FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

2ndtimer wrote: »

Exemption and Limitation clause the practical consequences of difference.

Hi all,

Confusion slightly over consequences of each. Limitation clauses are to limit liability, exemption clauses are to exempt from a duty or responsibility, atleast thats my limited understanding Courts use strict line in determining incorporation and to the interpretation of fact and at law.

Anyone aware of the practical consequences? Im slightly at a loss

Thanks

You're a bit off there. The real difference is between limitation clauses (that limit) and exclusion clauses (that exclude entirely). Courts adopt a somewhat staggered approach to how strictly they apply the Canadian Steamship principles. You need to do a bit of looking at the Ailsa Craig Fishing v Malvern case (google it) and the cases that come after.

Practical consequence is that when one wants an ambiguous clause to cover negligence, the approach taken for exclusion clauses won't be taken, as is what happened in Ailsa Craig Fishing v Malvern.

sarcastra wrote: »

I wonder was part of the reason why the Property paper was so tough to ensure that unless you really know what you're talking about you should have to resit the exam when the Land Law and Conveyancing Reform Act comes into effect. It's the last FE1 paper without it in operation I suppose so there's essential elements missing from study that would be relevant in practice.

i see exactly where your coming from but thats still not a good enogh reason to try and intentionally get people to fail, you shouldnt bee victimised for doing the exams at a certain time in history, the examiner would have to be psychic to know how the courts interpret many sections of the new act, a wide ranging statute can take years to nestle into the legal system.

all in all a very difficult paper, putting AP and co ownership in one question was very unfair, the two items are totally unrelated and very large areas to study, especially knowing every section affecting the area verbatim. teh only reasonable area of the exam i thought was on succession, short questions were even more discreet than usual, i mean realistically who studied treasure trove ?!

very worried wrote: »

Just wondering whether many people have heard this before about the law firms? Am with one of the big 5 and this was my third sitting... I might well be in trouble if so...

Does it say so on your contract or have they represented this to you in any way?

Dante09 wrote: »

My letter of offer says that the offer is subject to my passing of the FE1s before the start date.

That's what I was thinking, I would assume the sittings between the contract and the start date for the poster above totalled 3 and they just had to be completed by that date?

vote4pedro wrote: »

Will be interesting to read his examiner report this time round, hopefully he spends some time explaining what the hell was up with that paper instead of making terrible jokes (it was property that the examiner moaned about people misspelling tenants like the beer "and a poor one at that" or something along those lines?)

If I'm also not mistaken, in one previous exam question he clearly phrased the question "analyse the relevance of x in Irish property law" and then noted in the exam report how thrilled he was to see comparative law in the answers :rolleyes:

Fair enough, but has the person who told you to consider whether law is for you or not ever sat a law society exam? Apparently these nightmare exams are of relatively recent vintage! In any case, exam performance is no indication of whether a person will make a good or bad lawyer imo:( These exams are simply a rite of passage, albeit a very tough one.

What do people make of the sit three and sign your name on the fourth paper strategy for the 1st sitting? It can be risky if you have a bad paper.:(

Thirdfox wrote: »

I was told to pass within 3 sittings too. Otherwise "it's time to reconsider whether law is suitable for you or not" as the person put it to me.

Condolences to those who disliked the property exam. I remember my land law exam in college

What do people make of the sit three and sign your name on the fourth paper strategy for the 1st sitting? It can be risky if you have a bad paper.

It was something I had to do at my first sitting for various reasons and going in to the last exam which I hadn't prepared for felt sooooo horrible........would never want to do it again. I understand Dante09's point about the wastage of 110 euro but, at the time for me if I had not choose to focus on 3 than i would have lost 440 euro!

Hi legal eagle1, which subject did you leave out? I left out equity last time, though perhaps it might be best to leave out contract [the other subjects are company and criminal], as it is pretty tough imo I can understand why you left one subject out. It takes quite an age to get through the manuals etc.

legal eagle 1 wrote: »

It was something I had to do at my first sitting for various reasons and going in to the last exam which I hadn't prepared for felt sooooo horrible........would never want to do it again. I understand Dante09's point about the wastage of 110 euro but, at the time for me if I had not choose to focus on 3 than i would have lost 440 euro!

Yes, I agree with you on that point legal eagle. The company paper was quite nice this time round, and with the benefit of hindsight one could have focused on directors, borrowing, capital maintenance and share transfer, and done quite well. Alas attempted to cover all, with result of recalling little:( Instead of wasting time covering stuff like separate legal personality, s25 contracts, alteration of articles and liquidation which didn't come up. Any tips for learning stuff off by heart, my pet hate! I was thinking of using mind/concept maps this time round. Still congrats on getting the other three, including the dreaded contract I prsume:D Ironically, I used to love contract in college:o


quote=legal eagle 1;62463185]I left out Company law which in hindsight was a mistake because it was a relatively easy exam. The reason i left it out was that the manual on it was huge and i seemed to be getting no where with the study on it. Listen on your first sitting your required to pass 3 out of 4, at the time in my view passing only 3 was better than failing all 4!![/quote]

Thanks shaneybaby:) Yes, I recall that fellow from Independent. Spoke a lot about coming 1st in tax exams. I didn't really like the idea of the journey method, but the mind map sounds useful. I tended to draw a case law "wheel". Just need to start learning the stuff much much earlier this time, as I have the base notes:o

shaneybaby wrote: »

Quite honestly i wouldn't have got mine without using this method. In fact i have no idea how people can learn off 200 cases per subject and be able to use them in the correct questions thereafter.

Yer man in Indp/griffith that does the memory seminar has a nice method of doing it. Even two years later, not that anyone ever needs to really, but i can still rattle off a few cases whenever i visit the places i "mapped". Think brian Foley had a skeleton done earlier which is great too but if you coan incorporate them both you'll find you never "blank" when you get into an exam. If you're struggling to remember something you just go to that area in your head and work through the different locations/rooms etc.

I was working while doing mine so being able to run over cases while having 5 minutes at the photocopier or on the walk back from lunch helps you revise even without the books. Can't big-up this type of revision enough.