REFRESH LEARNING
CLP Examiner Language
Decoder
What the LPQB Actually Said — And What It Means For You
The only complete translation of both LPQB CLP Examiner Reports — 2024 and 2025 — into exam
technique corrections.
General Paper • Civil Procedure • Criminal Procedure • Evidence • Professional Practice
GENERAL PAPER CIVIL PROCEDURE CRIMINAL EVIDENCE PROF PRACTICE
PROCEDURE
2024 & 2025 Reports 7 Universal Failures • 5 Papers Free Resource
Prepared by Refresh Learning • For CLP Candidate Use • Not for Resale
HOW TO USE THIS DECODER
This document extracts every examiner criticism from the 2024 and 2025 CLP Examiner Reports — the only two published by
the LPQB — and translates each one into a concrete exam technique correction.
Section 1 covers failures that appear across every paper and both years. These are universal — fix them first. Section 2 covers
paper-specific failures. Section 3 shows the pass rate data year-on-year. Section 4 gives the structured answer method the 2025
examiner recommended by name.
Disclaimer: This document represents Refresh Learning's interpretation of the publicly available LPQB Examiner Reports for
2024 and 2025. It is not endorsed by or affiliated with the Legal Profession Qualifying Board. While every effort has been made
to ensure accuracy, Refresh Learning accepts no responsibility for any misstatement, omission, or error. Candidates should
verify all information against the original Examiner Reports and the current CLP syllabus.
SECTION 1 — THE UNIVERSAL FAILURES
These appear across every paper, both years. Fix these first — before anything else.
UNIVERSAL You Applied Nothing
1 FAILURE
Appears in every paper, both years — the single most recurring failure
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Application of the law to the facts was lacking" You explained the law correctly. You never connected it to the
scenario. The examiner gave you a story — you ignored it and wrote
a textbook instead.
"Candidates knew the provision but failed to Knowing the section number is worth almost nothing. The marks
demonstrate how they applied it in the practical live in the sentence after: "In this case, therefore..."
scenario given"
"Hardly any application of the law to the facts" This is the examiner saying your answer could have been written
before you even read the question. That is a fail.
FIX
THE FIX: After every legal principle you state, write the words "Applying this case..." and complete the sentence.
No exceptions. If you cannot complete this sentence, you do not understand the question yet.
UNIVERSAL You Reproduced Instead of Reasoned
2 FAILURE
Appears across GP, CP, CPC, Evidence and PP — both years
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Candidates regurgitate what they learned in Your answer reads like lecture notes. The examiner does not want
college without analysing or comprehending the your notes. They want your reasoning.
question"
"Candidates reproducing verbatim the Rules of Copying a statute into your answer script is not an answer. The
Court 2012 in their answers" statute is already in front of the examiner. You are being tested on
what you do with it.
"Copied the law word-for-word without explaining This is the single fastest way to fail. It signals to the examiner that
what it means or how it applies" you understand nothing beyond the words on the page.
"Simply reproducing the provisions without more" "Without more" is examiner language for: you stopped exactly
where the marks begin.
FIX
THE FIX: Every time you cite a section or a case, the next sentence must begin with "This means that..." or "Applied
to the facts..." If you find yourself copying full statutory text, stop. Summarise it in one line, then apply it.
UNIVERSAL You Cited Nothing
3 FAILURE
Explicit in CP, CPC, Evidence — both years
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Decided cases were not provided in answers" Legal propositions without case authority are assertions, not
arguments. The examiner cannot award marks for an unsubstantiated
position.
"Relevant authorities not cited. It was an easy This was the 2025 CP examiner's most pointed remark. The question
question, yet there were failures." was straightforward. Candidates failed purely because they did not
cite.
"Failed to cite section 50(1) of the CJA 1964 or Identifying the right area of law is not enough. The specific
provide case law in support" provision and a supporting case are both required.
"Candidates paid scant regard to recent cases" Both 2024 and 2025 examiners flagged this. The syllabus states
candidates are assessed on cases up to end of the preceding year,
stated in the 2026 syllabus as 1 January 2026. Ignoring recent
developments is a deliberate choice to lose marks.
THE FIX: In the vast majority of circumstances, every legal proposition needs two things attached: (1) a section
FIX
number, and (2) a case name. Build this as a reflex. One without the other is half an answer. In limited circumstances,
there may only be only a section number OR a case to cite, where it becomes even more imperative to make that
citation.
UNIVERSAL You Did Not Read the Question
4 FAILURE
Flagged explicitly in Evidence (twice), PP and CP — both years
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Candidates had blindly approached the questions The examiner used the word blindly — twice, in the same report.
without reading them" You identified a topic and wrote everything you knew about it. That
is not answering the question.
"Pick out a keyword in a question and answer off- You saw the word "bail" and wrote everything about bail. The
tangent, missing the primary issues" question was about something else that happened to involve bail.
