QUESTION TYPE: Main Conclusion
CONCLUSION: British judges should be well equipped to decide if an administrative decision by a government minister is reasonable.
REASONING: If they aren’t well equipped, then there is something badly wrong with the legal system. Yet there is little reason to suppose there is.
ANALYSIS: This is a good argument, and properly qualified. Justice Upton only says they “should be able to”, he is not definite.
___________
- This is a premise which supports his conclusion. Since there is nothing much wrong with the system, judges should be capable of assessing administrative decisions.
- This is not what he is saying at all. He does not claim judges should begin to make administrative decisions – that is a job for administrators.
- CORRECT. This is a bit more categorical than Justice Upton’s conclusion, but it is by far the best choice.
- By this logic, a shortage of courthouses (which is something badly wrong with the legal system) would mean that judges were no longer capable of assessing administrative decision. It incorrectly reverses the premise.
- This incorrectly negates the premise. Judges not being able to judge a minister’s action would be a problem with the legal system, but there could be many other problems.
Note: The premise for D and E is: Judges can’t evaluation admin decisions something is badly wrong.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply