Analysis and reporting - Drafting a research note or memoran...

Learning Outcomes

This article explains drafting research notes or memoranda, including:

• identifying client objectives and issues, and scoping the research task appropriately
• structuring a memorandum for internal use (issues, conclusions, analysis, recommendations)
• linking primary sources to facts and presenting clear, supported advice
• recording the research trail, updating the law, and citing authorities accurately
• avoiding common drafting pitfalls and adopting a professional tone suitable for internal audiences

SQE2 Syllabus

For SQE2, you are required to understand the principles and techniques of drafting research notes and memoranda from a practical standpoint, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• identifying and stating the client’s objectives and legal issues in practical scenarios
• researching and applying relevant legal principles, case law, and statutory provisions
• summarising, analysing, and applying legal findings to specific factual scenarios
• presenting advice in a clear, accurate, and practical written format suitable for colleagues or clients
• using an appropriate structure, tone, and referencing style in your written report

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What is the main objective of a legal research note or memorandum in practice?
2. Name three essential sections that should always be included in a research memorandum for a supervisor.
3. Why is it important to link legal principles to the specific facts of the scenario?
4. What are the principal differences, in style and tone, between a client advice letter and an internal research note?

Introduction

Legal research notes and memoranda are a common assessment in the SQE2 exam and are fundamental tools in practice. You may be asked to produce an internal memorandum or note for a supervising solicitor, summarising your research and setting out advice. The required structure, analysis, and presentation differ from those in formal client correspondence and demand a focused, professional approach.

A well-constructed research note allows a colleague to quickly identify the main issues, understand your analysis, and take informed decisions. Clarity, accuracy, and suitability for the intended audience are essential throughout.

Structure of a Research Note or Memorandum

Legal research notes for internal use should be concise, logical, and suitable for rapid reference. The standard sections in most SQE2-style research memoranda are as follows:

1. Heading: Clearly state the addressee, sender, date, subject, and file reference, if any.
2. Summary of Instructions: Briefly state what you have been asked to do and any key client objectives.
3. Issues: Identify the specific legal and factual questions arising from the scenario.
4. Summary of Conclusion(s): Offer a succinct answer to each issue based on your analysis (this often follows straight after issues for quick reference).
5. Analysis: This is the core section—apply relevant law and facts methodically, using references to statutes and case law where appropriate.
6. Recommendations/Advice: Suggest any next steps, practical advice, or further actions.
7. References: Include a list of primary and secondary sources relied on, following firm style.
8. Author, Signature/Initials, Date: End with your name and date.

Key Term: Research Memorandum
A concise, structured legal document prepared for internal use, presenting research and advice on specific legal issues for colleagues or supervisors.

Key Term: Issues Section
The part of a memorandum which breaks down the scenario into numbered legal and factual questions to be answered.

Key Term: Analysis Section
The section where the relevant law is applied to the facts, demonstrating how the legal principles answer the issues identified.

Strong memoranda also manage scope and assumptions. Make explicit any constraints, such as limited instructions, time, or missing documents (e.g., “Assumes the contract contains no express variation clause beyond the disciplinary policy”). Note any facts that are material but unverified, and indicate whether further factual enquiries are required.

Your references section should make it easy for a colleague to verify your sources. Where using online databases (e.g., Westlaw, Lexis Library, BAILII, legislation.gov.uk), note the database name, the document citation and title, and the date accessed. For case law, include the neutral citation and preferred report citation(s). For legislation, include section numbers and the version consulted (with a note if you viewed “current” or “point in time” text).

Worked Example 1.1

Question:
You receive these instructions: “Our client was dismissed after rejecting a change to her contract. Is the employer's action lawful?” Briefly outline valid Issues, Conclusion, and Analysis sections for your research memorandum.

Answer:
Issues:

• Was there a contractual right to impose the change?
• Was the dismissal potentially unfair under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996)?
• If unfair dismissal is in play, did the employer have a potentially fair reason and follow a fair procedure (including consultation)?

Summary of Conclusion(s):

• The employer likely lacked a contractual right to unilaterally alter terms absent an express variation clause and genuine agreement.
• The dismissal is likely to be unfair under ERA 1996 s.94–s.98, subject to whether “some other substantial reason” (SOSR) was properly relied upon, consultation occurred, and alternatives were considered.