"Candidates did not read the question, nor the The question gave you a specific case to engage with. You ignored
decision in [the stated case]" it and answered a general version instead.
"Instead of focusing on [X], candidates discussed Appears in PP both years, CP both years. The examiner told you
[Y]" exactly what to focus on. You answered a different question.
THE FIX: Before writing a single word, underline the specific instruction verb — advise, discuss, explain, draft,
FIX identify. Then underline what you are specifically being asked about. Only then write. If the question names a case
or section, your answer must engage with it directly.
UNIVERSAL You Ran Out of Time
5 FAILURE
Documented across GP, CPC and Evidence — both years
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Time management was poor — a number of An unanswered question scores zero. A partially answered question
candidates did not answer both questions" can still score passing marks. Leaving questions blank is a strategic
failure, not a knowledge failure.
"Candidates did well in the first two or three You spent too long on questions you were comfortable with and
questions and subsequently were unable to abandoned questions you were not. Marks are distributed across all
complete remaining questions" questions.
"Provided very brief, superficial answers to later You knew the answer. You did not have time to write it. The result
questions due to lack of time" is identical to not knowing.
THE FIX: Before the exam starts, divide total time by number of questions. Write that number on your question
FIX book cover. When time per question expires, stop — even mid-answer — and move on. A partial answer on every
question outperforms a perfect answer on three.
UNIVERSAL You Spotted Questions
6 FAILURE
Explicit in CP, Evidence and PP — both years
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Candidates appeared to be spotting questions" You prepared 4 topics and hoped 4 came out. When they did not,
you either attempted unprepared questions badly or left them blank.
"Avoid spotting questions" Both 2024 and 2025 reports include this as an explicit
recommendation. It is not a suggestion.
"Only a handful of candidates attempted this The examiner noticed. They know when a topic was avoided
question, suggesting candidates avoided questions wholesale.
that require them to think out of the box"
FIX
THE FIX: Prepare every topic on the syllabus to at least a functional level. You do not need to master everything
equally — but you need enough on every topic to attempt the question and demonstrate engagement with the issues.
UNIVERSAL Your Drafting Was Poor
7 FAILURE
Identical wording used in both 2024 and 2025 GP Examiner Reports
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS
"Drafting skills remained poor due to lack of Identical phrasing in both 2024 and 2025 GP reports. Two
practice" consecutive years. The word "remained" tells you this has been a
problem longer than two years.
"The overall structure was lacking" A statement of claim is not a prose essay. It has a mandatory
structure: heading, parties, cause of action with particulars, damages
with particulars, relief, date, signature, filing endorsement. Missing
elements cost marks mechanically.
"Candidates generally failed to comprehend the The facts in the question are the instructions. They are not your
pleading question and tended to copy or quote pleading.
word-for-word from the question"
THE FIX: Memorise the structure of every document type in your syllabus — statement of claim, charge, notice of
FIX appeal. Practice drafting from scratch under timed conditions at least once per document type. Structure is marks,
and structure can be drilled.
SECTION 2 — PAPER-BY-PAPER DECODER
Paper-specific failure patterns drawn directly from examiner observations across 2024 and 2025. Each entry shows what the
examiner said, what it actually means, and the specific fix.
GENERAL PAPER
Tort • Contract
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS THE FIX
"Candidates still argued on the The question was about remedies. You When you see a contract question, identify
formation of a contract and did not answered about formation. Two consecutive immediately: is this about formation, breach,
understand the question" (2024 & 2025) years of the same mistake means this is a or remedy? The GP examiner is almost
syllabus comprehension issue, not a always asking about remedies. Orient before
coincidence. you write.
"Did not address remoteness of Damages questions require you to work Use a checklist for damages answers: (1)
damages, nor the issue of tax as a factor through every sub-element: heads of breach, (2) heads of damage, (3) remoteness
in reducing damages" damage, remoteness, mitigation, and any test, (4) mitigation, (5) any reductions. Write
reduction factors. Missing one element through every item.
means missing those marks.
"Many candidates did not deal with the In a tort pleading, these are mandatory Build tort templates for all types of pleadings
particulars of negligence, particulars of particulars. Omitting them is equivalent to with all mandatory sections pre-filled. In the
injury, special damages and Civil Law filing an incomplete document. exam, work from that template — do not
Act 1956 claims" draft freehand.
"Could not understand the concept of Loss of future earnings = multiplicand × Practice the LOFE calculation with actual
loss of future earnings nor how to multiplier. This is a calculation, not a numbers until it is mechanical. This appears
calculate the multiplier" concept. The multiplicand is the annual loss; repeatedly across both reports.
the multiplier accounts for age, health, and
remaining working life.
