elements of an Ordinance · long title, interpretation section, schedules, application06Statutory Interpretation: Rules, Aids and Presumptions
literal, golden, mischief and purposive · section 19 and the eiusdem generis rule · extrinsic aids for purpose but not for meaning · three presumptions07Finding the Law: Sources and Research Routes
primary against secondary sources · where each kind of material lives · five routes to one answer · keeping a search record · two checks on legislation and four on a case08Legal Reasoning with IRAC
proposition of law and authority · which authorities to cite and which to leave out · five layers of a complete citation · breaking a provision into its elements09Identifying the Issues in a Problem Question
preparation, mental process, actual process · the general contract checklist in six groups · the specific checklist on acceptance · branching an issue before drafting10Writing to Advise: Structure, Clarity and Precision
introduction, body, conclusion · headings and paragraphs · plain English, active voice, short sentences · precision words · ten published mistakes · giving a graded viewThe published outline describes it as a skills-based course rather than a knowledge-based one, designed to run parallel with and support learning in other subjects such as Contract and Tort, and the questions used in class are drawn from areas being studied in those courses.
It is specifically designed for Mainland students on the Master of Common Law programme, learning the common law in the English language.
Ten seminars across two weeks, in two different formats
Teaching takes place over fifteen hours in ten seminars of an hour and a half, all delivered face to face.
Four of them provide an overview or introduction to a topic; the other six involve activities built around problem questions. The overview handouts are described as introductory outlines that students are expected to expand on in the seminar and add to from their own understanding, so arriving with the handout alone is arriving with a skeleton.
The activity seminars are interactive and include problem-solving, small group work and student presentations based on questions provided in advance, and students should expect to write answers in class either in a group or alone.
Eight areas, and why they are sequenced that way
The course concentrates on eight areas: an introduction to the common law, analysing a statute, analysing a case, legal sources and an introduction to legal research, legal reasoning and IRAC, analysing a problem question, effective legal writing, and improving your answers.
The order is not arbitrary. The first four supply the raw materials, since you cannot argue from an authority until you know whether it is part of the law here and which part of it binds.
The last four turn those materials into an answer, and they are treated as separate skills because they fail separately: a student who cannot identify issues will produce an elegant answer to the wrong question.
What the assessment actually measures
There is no examination.
There is an in-course oral assessment and an end-of-course written take home assessment, completed within a week, and both are graded on a pass or fail basis. The written assessment is one problem question of the kind worked in the seminars, answered in not more than one thousand two hundred and fifty words, using IRAC, and ending in advice.
Its published criteria fall into two groups, writing skills and legal analysis, and the word all appears three times in the second group: identify all the issues, analyse all the issues, conclude on all the issues.
No set textbook, and what that means for preparation
The course sets no textbook.
Reference is made to books students may wish to consult for further study, and since the course draws on Contract and Tort issues, the textbooks used in those subjects are the natural companions.
Materials are distributed through the course site and in class: the learning outcomes and course outline, the course schedule, the overview handouts, the seminar activity handouts setting out required reading and questions, and the relevant cases and Ordinances themselves. That last category is the one to work with hardest, because the skill being assessed is reading primary law rather than remembering a summary of it.
Turn a set of facts into a numbered issue list
- 2Name the area from the general checklist, and say which areas you are ruling out.
- 3List the formation issues raised: offer, prescribed mode of acceptance, communication, timing, revocation.
- 2Branch the prescribed-mode issue into what follows if post was prescribed and what follows if it was not.
- 1Number the list so that sub-issues sit under their parent, because those numbers become your headings.
Key terms
- Ordinance
- Legislation enacted by the Legislative Council of Hong Kong. The equivalent instrument in the United Kingdom is an Act of Parliament, so using Act for a Hong Kong instrument is wrong.
- Subsidiary Legislation
- Any proclamation, rule, regulation, order, notice or other instrument made under or by virtue of an Ordinance and having legislative effect, as defined in the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance.
- Ratio Decidendi
- The part of a decided case that binds later courts: a ruling on a point of law that the outcome of the case depended on. Both limbs are required, and the judge does not label it.
- Obiter Dictum
- A statement of law made in a judgment that was not crucial to the outcome. It may be highly persuasive and it never binds.
- Binding Authority
- A decision a later court must apply because the deciding court sits above it in the same judicial hierarchy, or because the court is bound by its own earlier decisions.
- Persuasive Authority
- A decision a court may adopt because it finds the reasoning convincing, rather than because it is obliged to. Overseas decisions fall here however distinguished the court.
- Invitation To Treat
- A step inviting offers rather than making one. A display of goods with a price in a shop window is the standard example, and the distinction decides several problem questions.
- Purposive Approach
- Reading a provision for what the legislature meant, as that meaning shows itself in the enacted words, and construing those words with regard to context and purpose rather than turning to purpose only once an ambiguity appears.
