iStill argued on formation of contract — did not understand what the question was asking.
iiRegurgitated college knowledge without analysing or comprehending the actual question.
iiiUnable to answer Q1(b) adequately — issue of tax as a factor in reducing damages.
ivLack of drafting skills in structure when preparing pleadings.
iLack of knowledge in key cases — e.g. Tenaga Nasional Berhad v Batu Kemas Industries Sdn Bhd.
iiFailed to raise duty of tortfeasors, identify defences, contributory negligence, or cite case law.
iiiDid not address loss of future earnings or calculate the multiplier correctly.
ivDid not comprehend the pleading question — copied content word-for-word instead.
vMissed special injury damages and failed to apply s.7 & s.8 of the Civil Law Act 1956.