Law Dissertation Examples

Introduction

A law dissertation is a substantial piece of academic research that sets out a clear question, examines relevant legal sources, and presents a reasoned argument. It blends legal doctrine with careful analysis of institutions, policies, and, where suitable, real-world case studies. Strong work typically shows a precise focus, a sound method, and clear writing that follows formal academic rules.

This guide uses public procurement corruption in Ghana and Kenya as a running example. It shows how to frame a question, select and assess sources, compare legal frameworks, and build chapters that answer the question set.

What You'll Learn

• How to frame a precise, researchable question and set a workable scope
• How to structure a law dissertation from introduction to conclusion
• How to use primary sources (constitutions, statutes, cases) and secondary sources (journals, reports)
• How to apply a comparative method using Ghana and Kenya’s procurement regimes
• How to analyse enforcement bodies and statutory design
• How to incorporate case studies such as Goldenberg, Anglo-Leasing, and Alfred Woyome
• How to present data (e.g., CPI figures) with care and balance
• How to follow academic standards on style, referencing, and ethics

Core Concepts

Choosing a focused research question

The question drives the entire project. It should be specific, answerable using legal sources, and limited enough to handle within your word count.

• Example question for a comparative dissertation: Do anti-corruption laws and institutions in Ghana and Kenya reduce corruption in public procurement?
• Scope: Limit the timeframe (e.g., 2003–2015), the legal instruments (Ghana’s Public Procurement Act 2003 (Act 663); Kenya’s Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2005), and the institutions assessed (e.g., Ghana’s Public Procurement Authority; Kenya’s Public Procurement Oversight Authority and anti-corruption bodies).
• Feasibility: Confirm that official texts, case law, reports, and credible data are accessible.

Tips for refinement:

• Focus on how law operates in practice, not just what the text says.
• Set clear sub-questions (statutory design, institutional powers, enforcement results).
• Define your terms (e.g., “corruption”, “public procurement”, “effectiveness”).

Methodology: comparative legal research and sources

State what you will examine and how.

• Approach: A micro-comparative method works well here—compare equivalent legal rules and institutions across two jurisdictions with similar legal traditions (both Ghana and Kenya are common law systems with English as a working language).
• Primary sources:
  Constitutions (e.g., Ghana 1992 Constitution, Article 35(8)), statutes (Ghana’s PPA 2003 (Act 663); Kenya’s PPDA 2005), regulations, official decisions, parliamentary debates, audit reports.
• Secondary sources:
  Academic journals and books; credible reports by organisations such as Transparency International; government white papers; reputable media investigations.
• Data:
  Procurement as a share of GDP (often 10–25% globally; around 11% Kenya, 14% Ghana in various reports); CPI scores; institutional performance reports. Explain the limits of such data and avoid over-claiming.
• Limitations:
  Time, access to records, and uneven reporting across countries. Make these limits explicit.

Legal frameworks and institutions in context

A well-built comparative chapter maps the legal terrain before assessing performance.

• Ghana:
  • Constitutional direction against corruption (1992 Constitution, Article 35(8))
  • Public Procurement Act 2003 (Act 663) setting common rules and procedures
  • Oversight and enforcement bodies (e.g., Public Procurement Authority, Auditor-General, specialised anti-corruption units)
• Kenya:
  • Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2005 and the Public Procurement Oversight Authority (now succeeded by newer bodies, but your study period may focus on the 2005 framework)
  • Anti-corruption agencies (e.g., the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission during the relevant period)
• Assessment focus: statutory clarity; independence and resourcing of bodies; complaint and review mechanisms; sanctions; follow-through in courts.

Structuring the dissertation and academic standards

Typical structure:

1. Introduction (topic, question, scope, contribution, method)
2. Literature review (what has been argued; where your question sits)
3. Methodology (comparative approach; sources; limits)
4. Legal framework chapters (country-by-country mapping)
5. Case studies and analysis (application of law to facts)
6. Discussion (comparison across countries; strengths and gaps)
7. Conclusion and recommendations

Academic standards:

• Use clear, precise language; define technical terms when first used.
• Follow your school’s referencing style (many UK law schools use OSCOLA).
• Maintain accurate citations to primary law and authoritative commentary.
• Address ethics if you use interviews or sensitive materials.

