The "Reading for Argument" Technique: Why Summarising is not a First-Class Habit

It is one of the most common pitfalls in legal education: the belief that "knowing the law" is synonymous with "knowing the facts." We see it every year in the first drafts of even the most diligent students.

They treat a case like a news report—meticulously detailing the parties, the lower court’s timeline, and the final order.

But here is the hard truth: The marker already knows the facts. If you spend 30% of your word count rehearsing the narrative of Donoghue v Stevenson, you are not demonstrating legal mastery; you are merely proving you can read a story.

To transition from a 2:1 to a First-Class mark, you must stop reading for information and start reading for tension.

Look for the "Fault Lines"

In any landmark judgment, the law is rarely settled by a unanimous, easy "yes." The gold is found in the disagreement. When you open a case, your primary objective shouldn't be to find the ratio alone; it should be to find the fault lines between the majority and the dissent.

Ask yourself (hypothetical example):

• Why did Lady Hale disagree with the majority?

• What specific policy concern was the dissenting judge worried about?

• Is the majority's logic a pragmatic solution to a social problem, or a strict adherence to black-letter doctrine?

The "Tension" Method

When you identify these points of friction, your essay instantly gains depth. Instead of writing, "The court held X," you begin to write, "While the majority focused on the certainty of contract, the dissent highlighted the potential for unconscionability—a tension that remains unresolved in recent Court of Appeal decisions."

This approach does three things for your grade:

1. It shows Critical Analysis: You aren't just a passive consumer of information; you are an active participant in the legal debate.

2. It provides Structure: Your paragraphs can be built around these thematic tensions rather than a chronological list of cases.

3. It demonstrates "The Grey Area": It proves you understand that law is an evolving argument, not a static set of rules.

Your Next Step

Next time you sit down with a core case, ignore the "Facts" section for a moment. Jump straight to the concluding paragraphs of the majority and the opening of the dissent. Find the spark where they clash. That spark is exactly where your first-class essay begins.

P.S.

For more advice on how to excel as a law student and how to write first-class law essays, you can grab a copy of my book here.