A practical legal-article guide for Philippine law school exams and the Bar

Why structure matters in Philippine law essays

Philippine law essay questions (especially “bar-type” problem questions) reward clarity, completeness, and correct legal reasoning under time pressure. Even when you know the law, you can lose points if your answer is:

disorganized (jumping between issues),
conclusory (answering “yes/no” without why),
overly theoretical (long lectures, little application), or
missing key elements (e.g., elements of a crime, requisites of a contract, jurisdictional facts, timelines).

That’s why structured frameworks like IRAC and ALAC are used: they force your writing to match how examiners grade—issue spotting + correct rule + correct application + correct conclusion.

IRAC vs ALAC in a Philippine setting

IRAC (Issue – Rule – Application – Conclusion)

Best when: the “Issue” needs careful framing (multiple sub-issues; remedies; procedural steps), or you want to show methodical reasoning.

Issue: What legal question must be resolved?
Rule: What law/jurisprudence governs? What are the elements/requisites/tests?
Application: Apply each element/test to the given facts (and address counterarguments).
Conclusion: Short, direct result.

ALAC (Answer – Legal Basis – Application – Conclusion)

Best when: bar-type questions want an immediate “Yes/No + Why,” and time is limited.

Answer: Direct response first (Yes/No; Valid/Invalid; Liable/Not liable).
Legal Basis: Cite the controlling provision/doctrine + key requisites.
Application: Apply requisites to facts; address defenses/exceptions.
Conclusion: Tight wrap-up (sometimes combined with Answer).

In Philippine exams, ALAC often scores better for time-pressured checking because it front-loads the conclusion while still requiring legal basis and analysis.

The core principle: “Element-by-element application”

In Philippine law problem questions, the most consistent high-scoring technique is:

Identify the controlling rule and its elements/requisites; then
Apply each element to the facts in a way that shows:
- what fact satisfies (or fails) the element,
- what ambiguity exists, and
- how the ambiguity is resolved by doctrine.

This matters across subjects:

Criminal Law: apply each element of the felony/offense; then defenses/justifying circumstances/qualifying circumstances.
Civil Law: requisites (consent/object/cause; damages; obligations; modes of extinguishment; ownership/possession).
Remedial Law: timelines, jurisdiction, proper remedy, procedural requisites, effect of noncompliance.
Labor: elements of employer-employee relationship; just/authorized causes; due process (substantive + procedural).
Tax: nature of tax, exemptions construed strictissimi juris, requisites for refund, assessments/protest periods.
Constitutional: tests (strict scrutiny/intermediate/rational basis), requisites for valid searches/seizures, due process/equal protection analyses.

How to write “Issues” the Philippine way (Issue-spotting technique)

A common weakness is writing vague issues like: “Whether X is liable.” Better is to frame issues that match doctrinal checkpoints:

Good issue framing patterns

Validity: “Whether the contract is void/voidable/unenforceable given ___.”
Liability: “Whether A incurred criminal/civil liability for ___ considering ___.”
Remedy: “Whether the proper remedy is ___ and whether the court has jurisdiction.”
Procedure: “Whether the pleading is the correct mode, filed on time, and accompanied by required proof.”
Rights: “Whether the act violates ___ right under ___ standard/test.”

Use sub-issues when needed

If the question is dense, break it down. Example (Remedial):

Whether the court has jurisdiction.
Whether the chosen remedy is proper.
Whether the filing is timely.
Whether requirements for issuance/grant are met.

Examiners award points per issue. Sub-issues = more opportunities to earn.

“Rule” writing in Philippine exams: what counts as a legal basis

A Philippine “Rule” paragraph usually draws from:

Statute/Code: Constitution, Civil Code, Revised Penal Code, special laws, Labor Code, NIRC, Corporation Code/RCC, Family Code, etc.
Rules of Court / procedural rules: especially for remedies, evidence, jurisdiction.
Jurisprudential doctrine: tests, definitions, controlling rules, exceptions.
Administrative rules (when relevant): e.g., labor regulations, tax regs—used carefully, subordinate to statute.

What to include in the Rule

The doctrine/test relevant to the issue; and
The elements/requisites you will apply.

What to avoid

Long treatises.
Unnecessary history.
Copying the entire provision.
Multiple unrelated doctrines “just in case.”

Rule writing should be “targeted”—only what you will actually apply.

“Application” writing: the difference between passing and top-tier answers

Application is where most points are earned and lost.

The 4-step application method (works across subjects)

For each element/requisite/test factor:

State the element in your own words.
Point to the relevant fact(s).
Explain why the fact satisfies/fails the element.
Address an exception/defense if plausible.

