How to Write a Law Essay Conclusion (+ 9 Examples)

On this page

How to write a conclusion for an essay-style law essay

State your final opinion about the central argument

The first task in your conclusion is for you to state the opinion you reached about your central argument after all the analysis you did in the main body of your essay. As a reminder, a "central argument" is the key argument you argue in your essay. It is usually starts with something like this: This essay will evaluate the extent to which....

You should not be introducing any new information, such as cases, statute sections or interesting quotes from academics. There is a place for that in the main body of your essay. Your conclusion is purely a regurgitation of the information from the main headings in your essay.

TIP: Scroll down to see 9 first class law essay conclusion examples and how they follow these rules.

Provide reasons to support your final opinion

Once you state your opinion about the central argument, it is time to provide a few reasons why you argued that specific opinion. You will have already included plenty of those reasons in the main body of your essay. That’s where the magic happened and where you proved your point to the reader.

But be careful. The reader has already read your arguments, so they don’t want to read through ALL OF THEM again. They only want to get a flavour of the main arguments you made. The trick is to figure out which arguments are the main arguments.

Length of your essay-style law essay conclusion

Here, there is an easy rule of thumb you can follow. Your law essay probably has around 2-4 headings in between the Introduction and the Conclusion sections. Depending on the length of your essay, this part of your conclusion should include 1-3 sentences summarising each of those headings.

So, if your essay is pretty short - let’s say up to 1,500 words - and has three headings, you should include in your conclusion one sentence restating the central argument and one sentence summarising each heading in your essay. Simple, right? Now let’s look at how to write conclusions for problem-style questions.

TIP: For more thorough step-by-step guidance on how to write first class law essays check out my 1st Class Law Essay Writing Course.

How to write a conclusion for a problem-style law essay

Acknowledge the legal issues

The writing of a conclusion for a legal problem-style question is actually very simple. Unlike with an essay-style question, there usually isn’t one specific central argument that you are arguing throughout the essay, so you don’t need to restate it in the conclusion.

What you should do instead in the first sentence of your conclusion is acknowledge the legal issues that your essay dealt with. For example, you could say: This essay evaluated whether….

It’s as simple as that!

Restate the conclusion you reached in each heading

The next step is equally straightforward. All you have to do is restate the conclusion you reached at the end of each heading in the main body of your essay in relation to the legal issue(s) that you discussed there. If you only addressed one legal issue per heading, this part is really about repeating again how you solved that legal issue.

If you discussed more than one legal issue in your heading, then you should briefly mention the conclusion that you reached in relation to ALL legal issues. This needs to be done for every heading.

For example, think about:

What advice did you provide to the person about their legal issue?
Are they likely to be convicted of a particular crime?
Is it likely that there was a breach of contract?
Is it likely that the person committed negligence?

Length of your problem-style law essay conclusion

Depending on the length of your essay, you should use between 1 and 6 sentences for your law essay conclusion. For example, with a short essay of 1,500 words with 3 headings your conclusion is likely to have one short sentence acknowledging the legal issues analysed in the essay and 3 short sentences discussing the conclusions reached in relation to each legal issue. Easy, right?

Essay-style law essay conclusion examples

The examples below come from essay-style essays in different modules. Notice how each of them restates the final opinion about the central argument and then gives a few key reasons for it, without introducing anything new.

Example 1 - Contract law

This conclusion comes from an essay on the remoteness of damage.

As illustrated above, by dissecting of the two-fold test in Hadley and cherry picking the application of each of those by the courts in Victoria and Parsons introduced significant confusion into the law on remoteness of damage in contract law disputes. While the decision in John appears to have introduced some clarity into this area by re-applying both limbs of the Hadley test jointly, the impact of John – and in particular the extent to which it will receive positive judicial consideration – remains to be seen.

