So your law lecturer gave you a case or multiple cases to read and asked you to summarize them either for marks or just to help you to make studying those cases for the test or the exam easier and just lighten the overall load of studying. You’re probably feeling overwhelmed by the number of pages the case has and whether or not you’ll be able to summarize the case efficiently without feeling like you have omitted serious information. Here’s the thing, some judgments are unnecessarily long and 70% or so of what judges discuss in their judgment is not even relevant to the case before the court. You know those cases where you are reading about ten pages only for you to read those dreaded words “but this is not relevant to the matter before us.” If you haven’t seen that, brace yourself. If you have experienced this, don’t you just get annoyed? Like bro you just wasted my time. You had me reading all the things you said in passing (in law we call this obiter dictum) and then tell me it’s irrelevant meanwhile I thought it was part and parcel of the ratio decidendi (that is, the reason for the court’s decision). Sigh, be that as it may, this blog post is to assist those of you who find summarizing cases overwhelming.
I like using the FIRAC method to summarize cases. You probably know about it and already make use of it. Some people like it, some don’t. I personally think it’s effective for the following reasons:
1. It filters out what’s really important & relevant
2. It effectively breaks down the case into bite size pieces that are so rich in information.
3. It helps you to better absorb all 202 pages of a particular case and truly understand the who, what, when, why and how.
Before my love for the FIRAC method gets out of hand, let’s get into 1) what FIRAC stands for and 2) break down each component in the FIRAC method.
First of all, FIRAC stands for the following:
· Facts
· Issue
· Rule of law (some people refer to this as the principle(s) used)
· Application (some refer to this as analysis)
· Conclusion
FACTS: The facts of a case refer to what happened that led to the court having to get involved in resolving a particular dispute. Furthermore, the facts of a case include who was involved, where and how everything unfolded and how what transpired led to rights or interests being violated (or perceived to have been violated. The reason why i say perceived is because sometimes the courts will interpret the alleged violation differently as compared to the party who alleges the said violation).
With regards to SCA and ConCourt cases, the facts may include some relevant information regarding the procedural happenings in the court a quo which the present court may have to deal with. For example, in DPP v Masiya, the Magistrate's and High Court held that the common law definition of rape had to be declared unconstitutional and had to developed to include anal penetration. However, because only the Constitutional Court has the jurisdiction to declare laws unconstitutional, the matter ended up in the ConCourt and hence the constitutionality of the common law definition of rape became an issue the ConCourt had to deal with. In deal with this issue of constitutionality, the ConCourt had to look at the procedural facts that took place in the court a quo in order to deal with the issue at hand.
ISSUE: The issue refers to the problem(s) that the court has to solve. I like to refer to the issue as the question before the court or rather the question the court has to answer in order to resolve the dispute at hand. For example, in the 2007 case of DPP v Masiya one of the issues before the court (or rather one of the questions before the court) was whether or not the common law definition of rape was unconstitutional & whether or not it should be extended to INCLUDE anal penetration.
RULE OF LAW (or Principles): The rule of law refers to the law or rather the various sources of law that were used, considered, interpreted and eventually applied to arrive to the final verdict. The reasons why I say sources of law is because some presiding officers make use of both primary and secondary sources to help them arrive to their final verdict. Rule of law can include case law with a set of analogous or distinguishing facts as the present case or rather matter that is before the court, applicable legislation, the Constitution and sometimes even the judicial opinions of various jurists.
APPLICATION: This refers to how the court applied the rule of law or the principles to the set of facts in order to solve the issues (or rather answer the questions) that were before it.
For example, in the case of DPP v Masiya, the Magistrate's court had charged Masiya with rape whereas the ConCourt, after looking at S35(3)(l) of the Constitution and applying it to the set of facts, could only charge Masiya with indecent assault. (If you've read the full case, you'd understand why ;))
CONCLUSION: This is basically where the presiding officer gives the final verdict. It also includes the order the court makes and the ratio decidendi (that is, the reason for the court’s decision).
I hope the above brief explanation of the FIRAC method and will encourage you to make use of it. Before I conclude this blog post, I want to mention 2 VERY IMPORTANT things to remember when it comes to case summation:
1) Keep your summary as short as possible but also relevant. A good summary shouldn’t be longer than a page or 2 ½ pages (this obviously depends on how long the case is, how many issues the court had to deal with and of course your handwriting. Obviously the longer the case and the more issues before the court, the higher the chances are that you're going to have 2 or more pages and that’s okay. I mean considering the 202 pages of S v Makwanyane, 3 or so pages is just fine. I mean it takes skill to reduce 202 pages into 3.)
2) Make sure you don’t focus too much on the facts in your summary. Most of the facts are irrelevant anyway. How do you know if the facts you have jotted down are relevant or not? The issue or issues before court don’t even address those facts. Meaning, the issue or issues before the court will always correlate and coincide with the relevant and important facts. For example, if you have jotted down that X was wearing a red t-shirt and was listening to J Cole after he stabbed Y but the issue before the court was whether the death of Y was a case of premeditated murder, then the facts you have down are completely irrelevant. What would be considered a relevant fact in a scenario as the aforementioned is that X hid the knife he used to stab why or cleaned the crime scene before he left Y to die.
One last thing, inasmuch case summation using the FIRAC method might seem tedious, it really comes in handy when you have to answer long scenario and application type questions in a test or an exam because it enables you to give some sort of structure to your answer, especially if the facts in the scenario test question are analogous to a prescribed case you had to read. :)
Anyway, that's all from me. I hope it helps.
Yours in justice,
The Aspiring Advocate.*
Comments