Cambridge IAL · 試験対策
Law (9084) 試験対策
An ultimate study and exam-day guide for Cambridge International AS & A Level Law (9084), featuring an evidence-based breakdown of Paper 1 and Paper 2 structures, exact command-word strategies, IRAC essay structures, and high-frequency mistakes sourced from recent examiner reports.
試験の概要
| 試験 | 時間 | 配点 | 問題数 | 配点比率 | 出題形式 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper 1: English Legal System | 1時間 30分 | 75 | — | — | — |
| Paper 2: Criminal Law | 1時間 30分 | 60 | — | — | — |
| Paper 3: Law of Contract | 1時間 30分 | 75 | — | — | — |
| Paper 4: Law of Tort | 1時間 30分 | 75 | — | — | — |
A calculator is not normally required for this subject.
- AO1: Knowledge and understanding: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of legal concepts, principles and rules. Use statutes, cases, examples and legal terminology. (40%)
- AO2: Analysis and application: Analyse and apply legal concepts, principles and rules. (30%)
- AO3: Evaluation: Evaluate legal concepts, principles and rules. Communicate legal argument coherently on the basis of evidence. (30%)
過去問と採点基準にもとづいて作成(2023–2025)。
よくあるミス
- 1high影響する配点: 10Elements of a crime (Criminal law (AS Level))
Rewriting or copy-pasting the scenario's factual text at the beginning of an answer instead of starting direct legal application.
回避方法: Omit any factual summary. Jump straight into legal analysis using the IRAC structure, referencing the relevant rules and applying them directly to the facts to earn AO2 marks immediately. - 2high影響する配点: 15Legal personnel (English legal system (AS Level))
Confusing the distinct roles, statutory origins, and appointment procedures of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) and the Law Commission.
回避方法: Explicitly recall that the JAC selects judicial candidates under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, whereas the Law Commission is an independent, statutory law-reform body set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965. - 3high影響する配点: 15Principles and sources of English law (English legal system (AS Level))
Stating that the Court of Appeal has the power to use the Practice Statement 1966 to depart from its own binding precedents.
回避方法: Clearly specify that the Practice Statement 1966 applies exclusively to the Supreme Court. The Court of Appeal remains strictly bound by its own decisions, subject only to the narrow exceptions established in Young v Bristol Aeroplane (1944). - 4high影響する配点: 12Contents of a contract (Law of contract (A Level))
Applying outdated statutes like the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) 1977 to business-to-consumer contracts instead of the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015.
回避方法: Always use the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015 for consumer contracts (e.g. digital content, consumer services, and goods) and restrict UCTA 1977 strictly to business-to-business exclusions. - 5medium影響する配点: 25Torts affecting the person (Law of tort (A Level))
Treating civil trespass to the person claims as criminal liability issues on Law of Tort papers, or mixing up civil and criminal terminology.
回避方法: Differentiate civil liability (remedied by damages on a balance of probabilities standard) from criminal prosecutions (remedied by state punishment beyond a reasonable doubt). Avoid using terms like 'guilty', 'prosecution', or 'crime' in tort questions. - 6high影響する配点: 10Offences against property (Criminal law (AS Level))
Failing to isolate and evaluate both s.9(1)(a) intent at entry and s.9(1)(b) subsequent behaviors in property scenarios, or failing to apply the two-stage test of dishonesty from R v Barton & Booth.
回避方法: Structure property theft and burglary answers systematically. Evaluate intention at the point of entry for s.9(1)(a) and subsequent acts for s.9(1)(b). When assessing dishonesty, apply the two-stage test: first establish the subjective knowledge of the defendant, and second apply the objective standard of ordinary, honest people.
本番形式の問題を解いて、AIが即座に採点とフィードバック。
無料で問題を解いてみる