Example 2 - European Union law

In conclusion, despite the narrow interpretation of Art. 263(4) by the CJEU in the case of Plaumann, decisions such as Piraiki and Toepfer show that the requirement of individual concern under that Article is not impossible to meet. Furthermore, the decisions in International Fruit Company and Cordoniu facilitate individual standing under Art. 263(4) even further, therefore making it achievable.

Example 3 - International law

The arguments presented above demonstrate that the answer to the question of whether ‘important and spectacular’ violations of international law can cause grave damage to the credibility of that law is largely dependent on the approach adopted to understanding the nature of international law in general. In his quotation Morgenthau acknowledges that some damage to the credibility of international law can be inflicted through the lack of compliance by powerful states, although such damage is not sufficient to lead to the complete invalidation of the law. Given the arguments put forward above in relation to the law on the use of force and international human rights law, one could only conclude that Morgenthau’s opinion is fully justified.

This one comes from a quotation essay question, which is why it starts by returning to the quote.

Example 4 - Business law

As explained above, the advantages of running a business as a partnership include flexibility in terms of the agreements between the partners on how to run the business, and ease of setting up a business and meeting any formal requirements. On the other hand, the disadvantages of this business structure compared to a company limited by shares include the lack of protection of partners’ personal assets and difficulty with solving disputes.

Example 5 - Family law

As illustrated above, the introduction of a no order presumption in domestic abuse cases would constitute a significant interference of the state in family life of the citizens. It would potentially deprive some children of face-to-face contact with their parents, even where it would be beneficial for contact to be maintained. Moreover, the existing safeguards embedded in the welfare principle under s. 1 of the CA, the surrounding cases and Practice Direction 12J appear to provide strong protection for children and victim parents against future domestic abuse. Therefore, the introduction of a no order principle in those circumstances could be excessive.

Example 6 - Public and administrative law

The core principle of Dicey’s theory provides that the law-making power of the UK parliament should not be restricted at all. This strict traditional version of parliamentary sovereignty never applied to the UK, as illustrated in cases such as Burmah Oil, Ellen Estates and Ghaidan. The reason for this lack of complete parliamentary supremacy in the UK was not only the country’s relationship with the EU, but also its internal limitations, such as the implied repeal doctrine. Although the UK’s exit from the EU has no doubt removed some restrictions on the supremacy of the UK parliament, others (as discussed above) will remain despite it. Therefore, it cannot be said that Brexit restored Dicey’s theory of parliamentary supremacy in the UK. Rather, the ultimate supremacy of the UK parliament was always preserved, and it will continue to be preserved now, following Brexit, with some limitations removed and – perhaps – others added.

This is a longer essay, so the conclusion has room for more than one sentence per heading.

Example 7 - Public law

In conclusion, the desire to uphold the intention of Parliament is indeed driving the judicial review of decisions of public authorities in many cases, including in reviews on the grounds of illegality and proportionality. However, in a review based on the ground of irrationality or procedural impropriety the courts rely to a significant extent on the common law principles established through the precedent.

TIP: Get more help with writing your law essays with the 1st Class Law Essay Builder.

Problem-style law essay conclusion examples

Both examples below come from problem-style essays in tort law. Notice how they state the advice reached on each legal issue, one person at a time, together with the key reason for it.

Example 8 - Tort law

As illustrated above, Lucas is likely to successfully claim private nuisance, including obtaining an injunction and (possibly) damages for the interference with his enjoyment of land due to the smell and noise emanating from Andrew’s farm. Moreover, John is likely to recover damages for the destruction of his plants by Andrew’s insecticides under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, although his claim for defamation will be successful only if it is not set aside as abuse of the process.

Example 9 - Tort law

Given the above arguments, Henry is likely to be liable to the full extent for the severe injuries sustained by Peter, and for those injuries sustained by Mary which she was likely to sustain had she been wearing a seatbelt. However, he will not be liable for Mary’s death since the penicillin injection broke the chain of causation. The hospital (on behalf of Alex) might be liable for Mary’s death provided that Alex did not follow standard medical practice when ordering the injection. Finally, Henry will not be liable for the financial loss suffered by Jade.