9084 · Cambridge International AS Level
9084/13
English Legal System
Law · June 2024 · Variant 3
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
3.0 / 5
135
180 min
Offences against property
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
135
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.0 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
In Paper 1, candidates secured high marks on straightforward identification questions (such as naming courts and rules of language).
However, in Section B, marks were frequently lost in the evaluative (b) parts.
For instance, in the juries question, candidates often listed the selection process without critically evaluating the extent to which a jury truly represents contemporary society.
Similarly, in the delegated legislation question, candidates frequently missed out on top-band marks due to a lack of concrete case examples illustrating judicial controls like substantive or procedural ultra vires.
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.
Knowledge & Understanding
Weight: 5100%Analysis & Application
Weight: 360%Evaluation & Analysis
Weight: 120%
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. 65% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 56% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 47% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 39% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 30% 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
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Present multiple perspectives with evidence; balance breadth and depth.
Name or point to the specific feature asked for — avoid extra explanation.
Weigh arguments for and against with evidence; end with a supported judgement.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Match the expected response style for “Define” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Assess” questions.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.2
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Offences against property
60 marks this session
Principles and sources of English law
44 marks this session
Legal personnel
30 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
Offences against property
Principles and sources of English law
Legal personnel
Machinery of justice
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1 English Legal System:
Paper 2 Criminal Law:
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
Offences against property
60 marks this session
Practise in RevuiPrinciples and sources of English law
44 marks this session
Practise in RevuiLegal personnel
30 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
In Paper 1, candidates secured high marks on straightforward identification questions (such as naming courts and rules of language).
- 2Message
However, in Section B, marks were frequently lost in the evaluative (b) parts.
- 3Message
For instance, in the juries question, candidates often listed the selection process without critically evaluating the extent to which a jury truly represents contemporary society.
- 4Message
Similarly, in the delegated legislation question, candidates frequently missed out on top-band marks due to a lack of concrete case examples illustrating judicial controls like substantive or procedural ultra vires.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Law
In Paper 1, candidates secured high marks on straightforward identification questions (such as naming courts and rules of language). However, in Section B, marks were frequently lost in the evaluative (b) parts. For instance, in the juries question, candidates often listed the se
In Paper 1, candidates secured high marks on straightforward identification questions (such as naming courts and rules of language).
However, in Section B, marks were frequently lost in the evaluative (b) parts.
For instance, in the juries question, candidates often listed the selection process without critically evaluating the extent to which a jury truly represents contemporary society.
- Total marks
- 135
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.0 / 5
Session analysis
In Paper 1, candidates secured high marks on straightforward identification questions (such as naming courts and rules of language). However, in Section B, marks were frequently lost in the evaluative (b) parts. For instance, in the juries question, candidates often listed the selection process without critically evaluating the extent to which a jury truly represents contemporary society. Similarly, in the delegated legislation question, candidates frequently missed out on top-band marks due to a lack of concrete case examples illustrating judicial controls like substantive or procedural ultra vires.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1 English Legal System:
Paper 2 Criminal Law:
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.
59% 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.
Essay
80·4·59%
Application
30·3·22%
Short Answer
25·5·19%
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.
P1 Section A (Compu
0.83 m/minP2 Section A (Compu
0.67 m/minP2 Section B (Optio
0.67 m/minTotal marks
85
Total time
120 min
Avg pace
0.71
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Torts affecting the person
5%5%
Sentencing in England and Wales
4%4%
Legal personnel (Solicitors and Barristers)
4%4%
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Neglecting the Objective-Subjective Shift in Dishonesty: Candidates must explicitly cite R v Barton and Booth (2020), confirming that the old test has been replaced by the objective test of the ordinary, honest person, armed with the defendant’s knowledge.
- Failing to Define and Translate Latin Terms: In precedent questions, candidates often lose basic marks by failing to provide direct translations for fundamental terms like ratio decidendi and obiter dicta.
- Weak Critical Evaluation: On 15-mark essay questions, simply describing the law only secures a passing grade. Higher bands require detailed analysis of reforms, limits, and systemic advantages or disadvantages.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 30min
- Total marks
- 75
- Weighting
- 50%
- Question types
- Short recall/identification (1-2 marks), Structured description of structures/controls (6 marks), Discussive analytical essay (10 marks), Explain/describe procedural or rules framework (part a), Critically assess/discuss effectiveness (part b)
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.