- Eiusdem Generis
- A rule of construction: where a provision names several specific things and then adds a broad catch-all, the catch-all reaches only things of the same class as the specific ones.
- IRAC
- The reasoning structure this course teaches, applied to each issue separately: state the Issue, state the Rule with its authority, Apply the rule to the facts, and Conclude on that issue.
- Problem Question
- An assessment format setting out a factual scenario and asking for advice, rather than asking for discussion of a proposition. The answer is structured by issues, not by topics.
- Neutral Citation
- A citation independent of any published law report, identical in print and online, giving the year, the court and the number of that judgment in that year rather than a page.
LLAW6259 FAQ
Is there an exam in Understanding Common Law?
No. The course outline states that there will be an in-course oral assessment and an end of course written take home assessment to be completed within a week, and no examination appears anywhere in the course materials. The written component is a problem question answered at home over a week with a ceiling of one thousand two hundred and fifty words.
If you are planning revision, plan it around producing a written advice under a word limit rather than around recall under time pressure, because those two tasks reward almost opposite preparation.
How are the two components weighted, and what grade do I get?
The written assessment instructions state that the written assessment counts towards eighty per cent of the marks and that the remaining twenty per cent was assessed by oral assessment during the course, and that you will be graded on a pass or fail basis only. The course outline adds that both assessments are marked on a pass or fail basis and that you need to pass both.
So the eighty and twenty describe the internal weighting while the grade reported to you is pass or fail, and each component is a condition in its own right.
What are the rules on length and format for the written assessment?
Your answer must be typed or word processed; a handwritten script will not be marked and counts as a failed attempt. It should be saved and submitted as a Word document rather than a PDF.
It must not exceed one thousand two hundred and fifty words in Arial size 11 with single spacing and reasonable headers, footers and margins, the word count should appear at the end, and anything written after the one thousand two hundred and fiftieth word will not be marked. Your name appears nowhere; your university number appears on the top right hand corner of each page.
Can I use AI to help me research or write the answer?
No. The written assessment instructions state that you must not use it at all in preparing or writing your answer. Note the verb preparing, which reaches the research stage and not only the drafting stage, and note that no documented-use exception appears in these instructions.
The course does discuss artificial intelligence elsewhere as something a lawyer encounters, with its problems named, but that discussion is not a permission for this assessment.
What does the marking actually look for?
Two published groups. Writing skills asks for correct grammatical English, clear plain language, no spelling mistakes, concise writing, and a language and style appropriate to a lawyer.
Legal analysis asks you to correctly identify all the issues, correctly and fully state all the relevant law with full reference to relevant statutes and case authorities where appropriate, correctly analyse all the issues and apply legal principles with full sound and logical reasoning to the facts, and provide a full and correct conclusion on all the issues.
What is IRAC and why does the course insist on it?
IRAC is the reasoning structure applied to each issue in turn: state the issue, state the rule as a proposition of law together with its authority, apply the rule to the facts of this problem, and conclude on that issue. The course insists on it because it forces the step candidates most often skip, which is application.
An answer that states a rule and then states a conclusion has described the law and advised nobody, and that gap is exactly what the third legal analysis criterion is testing for.
How much preparation do the seminars need?
It varies by seminar type. Seminars one, two and eight provide an overview of a topic and their handouts are described as outlines you are expected to expand on in class. Seminars three to seven and nine to ten are activity seminars: the required reading and the question are set out in the handout in advance, and you should expect to write answers in class either in a group or on your own.
For those you need the reading done and a draft answer thought through before you arrive.
Do I need to know Contract and Tort to do well?
You need to use them. The course is designed to run parallel with and support your learning in other subjects such as Contract and Tort, and the questions used in the seminars cover areas you are studying there.
It is a skills course rather than a knowledge course, so you are not assessed on how much contract law you have memorised, but you cannot demonstrate issue identification or legal reasoning without substantive law to reason about.
How to prepare for the assessments
Build the two checklists before you need them. A general list of the areas in contract and in negligence, then a specific list of the rules under each matter, written in your own hand from your Contract and Tort materials.
Then practise the sequence rather than the subject: take an unseen fact pattern, spend ten minutes producing a numbered issue list with the checklist open and the textbook shut, allocate words across the issues, and only then write. Do that three times and the written assessment becomes a familiar procedure applied to unfamiliar facts, which is exactly what the course is training.
Finish by auditing a draft against the nine published criteria one at a time, because several of them, spelling, conciseness and a conclusion on every issue, are checkable in minutes and are where answers quietly lose their pass.
Your AI Law tutor for LLAW6259
Stuck on a hard LLAW6259 question? Sia is AskSia’s AI Law tutor — ask any LLAW6259 Understanding Common Law question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how the course is actually taught and assessed. Read this whole study guide free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