Use both sides when facts are ambiguous

If facts allow two interpretations, do a short balanced analysis:

“If ___, then ___; however, given ___, the better view is ___.”

This shows legal judgment without over-writing.

Don’t argue facts not given

You may infer reasonable implications, but avoid inventing major facts. Anchor every inference to something stated or strongly implied.

Conclusions: short, specific, and outcome-focused

A conclusion should be one to three lines and should:

directly answer the question,
state the legal consequence (e.g., “liable for ___,” “action will be dismissed,” “evidence inadmissible,” “contract voidable”), and
(when relevant) state the remedy/next step.

Avoid “Therefore, it is submitted…” filler.

Templates you can memorize

IRAC Template (single issue)

ISSUE: Whether ____ given ____. RULE: Under ____, ____ requires: (1) ____, (2) ____, (3) ____. APPLICATION: Here, (1) ____ because ____. (2) ____ because ____. (3) ____ because ____. Any exception/defense: ____. CONCLUSION: Thus, ____.

ALAC Template (single issue)

ANSWER: Yes/No. _____. LEGAL BASIS: ____ governs. The requisites/elements are: (1) ____, (2) ____, (3) ____. APPLICATION: (1) ____ is present/absent because ____. (2) ____ because ____. (3) ____ because ____. CONCLUSION: Hence, ____.

Multi-issue formatting (recommended)

Use headings or numbering:

Issue 1: … (ALAC/IRAC)
Issue 2: … (ALAC/IRAC)
Issue 3: … (ALAC/IRAC)

Subject-by-subject guidance on using IRAC/ALAC

Constitutional Law

What wins points:

Identify the right involved (speech, privacy, due process, equal protection, unreasonable searches, etc.).
Choose the correct standard/test (e.g., scrutiny levels; requisites for warrantless searches; void-for-vagueness/overbreadth where appropriate).
Apply test factors to facts.

ALAC tip: Give the bottom-line first (“Unconstitutional because…”) then name the test and apply its elements.

Criminal Law

What wins points:

Correct crime/offense (including qualifying/privileged mitigating circumstances if relevant).
Elements of the offense.
Stages, participation, and defenses (justifying/exempting/mitigating).
Civil liability ex delicto when asked or naturally follows.

Application tip: Element-by-element; then add a short paragraph for defenses.

Civil Law (Obligations/Contracts/Property/Family/Succession)

What wins points:

Requisites (validity/enforceability/voidness/voidability).
Proper classification (e.g., void vs voidable → effects differ).
Proper remedy (rescission, annulment, reformation, specific performance, damages).
For property: identify whether issue is ownership vs possession, and the correct action/remedy.

IRAC tip: Use IRAC when multiple doctrinal branches exist (e.g., different effects depending on classification).

Remedial Law

What wins points most:

Proper remedy and jurisdiction (court/tribunal, original/appellate).
Periods and procedural requisites (verification/certification, affidavits, attachments, service, exhaustion where applicable).
Standards for relief (probable cause, grave abuse of discretion, requisites for injunction, etc.).
Effects of errors (dismissal vs curable defect; fatal vs formal).

ALAC tip: Start with “The proper remedy is ___; filing in ___ is improper because ___.”

Evidence

What wins points:

Relevance + admissibility (hearsay, best evidence, authentication).
Exclusions (privileged communication, illegally obtained evidence).
Burden of proof/presumptions where relevant.

Application tip: Identify the exhibit/testimony and run it through the rule and exceptions.

Labor Law

What wins points:

Determine employer-employee relationship (control test indicators).
For dismissal: substantive ground + procedural due process.
Monetary claims: basis and limitations; who has jurisdiction.

ALAC tip: “Illegal dismissal” or “valid dismissal” first, then discuss ground + due process.

Taxation

What wins points:

Nature of imposition, situs, taxpayer classification, or exemption rule.
For refunds/assessments: mandatory periods and administrative prerequisites.
Strict construction of exemptions; lifeblood doctrine balanced with due process in assessments.

Application tip: Always anchor to requisites and periods—tax is procedural-heavy in problem questions.

Legal Ethics / Professional Responsibility

What wins points:

Identify duty breached (to client, court, public).
Conflict-of-interest analysis.
Confidentiality, candor, competence, diligence.
Appropriate consequence/remedy (discipline, disqualification, contempt implications if relevant).

ALAC tip: “Improper/Proper” first, then specify which duty and why.

