Sweden is, according to its constitution, a state governed by law. The rule of law is upheld by the correct application of specific sources of law, consisting exclusively of legislation and its legislative history, court practise, established practise and the literature of jurisprudence. The non-regard for all other kinds of arguments, such as, for example, subjective justice in the matter at hand, ensures that formal justice is maintained. The outcome of two similar cases must result in the same ruling regardless of the person presiding. However, the courts are not the only place where the rule of law must be respected. In state and municipal administrations, legal decisions concerning individuals are made every day. Oftentimes administration officers are the first instance of adjudication. To achieve the same level of legality, administration officers must apply the same sources of law as do law graduates, but without any education in law. In this thesis, the method of legal problem solving that is practised by administration officers is studied, as well as the historical development of the profession of administration officers. Three representatives were interviewed about the scope of the method used in specific cases. The results showed that the methods clearly differed from the method of law graduates, in part due to organisational, economic and educational differences, and that the historical legacy is still very present in the administrative work.