Legal Reasoning and Approach to Problems
Law students often notice that lawyers think differently—they analyze issues with precision, identify key facts, and formulate arguments in distinctive ways. This approach, known as “legal reasoning,” is a fundamental skill for legal professionals. Let’s explore how lawyers reason and approach legal problems.
Introduction to Legal Reasoning
Legal reasoning, in its simplest form, is systematic, logical, coordinated, and persuasive thinking about law-related issues. It involves analyzing facts, identifying applicable legal principles, and drawing conclusions about rights, duties, and liabilities.
Why is legal reasoning distinctive? The discipline of law is peculiar and multi-perspective in nature. Lawyers are often perceived as inquisitive, argumentative, and using technical language. Understanding the reasoning processes of lawyers, legislators, and judges in making, executing, and interpreting law is essential for any law student or practitioner.
Legal reasoning forms the foundation of both judicial decision-making and legislative processes, making it central to how law operates in society.
The Language of the Law
Before examining specific techniques of legal reasoning, we must understand the unique language in which law is expressed. The language of law has several distinctive characteristics:
Law is Expressed in General Terms
Legal rules are typically formulated in general language to apply across various circumstances. Consider section 316 of the Criminal Code, which defines murder not by listing specific acts (shooting, stabbing, poisoning) but through general principles like “intent to cause death” or “intent to cause grievous harm.”¹
Case law similarly employs general principles rather than specifics. The famous case of Donoghue v. Stevenson established not just that a ginger beer manufacturer shouldn’t allow snails into bottles, but the broader principle that manufacturers of consumer goods owe a duty of care to final consumers.²
While general language is common, law can also be highly specific when necessary. Section 6(5) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution precisely lists the courts to which the judicial powers of the Federation are vested, a topic further explored in the sources of Nigerian law.
Use of Abstract Concepts
Legal language employs abstract concepts that may differ from ordinary meaning. Terms like “contract,” “company,” “law,” “rule of law,” “legal personality,” “ownership,” and “possession” have specific legal meanings. These technical terms help achieve economy of words—a single concept can encapsulate complex ideas that would otherwise require lengthy explanations.
Other Features of Legal Language
Legal language has several other distinctive characteristics:
- Use of common words with uncommon meanings (e.g., a lawyer might say “matter” instead of “case”)
- Latin and French words and phrases (consensus ad idem, ultra vires, etc.)
- Archaic English words (“hereinbefore,” “aforementioned,” etc.)
- Legal jargon or “argot” (e.g., “my brief has not been perfected” meaning “I haven’t been paid”)
- Formal, resonant expressions (“the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”)
Many of these features evolved from historical development of legal systems rather than rational necessity. While some formalities give legal proceedings seriousness and objectivity, excessive formalism can mystify the law for non-lawyers.
Methods of Legal Reasoning
Having explored legal language, let’s examine the reasoning methods typically employed by legal professionals.
Principles and Rules
A legal principle is an established proposition so clear it cannot be contradicted except by a clearer proposition. Principles serve as standards for evaluating legislation, decisions, and arguments.
Legal rules are specific applications of principles. The relationship between principles and rules can be seen in natural justice, which comprises two principles: audi alterem patem (a party must not be condemned unheard) and nemo judex in causa sua (one should not judge their own case). From these principles, numerous specific rules have developed.
These principles and rules are explored in greater detail in our guide on the various aspects and classifications of law.
Legal Rhetoric
Rhetoric is the art of persuasion through writing or speech. In law, rhetoric takes distinctive forms. Lawyers employ forensic rhetoric to persuade courts to accept their viewpoint, while judges use deliberative rhetoric to arrive at rationalized decisions.
The principal rhetorical device in law is the appeal to authority—citing existing judicial or statutory authorities to justify positions. This requires knowledge of law sources, their content, and the ground rules for using them, which is further discussed in our guide on legal research and source materials.
Legal rhetoric isn’t a natural gift but an acquired skill developed through education and experience. As Justice Alexander noted: “Few people realize under what pressure successful barristers live… The busy barrister is on the qui vive all the time. In court he has to be alert every moment and is watched by a highly trained expert who pounces upon his slightest mistake.”³
Legal Logic
Logic helps lawyers reason clearly, express themselves precisely, and detect flaws in opponents’ arguments. Legal reasoning employs several types of logic:
Syllogism (Deductive Logic)
Syllogism is a deductive form of argument that starts with a major premise, introduces a minor premise, and reaches a conclusion. For example:
- Major premise: Any man who rapes a woman will be imprisoned (from statute)
- Minor premise: Mr. Showboy has raped Miss Pelemo (facts of the case)
- Conclusion: Mr. Showboy must be imprisoned
Deductive reasoning moves from general to specific. However, it has limitations—it may be logically valid but factually untrue, and incorrect premises lead to incorrect conclusions.
Inductive Logic
Inductive reasoning moves from specific to general, building cases from particular instances to general propositions. When a lawyer cites case law, they’re using inductive logic—examining cases with similar features to establish an overarching principle.
Consider a lawyer arguing in a negligence case:
- In Donoghue v. Stevenson, a party injured through another’s negligence received damages
- Similar outcomes occurred in Dulie v. White & Sons, Scarsbrook v. Mason, etc.
- These cases share features with the current case, so the defendant should pay damages
Analogical Reasoning
Analogical reasoning involves identifying cases with similar facts and using them as precedents. It’s not strictly logical but rather a looser form of reasoning that raises broader issues.
As Lord Diplock noted in analyzing cases: “The method adopted at this stage of the process is analytical and inductive… This leads to a proposition which can be stated… A duty of care has been held to exist wherever the conduct and the relationship possessed each of the characteristics A, B, C, D, etc.”
Understanding these forms of legal reasoning is essential for effective legal writing and argumentation.
Legal Reasoning vs. Practical Reasoning
While legal logic is important, legal reasoning extends beyond formal logic. Practical reasoning considers various factors and comes to justifiable conclusions without necessarily following strict logical forms. As some have noted, what makes common law great is “less reason rather than an endless succession of reason”—the constant process of supporting legal rules with reasoning and modifying them when necessary.
Logic and Interest of Justice
Today, courts can depart from strict rhetoric or logic if the interests of justice demand it. As stated in Chinwendu v. Mbamali: “Care should be taken by the court always not to sacrifice justice on the altar of technicalities. The time is no more when disputes are dealt with on technicalities and not on the merit.”⁴
Courts now prioritize justice over technical victories. Legal reasoning, including rhetoric and logic, operates to the extent it doesn’t cause miscarriage of justice. Lawyers, as ministers in the temple of justice, must place facts before the court that assist in effective dispute resolution, whether favorable to their case or not.
This understanding of law’s function in promoting justice relates to the broader concept of law in its social context and the various methods of social control through law.
Conclusion
Legal reasoning is a distinctive approach to analyzing problems that combines specialized language, principles, rules, rhetoric, and various forms of logic. While it may seem mysterious to outsiders, it’s a skill that can be learned and refined through study and practice.
As a law student, understanding these techniques will help you “think like a lawyer”—the essential skill that distinguishes legal education from other disciplines. By mastering these methods, you’ll be better equipped to analyze cases, construct arguments, and ultimately serve the cause of justice.
To further develop your legal reasoning skills, explore our resources on judicial process, legislation, and legal research methods.