How to cite law and cases in Philippine exam writing (practical approach)

You usually do not need perfect citation format, but you must be identifiable and accurate:

Statutes/Rules: name the code/rule and the topic (e.g., “Rules of Court on jurisdiction/appeal,” “Civil Code on obligations,” “Revised Penal Code on felonies,” etc.).
Jurisprudence: cite the doctrine by name and describe it accurately. If you remember details, you can add case identifiers (G.R. No., date), but accuracy matters more than completeness.

High-scoring habit: cite fewer authorities, but apply them correctly.

Common mistakes (and how to fix them)

1) “Pure conclusion” answers

Bad: “Yes, A is liable.” Fix: Add legal basis + element-by-element application.

2) Dumping everything you know

Bad: multiple doctrines with no connection to facts. Fix: One governing rule/test + exceptions you actually apply.

3) Missing the remedy/jurisdiction (especially in Remedial)

Fix: Always ask: “What is being challenged, in what forum, by what mode, within what period?”

4) Ignoring defenses/exceptions suggested by facts

Fix: After applying elements, scan for likely defenses (self-defense; consent; good faith; authority; procedural bars; exceptions to hearsay/search rules).

5) Not using the facts

Fix: Every paragraph should mention at least one relevant fact.

Exam technique: time, length, and scoring strategy

Philippine essay checking is often point-allocation by issue/element. Practical strategy:

Answer first (ALAC) when pressed.
Use short, segmented paragraphs (easy to check).
Prioritize issue coverage over elegance.
Write in “checkable units”: one element → one fact → one conclusion.

A strong default pacing is:

1–2 lines for Answer/Issue,
3–6 lines for Rule,
6–12 lines for Application,
1–2 lines for Conclusion, adjusted depending on complexity.

Worked mini-examples (structure demonstrations)

Example 1 (ALAC – Criminal)

Question (illustrative): A punched B once; B fell, hit his head, and died. Is A criminally liable for homicide?

ANSWER: Yes, A may be liable for homicide if the punch is the proximate cause of death. LEGAL BASIS: Criminal liability attaches when the accused’s act is the cause of the injury resulting in death, and the felony is committed with the requisite intent or through culpable negligence depending on facts. APPLICATION: A intentionally punched B. Although A may not have intended to kill, the punch set in motion the events leading to B’s fall and fatal head injury. Unless an independent, unforeseeable cause breaks the causal chain, the death is attributable to A’s act. Depending on surrounding circumstances (force used, foreseeability of harm), liability may be for intentional felony or for a lesser offense if intent to cause fatal harm is negated and negligence better fits. CONCLUSION: A is criminally liable, at least for a felony resulting in death, subject to the precise appreciation of intent and causation.

Example 2 (IRAC – Remedial)

Question (illustrative): A filed the wrong remedy in the wrong court. What happens?

ISSUE: Whether the action should be dismissed due to improper remedy and lack of jurisdiction. RULE: Courts require that the proper remedy be used and that jurisdiction over the subject matter be present; lack of jurisdiction is generally fatal and cannot be cured by consent, while use of an improper remedy may warrant dismissal or denial depending on the defect. APPLICATION: If A filed in a court without subject matter jurisdiction, the case must be dismissed. Even if the court has jurisdiction, an improper mode (wrong pleading/remedy) can still result in dismissal/denial, especially if periods and requisites were not complied with. CONCLUSION: The case will be dismissed or denied, primarily if jurisdiction is lacking, and otherwise for improper remedy or procedural defects.

(Real exam answers should specify the exact remedy/court/period based on the given facts.)

Choosing between IRAC and ALAC quickly

Use this mental shortcut:

If the question asks “Is X liable/valid/proper?” → ALAC (answer now, justify next).
If the question asks “Discuss,” “Resolve,” “Determine rights and remedies,” or has multiple procedural layers → IRAC (or ALAC with clearly numbered issues).

In practice, many top answers are hybrids: they use ALAC overall, but run an IRAC-style “Issue” line for each sub-issue.

A “ready-to-write” checklist before you finalize an answer

Before moving on, confirm you have:

✅ Direct Answer (or clearly framed Issue)
✅ Correct legal basis (law + elements/test)
✅ Element-by-element application to facts
✅ At least one defense/exception addressed when suggested
✅ Clear conclusion + remedy/effect when relevant
✅ Clean structure (numbered issues, short paragraphs)

Bottom line

IRAC and ALAC are not about sounding formal—they are scoring tools. In Philippine law essays, the most reliable high-scoring approach is:

ALAC for speed and checkability,
IRAC for complex issue framing,
always anchored on requisites + element-by-element application.

If you want, paste a sample Philippine bar-type question you’re working on and I’ll answer it using both IRAC and ALAC so you can see the difference in style and scoring clarity.