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Rules of Court 2012 • Practice Directions
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS THE FIX
"Many candidates did not correctly Issue identification is the entry point for Before answering any CP question, write the
identify the issues" (multiple questions, every CP answer. If you cannot name the issue as one sentence: "The issue is whether
both years) procedural issue precisely, your answer has the defendant can set aside the default
no foundation. judgment under Order 13 Rule 8." Then
answer that question.
"Candidates did not adequately set CP questions frequently ask about judicial For every discretionary order in your
down the factors the court would discretion. The answer requires a structured syllabus, memorise the legal test and the
consider" list of the legal factors, not a general factors. These are fixed. They do not change
discussion. between sittings.
"Reproducing verbatim the Rules of The ROC is open in front of you. Copying it Treat the ROC as a reference, not an answer.
Court 2012 — answering questions is wasting time and marks. The examiner can Cite the Order and Rule, summarise it in one
without elaboration" read the ROC themselves. sentence, then apply it.
"Law colleges must buck up. Memorised The 2025 CP examiner addressed Your answer must engage with the specific
answers are provided to candidates" institutions directly. The implication: model facts of the question. Generic answers to
answers are being recycled and examiners specific facts are penalised.
have seen them. Generic answers are
identifiable.
"Time wasted by repeating the questions Writing back the question facts is not an Begin your answer with the issue or the
in the answers" introduction. It is dead time on a timed applicable legal principle. Never paraphrase
paper. the question back to the examiner.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593) • Courts of Judicature Act 1964 • Child Act 2001
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS THE FIX
"Candidates wrongly cited sections 307 When the appeal goes beyond the CPC's Map your appeal routes explicitly:
and 310 of the CPC instead of the CJA framework — to the Court of Appeal or Magistrate > Sessions > High Court (CPC).
1964" (multiple questions, 2025) Federal Court — the governing statute shifts High Court > Court of Appeal > Federal
to the CJA 1964. Candidates defaulted to the Court (CJA 1964). Know which Act governs
CPC because it was familiar. which tier.
"Upon seeing words surrounding 'plead The examiner set a question on ss.172C and Slow down when you see familiar language.
guilty', they immediately and wrongly 172D, which differ from standard guilty plea The question may be testing a specific
regurgitated the standard answer" procedure. Keyword-triggering a memorised provision within that topic, not the general
answer caused candidates to answer a rule. Identify the exact procedural context
different question. before writing.
"Did not know there was a sample The CPC contains prescribed forms. Open your CPC to the Forms section. Know
charge in the Forms section of the CPC" Candidates who did not know this drafted which forms exist. In a charge drafting
freehand and produced structurally deficient question, structure your answer around the
charges. prescribed form.
"Faced with anything beyond the CPC, When the answer required the CJA 1964 or Build a legislation map for Criminal
they were at a loss and looked for any Child Act 2001, candidates panicked and Procedure. Every topic: Primary Act —
sections that resembled the topic" inserted CPC sections that sounded relevant. Supporting Acts. Know that higher court
Explicitly noted in Q3 and Q5 of the 2025 appeals require CJA 1964, and juvenile
paper. matters require the Child Act 2001.
"Weaknesses were specifically noted in The 2025 examiner flagged these two Treat the Child Act 2001 and CJA 1964 as
topics covered within the Child Act 2001 statutes by name. This is an explicit signal compulsory revision topics, not optional
and the Courts of Judicature Act 1964" they will continue to be tested. reading. Both appeared in multiple questions
in 2025.
EVIDENCE
Evidence Act 1950 (Act 56)
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS THE FIX
"Candidates understood the law but Knowledge confirmed. Application failed. Every Evidence answer: (1) identify the
could not apply it correctly — lacked the This is the Evidence paper's defining failure evidential issue, (2) state the applicable
ability to connect the law to the across both years. The problem is not what section or case, (3) explain what the section
questions" you know — it is how you use it. or case requires, (4) apply to the specific
facts. Missing step 4 means you stopped
before the marks.
"Many candidates relied on model The examiner detected template answers. Practice Evidence with unfamiliar fact
answers as templates despite the diverse Evidence scenarios are varied — the same patterns, not with past year questions you
issues raised" section can arise in different factual contexts. have already seen. The skill is issue-spotting
A template built for one context will misfire in new scenarios.
in another.
"Section 114A applied — several Candidates missed the trigger. The moment Build a trigger list: online content → s.114A,
candidates could not even identify it was a fact scenario involves online content, dying declaration → s.32(1)(a), entries in
online publication" publication, or digital platforms, s.114A is books of accounts → s.34. Every major
the applicable provision. provision should have an identifiable factual
trigger.
"Candidates focused on peculiar words A question asked about witness Underline the precise legal concept being
and were led astray" compellability. Candidates discussed asked about before writing. Compellability,
admissibility. Compellability and admissibility, relevance — these are distinct
admissibility are different. Examiners set and separately testable.
questions specifically on these distinctions.
