9084 · Cambridge International A Level
9084/12
English Legal System
Law · June 2024 · Variant 2
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
3.8 / 5
285
360 min
Negligence and Contract Formation
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
285
Duration
360 min
Session difficulty
3.8 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The bulk of the marks in this series were concentrated in the higher-tariff 15-mark and 25-mark evaluation and application questions.
In Paper 2 (Criminal Law), the application of the Sentencing Council Guidelines for aggravated burglary (Question 1) required students to identify precise harm and culpability levels and adjust sentences using aggravating and mitigating factors.
Candidates who precisely matched the facts (e.g., weapon present on entry, value of property, age of the offender) to the source material secured top marks.
In Paper 3 (Contract) and Paper 4 (Tort), high marks were awarded for the classical IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) structure, especially when identifying the fine line between a request for information and a counter-offer, or unpacking complex chains of causation involving junior doctors and contributory negligence.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
KnowledgeAO2
Weight: 3100%ApplicationAO3
Weight: 267%Evaluation
Weight: 133%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Cambridge Principal Examiner Report — component performance and international standards
Level A*
Approx. 71% of maximum mark
Level A
Approx. 63% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 55% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 47% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 39% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 32% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Weigh arguments for and against with evidence; end with a supported judgement.
Match the expected response style for “Assess” questions.
Present multiple perspectives with evidence; balance breadth and depth.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Name or point to the specific feature asked for — avoid extra explanation.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Match the expected response style for “Advise” questions.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 2
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.2
Min per mark: 1.2
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
The tort of negligence
75 marks this session
Formation of a valid contract
75 marks this session
Offences against property
55 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Formation of a valid contract (Law of contract (A Level))
Offences against property (Criminal law (AS Level))
Torts affecting land (Law of tort (A Level))
Principles and sources of English law (English legal system (AS Level))
Offences against property
Principles and sources of English law
Formation of a valid contract
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1 English Legal System:
Paper 2 Criminal Law:
Paper 3 Law of Contract:
Paper 4 Law of Tort:
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
The tort of negligence
75 marks this session
Practise in RevuiFormation of a valid contract
75 marks this session
Practise in RevuiOffences against property
55 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The bulk of the marks in this series were concentrated in the higher-tariff 15-mark and 25-mark evaluation and application questions.
- 2Message
In Paper 2 (Criminal Law), the application of the Sentencing Council Guidelines for aggravated burglary (Question 1) required students to identify precise harm and culpability levels and adjust sentences using aggravating and mitigating factors.
- 3Message
Candidates who precisely matched the facts (e.g., weapon present on entry, value of property, age of the offender) to the source material secured top marks.
- 4Message
In Paper 3 (Contract) and Paper 4 (Tort), high marks were awarded for the classical IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) structure, especially when identifying the fine line between a request for information and a counter-offer, or unpacking complex chains of causation involving junior doctors and contributory negligence.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Law
The bulk of the marks in this series were concentrated in the higher-tariff 15-mark and 25-mark evaluation and application questions. In Paper 2 (Criminal Law), the application of the Sentencing Council Guidelines for aggravated burglary (Question 1) required students to identify
The bulk of the marks in this series were concentrated in the higher-tariff 15-mark and 25-mark evaluation and application questions.
In Paper 2 (Criminal Law), the application of the Sentencing Council Guidelines for aggravated burglary (Question 1) required students to identify precise harm and culpability levels and adjust sentences using aggravating and mitigating factors.
Candidates who precisely matched the facts (e.g., weapon present on entry, value of property, age of the offender) to the source material secured top marks.
- Total marks
- 285
- Duration
- 360 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.8 / 5
Session analysis
The bulk of the marks in this series were concentrated in the higher-tariff 15-mark and 25-mark evaluation and application questions. In Paper 2 (Criminal Law), the application of the Sentencing Council Guidelines for aggravated burglary (Question 1) required students to identify precise harm and culpability levels and adjust sentences using aggravating and mitigating factors. Candidates who precisely matched the facts (e.g., weapon present on entry, value of property, age of the offender) to the source material secured top marks. In Paper 3 (Contract) and Paper 4 (Tort), high marks were awarded for the classical IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) structure, especially when identifying the fine line between a request for information and a counter-offer, or unpacking complex chains of causation involving junior doctors and contributory negligence.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1 English Legal System:
Paper 2 Criminal Law:
Paper 3 Law of Contract:
Paper 4 Law of Tort:
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
65% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Evaluation/Essay
(AO3)
139·6·49%
Scenario Application
(AO2)
90·5·32%
Describe/Explain
(AO1)
47·6·16%
Identify/List
(Recall)
9·3·3%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 1 Section A
0.50 m/minPaper 2 Section A
0.67 m/minPaper 2 Section B
0.67 m/minPaper 3 Section A
0.83 m/minPaper 4 Section A
0.83 m/minTotal marks
120
Total time
170 min
Avg pace
0.71
Cumulative marks ladder
The line is your running mark total question by question; dashed lines are the estimated grade cut-offs. See which question the line crosses your target grade at, so you know how far you must answer cleanly and which questions decide a band.
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Torts affecting the person
90%90%
General defences and remedies in tort
85%85%
Remedies for breach of a contract
80%80%
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 30min
- Total marks
- 75
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.