Analysis:

• Contract variation requires agreement; imposing a fundamental change without consent is a repudiatory breach. Check if any express flexibility clause exists and whether its exercise was reasonable and in good faith. Absent that, the employee could refuse the change without necessarily resigning.
• On dismissal, SOSR (ERA 1996 s.98(1)(b)) can justify termination for business reorganisations, but fairness depends on reasonableness of the employer’s decision and process (including meaningful consultation, exploring alternatives, and allowing reasonable time). The ACAS Code and case law emphasise consultation and proportionality. Failure to consult or consider less drastic measures (e.g., trial periods, redeployment) tends to render the dismissal unfair even where SOSR is established.

Writing Style and Tone

Your primary audience for a research note or memorandum is your supervisor or another legal professional, not the client. The tone must therefore be formal, detached, and analytical. Avoid emotional language or persuasive tone—your role is to inform, not to advocate or sell. Structure sentences concisely, avoid redundancy, and use plain legal English.

• Use headings and numbered issues for clarity.
• Adopt the active voice where appropriate; reserve the passive for neutral, objective statements (e.g., “The allegations are denied”).
• Keep sentences short and avoid tautology and archaic expressions.
• Avoid jargon unless it is standard legal terminology and defined; use capitalised defined terms consistently.
• Reference all sources accurately using standard citations (neutral citation, preferred report, statutory sections) and include date accessed for online sources.

Include inclusive and respectful language. Maintain ethical standards in internal reporting and do not conceal limitations, adverse authorities, or material uncertainties.

Key Term: Internal Audience
Persons within the legal practice (e.g., supervising solicitors, other lawyers) for whom research memoranda are prepared, as opposed to external clients.

Linking Law to Facts

One of the most frequent reasons candidates lose marks in SQE2 research notes is failure to explain how the law applies to the facts. Legal principles must be expressly connected to the scenario—do not merely recite case law or statutory extracts.

Structure your analysis around a simple framework such as Issue–Rule–Application–Conclusion (IRAC). Signpost key facts that drive the analysis (dates, parties, contractual clauses, notices served, procedural steps), and explain why each authority affects the outcome. Use pinpoint citations where possible.

Worked Example 1.2

Question:
A client running a shop faces liability for a slip on ice outside her entrance. You find the local council is responsible for the pavement. How should this be presented in the Analysis section?

Answer:
The Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 imposes duties on occupiers regarding visitors to premises under their control, but the public highway is not part of the shop’s premises. Control of the pavement generally rests with the highway authority; their duty arises under the Highways Act 1980 (e.g., s.41 maintenance). On authority, users of public rights of way are not “visitors” of the occupier for OLA purposes (see, for example, McGeown v Northern Ireland Housing Executive [1995] 1 AC 233). Therefore, our client owes no duty under the 1957 Act for the accident on the pavement. Any liability would fall to the highway authority subject to statutory defences.

Presenting Conclusions and Recommendations

Your conclusions should answer each issue expressly, with clear reasoning. Avoid hedging language such as “it is possible that…” unless the law is genuinely unclear. When the position is uncertain, explain the competing interpretations and provide a reasoned preference.

Where practical steps are needed, state them directly and allocate responsibilities and timeframes. Recommendations add value and demonstrate awareness of the client’s or firm’s objectives. Include:

• options, advantages, disadvantages, and risk–benefit considerations
• any further factual enquiries or documents needed
• any immediate protective steps (e.g., limitation, holding measures, early correspondence)
• whether ADR or negotiation is appropriate given the client’s objectives and resources
• a short implementation plan (who, what, by when) suitable for the file

If the matter is sufficiently material, record that the law was updated and when, and flag further updates required (e.g., monitoring for new appellate authority).

Worked Example 1.3

Question:
Your supervisor asks: “Does the Working Time Directive limit on weekly working hours apply directly to our UK client?” Draft concise Issues, Conclusions, and practical Recommendations.

Answer:
Issues:

• What is the current position on maximum weekly working time under UK law?
• What is the relevance of Directive 2003/88/EC post-Brexit?

Summary of Conclusion(s):

-UK law is set by the Working Time Regulations 1998 (as amended), which implement limits on weekly working time and rest entitlements. The Directive provides background but does not apply directly post-Brexit; UK regulations govern.

