This paper presents a study on the practical application of Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ) in assessing student exams within legal education at the University of Bergen, Norway. ACJ is a method used to evaluate and compare the quality of qualitative work, involves assessors judging pairs of items relative to each other. Unlike traditional assessment methods, which rely on absolute judgments, ACJ requires assessors to assess items in pairs, determining relative quality rather than absolute quality. The study examines the feasibility of integrating ACJ into existing educational frameworks, addressing key challenges such as resource allocation, grading transparency, and assessing exams with multiple tasks. Specifically, the research focuses on assessing student exams within an undergraduate course on Property and Intellectual Property Law, with a total of 300 exam papers and eight examiners participating in the study. Utilizing RM Compare as the ACJ software, each assessor was instructed to dedicate 35 hours to comparative judgment, aiming to establish a reliable rank order of the exam papers. The findings reveal several challenges associated with the practical implementation of ACJ, including issues of resource allocation, grading transparency, and the assessment of exams with multiple tasks. Potential solutions to these challenges will be discussed.