"Candidates paid scant regard to the Both years flagged this. In 2025, MPPL v Build a list of Federal Court and Court of
assessment of recent cases" (2024 & CAS was cited as a case candidates should Appeal Evidence decisions up to the cut-off
2025) have known. The cut-off is 31 December of date. Recent cases in the syllabus are almost
the year before your sitting. always examined.
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Legal Profession Act 1976 • National Land Code • Solicitors' Account Rules 1990
EXAMINER SAID WHAT IT MEANS THE FIX
"Almost 50% of the candidates did not The harshest single line in either report. The PP has the broadest syllabus of any CLP
study or prepare for the examination" PP examiner concluded from answer scripts paper. It cannot be crammed. Build a revision
that half the candidates sat the paper schedule that covers every topic area with at
unprepared. Scores below 20 and scripts least one practice question per topic.
with zero marks were documented in 2024.
"Candidates misunderstood the A question about professional ethics Read the question twice. Identify the specific
question — wrote about qualifications triggered a memory dump about admission angle: ethics, admission, discipline, or
to become an Advocate and Solicitor requirements. The keyword "Advocate and conduct? These are different topics within
instead of ethics" Solicitor" activated the wrong module. the same paper.
"Confused between 'clients' account' This is a basic concept in the Solicitors' The Solicitors' Account Rules 1990 is a
and 'clients' money' — some wrote that Account Rules 1990. The 2025 examiner mandatory read. Rules 2, 7, and 7A
clients themselves could be signatories" called these things "every aspiring Legal specifically. Know the definitions, permitted
Practitioner should understand and must signatories, and withdrawal rules cold.
know."
"Discussed Disciplinary Board when These are distinct bodies under the LPA Map the disciplinary framework:
asked about Disciplinary Committee" 1976. One word difference, entirely different Disciplinary Committee (inquiry) →
answer. The examiner set a question Disciplinary Board (punishment) → High
specifically on the Committee. Court (appeal). Know the function and
powers of each separately.
"Merely reproduced provisions of the The LPA 1976 is in front of you. Reciting it For every institution in the PP syllabus —
LPA 1976 without offering meaningful is not analysis. The examiner wants you to LPQB, Bar Council, Disciplinary Board,
elaboration" explain how these bodies function in Disciplinary Committee — prepare one
practice. paragraph explaining what it does
functionally, not what the Act says.
"Candidates wrongly suggested A land law question was answered with an Land law under the NLC is a fixed topic.
transferring the property to the lender" invented remedy that does not exist. This Indefeasibility, caveats, charges, and liens
signals an absence of foundational are recurring. Prepare each with the relevant
understanding of the NLC. NLC provisions and supporting cases.
SECTION 3 — THE DATA
CLP Main Examination pass rates: 2024 vs 2025. Source: LPQB Examiner Reports (official). Criminal Procedure is the only
paper where the pass rate declined.
PAPER 2024 PASS % 2025 PASS % CHANGE TREND
General Paper 54.72% 66.51% +11.79% ↑ Improved
Civil Procedure 41.74% 46.90% +5.16% ↑ Improved
Criminal Procedure 42.71% 40.05% −2.66% ↓ Declined
Evidence 46.17% 50.98% +4.81% ↑ Improved
Professional Practice 34.61% 46.99% +12.38% ↑ Improved
Criminal Procedure is the only paper where the pass rate declined year-on-year: 42.71% → 40.05%. Every other
! paper improved. Treat Criminal Procedure with elevated urgency. The 2025 examiner flagged the Child Act 2001
and CJA 1964 by name as areas where candidates were systematically underprepared.
SECTION 4 — THE FIX PROTOCOL
A structured answer method. Apply it mechanically to every question, every paper. The 2025 Professional Practice examiner
recommended this method by name. The 2024 and 2025 examiners across all five papers described the failure to follow it as
the primary reason candidates failed.
STEP INSTRUCTION
STEP 1 IDENTIFY the precise legal issue. Write it as a question: "The issue is whether..."
STEP 2 STATE the applicable law. One sentence per provision. Section number + brief summary. No copying.
STEP 3 CITE the authority. Attach a case to every legal proposition. Recent cases where available.
STEP 4 APPLY to the specific facts. Begin with "In this case..." and connect the law to the scenario given.
STEP 5 CONCLUDE. One clear sentence. What is the answer, and why.
This is the IRAC method. The 2025 PP examiner recommended it by name. The examiners across all five papers
! in both years described the failure to follow it as the primary reason candidates failed. It is not a study technique —
it is an answer structure. Apply it mechanically.
REFRESH LEARNING
Prepared by Refresh Learning • For CLP Candidate Use • Not for Resale