Analysis & Recommendations:

-Confirm the client’s sector-specific exemptions and any valid opt-out arrangements. Ensure opt-out agreements meet regulatory requirements and record-keeping is robust. Note that while EU Directive 2003/88/EC remains a useful interpretive background, it is not directly enforceable against UK employers post-Brexit. Advise an audit of scheduling practices, opt-outs, and rest breaks under the current UK regulations, and monitor any domestic reforms affecting retained EU-derived employment law.

Worked Example 1.4

Question:
The partner needs to know whether an eye-test must be provided to a self-employed contractor using display screen equipment at your client’s premises. How would you structure your memo’s core Analysis?

Answer:
Issues: What duties arise under UK health and safety law for display screen users, and do they extend to non-employees on site?

Analysis:

• The Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations 1992 impose duties on employers in respect of “users,” typically employees who habitually use DSE. Employers owe broader duties under s.2 and s.3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of employees and non-employees affected by the undertaking.
• A self‑employed contractor may not be entitled to employee-specific entitlements (like paid eye tests under DSE Regulations) unless contractually agreed, but the client must still assess risks and implement control measures reasonably practicable for persons on site (e.g., ergonomic assessments, information and training, safe workstation setup).
• Recommendation: conduct a risk assessment covering contractors’ DSE use; offer reasonable adjustments and information; consider contractual provisions on health surveillance or reimbursement for eyesight tests if DSE use is substantial and habitual, to align with best practice and mitigate risk under HSWA s.3.

Worked Example 1.5

Question:
You have identified a key case supporting your client’s position. How should you verify and present its current status in the memo?

Answer:

• Use Westlaw “Case Analysis” or Lexis Case Overview to check the subsequent judicial history: note whether the case has been applied, distinguished, approved, disapproved, reversed, or overruled, and list recent citations.
• If in print, cross-check with Current Law Case Citator and, for older cases, The Digest or English Reports indexes.
• Present a short “Status” note after your primary proposition (e.g., “Still good law: applied by [case], distinguished by [case]; no overruling. Pinpoints: [paragraph].”), and include parallel citations where available.

Worked Example 1.6

Question:
Your colleague asks you to trace whether a statutory instrument relevant to your matter is current. Outline a concise update approach suitable for the memo.

Answer:

• Check the text and status on legislation.gov.uk and note the status icons (in force, prospective, revoked).
• Where available, consult Westlaw’s “Overview Document” and “Table of Amendments” for historic, current, and future versions.
• For historical tracking, use Current Law Legislation Citator for amendments, revocations, and related cases; if necessary, check Halsbury’s Statutory Instruments and service binder monthly surveys.
• Summarise as: “SI 20XX/XXXX: current as amended by SI 20YY/ZZZZ, with partial revocation of reg. X; no pending commencement provisions.”

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Exam Warning

For SQE2, failing to structure your memorandum or omitting clear conclusions and practical recommendations will cost significant marks. Marks are also lost for merely repeating the facts or summarising law without proper application.

Typical pitfalls include:

• omitting a short executive summary (issues and conclusions) at the front
• failing to state scope, assumptions, and any material unknowns
• citing only secondary sources and ignoring primary authorities
• neglecting to update case law and legislation before concluding
• superficial recommendations lacking timeframes or allocation of responsibility
• imprecise or verbose prose (overuse of passive voice, tautology, archaisms)
• weak cross-referencing and inadequate citations (no neutral citation, missing pinpoint)
• mixing client-facing tone with internal analytic tone, or failing to adopt inclusive language
• not recording the research trail (sources, searches, dates accessed)

Revision Tip

Before submitting your memorandum, check each issue: Have you answered it directly? Is every statement supported by law or fact? Is your advice practical and concise?

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• adopt a clear internal structure: Heading, Instructions, Issues, Conclusions, Analysis, Recommendations, References
• link law to facts using issue-led signposting and IRAC; include pinpoint citations
• present concise conclusions up front and practical recommendations with timeframes
• record the research trail and update the law using reputable tools (Westlaw/Lexis/BAILII/legislation.gov.uk)
• use formal, neutral tone for internal audiences; avoid tautology and archaic language
• include scope and assumptions; flag material uncertainties and further enquiries
• verify the current status of cases and instruments; include a brief status note
• prepare references suitable for rapid verification and file defensibility

Key Terms and Concepts

• Research Memorandum
• Issues Section
• Analysis Section
• Internal Audience