Key Examples or Case Studies

These examples show how to connect legal rules with outcomes in public procurement.

• Kenya: Goldenberg scandal

  • Approx. US$850 million lost through export compensation fraud.
  • A commission of inquiry reported findings; prosecutions did not follow through as expected.
  • Relevance to dissertation: tests the adequacy of procurement rules and anti-corruption bodies, including investigatory powers and prosecutorial action.

• Kenya: Anglo-Leasing scandal

  • About US$21 million paid on a fraudulent passport equipment contract, with further linked contracts alleged.
  • Senior officials were implicated in reporting at the time.
  • Relevance: illustrates contract award irregularities, due diligence failures, and oversight responses.

• Ghana: Alfred Woyome judgment debt case

  • Over US$11 million paid; the Supreme Court later ordered repayment; criminal proceedings ended in acquittal.
  • Relevance: probes state contracting, legal advice within ministries, and enforcement follow-up.

Macro context to support your analysis:

• Procurement is a large public spend (often 10–25% of GDP; around 11% in Kenya and 14% in Ghana in available estimates).
• Reported concentration of corruption in procurement is high (e.g., estimates that a large share of overall corruption occurs through procurement: figures of roughly 80% in Kenyan estimates and around 70% in Ghana cited by scholars such as Dagbanja).
• CPI scores for many Sub-Saharan countries remain below 50/100, indicating ongoing problems. Treat CPI as an indicator, not a legal measure.

What to show in your write-up:

• State the legal rules in force at the time of each case.
• Track institutional steps: investigation, review, prosecution, audit queries, parliamentary scrutiny.
• Compare planned sanctions with actual outcomes.
• Draw cautious conclusions about enforcement gaps and where legal design or resourcing may affect results.

Practical Applications

Turn the core ideas into an actionable plan for your dissertation.

• Frame and refine your question

  • Draft three versions; choose the one with the clearest scope and best source base.
  • Specify period, statutes, institutions, and case studies.

• Build a research map

  • List primary sources: constitutions, statutes, regulations, case law, official reports.
  • List secondary sources: academic texts, credible reports, and data sets.
  • Note where to access each source (official gazettes, law reports, parliamentary websites, institutional archives).

• Set your comparative grid

  • Create headings that match across countries: procurement rules, oversight mechanisms, sanctions, review procedures, court remedies.
  • Enter concise notes and citations for each cell.

• Analyse with discipline

  • Distinguish what the law says from how it is implemented.
  • Use case studies to test whether statutory aims are realised.
  • Where you use figures (e.g., CPI, GDP shares), explain methodology limits and avoid treating them as proof of causation.

• Write to length and plan your chapters

  • Allocate words by chapter; keep margins for revisions.
  • Use signposting at the start and end of each chapter to link back to the question.

• Referencing, style, and integrity

  • Follow your school’s style guide (e.g., OSCOLA) for citations and footnotes.
  • Keep a source log with full references and document versions.
  • Disclose limitations and avoid over-stating claims.

• Final checks

  • Run a consistency check on names (e.g., statute titles, institution names) and figures.
  • Cross-check citations for accuracy and pinpoint references.
  • Ensure the conclusion answers the question and reflects the evidence presented.

Summary Checklist

• Clear, answerable research question with defined scope
• Methodology explained (comparative approach, sources, limits)
• Accurate mapping of legal frameworks in Ghana and Kenya
• Case studies analysed against the legal rules and institutional powers
• Balanced use of data (CPI, procurement as % of GDP) with caveats
• Structured chapters with clear signposting and conclusions
• Correct, consistent referencing and formal academic style
• Transparent discussion of limitations and future research angles

Quick Reference