FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

234

Here you go.

JCJCJC

234 wrote: »

Here you go.

Thanks 234, this is great. Regards JC

Dal86

Stuck on this question any thoughts on it would be great....

A model takes part in a photo shoot for a friend to model her clothes, there is no payment involved. The photographer who is also not getting paid gets the model to sign a standard model release form allowing him to use the photographs now and in the future. Within the release it states that by signing the model accepts that she has received adequate consideration and that the photographer can use the images in any media and in any way except in relation to pornography.

However at the time of signing the contract the model was under contract with a modelling agency. The agency now claims that it is entitled to a copy of the images and claiming to be allowed to use them for profitable purposes.

The release contains a clause stating that the model has surrendered any further claims to the images.

Advise the photographer regarding the agency's claims.

jaybeeveedub

radioface wrote: »

Dunne J.'s judgment of last year might be helpful to you - explains the rationale behind the distinction between males and females under the Act. (Decision is being appealed to Supreme Court)

http://courts.ie/judgments.nsf/6681dee4565ecf2c80256e7e0052005b/87192ea5ed528e7580257749004c8f99?OpenDocument

why wasn't he charged under S.2 as she was 14??

skeenan89

i know it'l be a while yet...but anyone have any idea when the results are out? moving into a new house in may and not sure whether to change me address with the law society or not??
really wish we could just check online

Hogzy

skeenan89 wrote: »

i know it'l be a while yet...but anyone have any idea when the results are out? moving into a new house in may and not sure whether to change me address with the law society or not??
really wish we could just check online

Usually first week of June. Thats when they arrived this time last year.

colonel1

skeenan89 wrote: »

i know it'l be a while yet...but anyone have any idea when the results are out? moving into a new house in may and not sure whether to change me address with the law society or not??
really wish we could just check online

I emailed the Law Society a while ago and though the numbers have fallen the whole exam correcting/board review procedure is the same alas. I was told to email again at the end of this month, when a possible exam result release date might be available. Hopefully the results will be worth the wait!!

Interestingly Griffith are starting their FE1 prep course on May 31st, though Independent college doesn't start till June.

colonel1

Hogzy wrote: »

Usually first week of June. Thats when they arrived this time last year.

Hi Hogzy, have you done the Griffith property FE1 prep course, and if so would you recommend it? I have heard bad things about the Independent manual for this subject, which is very small but not comprehensive enough apparently.

The Griffith manuals seem to be huge, do they include the exam papers and reports in the back? The independent college manuals wouldn't be quite that big except for Equity and constitutional.

I have a nasty feeling that I will be doing company again, but was thinking of trying Griffith this time. I was impressed with the handouts etc received on the one day intensive prep courses for contract and company.

skeenan89

colonel1 wrote: »

Hi Hogzy, have you done the Griffith property FE1 prep course, and if so would you recommend it? I have heard bad things about the Independent manual for this subject, which is very small but not comprehensive enough apparently.

The Griffith manuals seem to be huge, do they include the exam papers and reports in the back? The independent college manuals wouldn't be quite that big except for Equity and constitutional.

I have a nasty feeling that I will be doing company again, but was thinking of trying Griffith this time. I was impressed with the handouts etc received on the one day intensive prep courses for contract and company.

these were my first set of fe1s but i thought independent was great....realistically there was everything in the manual to get you through 5 questions!!

good luck to everybody....hope all the hard work pays off, the thought of repeats makes me very sad

colonel1

skeenan89 wrote: »

these were my first set of fe1s but i thought independent was great....realistically there was everything in the manual to get you through 5 questions!!

good luck to everybody....hope all the hard work pays off, the thought of repeats makes me very sad

That is true skeenan89 but I haven't done property at Indo yet, I only did company, contract, equity and criminal. Of course, Indo has the best teacher for equity and criminal ever, namely Ciaran Paton:D

With regard to repeats, if it happens just keep going till you get the exams. Many people don't get their first three the first time, myself included.

Hogzy

colonel1 wrote: »

Hi Hogzy, have you done the Griffith property FE1 prep course, and if so would you recommend it? I have heard bad things about the Independent manual for this subject, which is very small but not comprehensive enough apparently.

I found that the lecturer was FANTASTIC. She explained everything thoroughly and throughout the whole course she would go back to basic principles the whole time. I cant recommend the property course for griffith enough. It is, in my opinion the best course they offer out of all the other FE1 subjects.

The Griffith manuals seem to be huge, do they include the exam papers and reports in the back? The independent college manuals wouldn't be quite that big except for Equity and constitutional.

Some manuals do, Some Manuals dont. The property manual didnt have the papers and reports in the manual. But did have a lot of irrelevant material (Given the 2009 LCRA act)

I have a nasty feeling that I will be doing company again, but was thinking of trying Griffith this time. I was impressed with the handouts etc received on the one day intensive prep courses for contract and company.

Its the homework facility that i find the best. I wish they had a programme where you could pay less for just the homework facility. When i repeat subjects i end up paying money for a new manual (which i dont need), lectures (which im relucant to watch AGAIN) and the homework facility (which is invaluable.)

It would be great if Griffith charged for just the homework facility so i would have to pay for the other stuff.

JCJCJC

Dal86 wrote: »

Stuck on this question any thoughts on it would be great....

A model takes part in a photo shoot for a friend to model her clothes, there is no payment involved. The photographer who is also not getting paid gets the model to sign a standard model release form allowing him to use the photographs now and in the future. Within the release it states that by signing the model accepts that she has received adequate consideration and that the photographer can use the images in any media and in any way except in relation to pornography.

However at the time of signing the contract the model was under contract with a modelling agency. The agency now claims that it is entitled to a copy of the images and claiming to be allowed to use them for profitable purposes.

The release contains a clause stating that the model has surrendered any further claims to the images.

Advise the photographer regarding the agency's claims.

Where is this from - it's a bit wacky. Anyway, my top-of-the-head take on it would be...

We're advising the photographer. He is relying on the document purporting to be a contract. The big issue is does he have an enforceable contract at all.

Does that document reflect the intentions of the parties? Was there a meeting of minds on the subject matter of the relationship between the model and the photographer? Did the model intend to enter legal relations with the photographer in accordance with the terms of the document? Would the officious bystander say that legal contractual relations were coming into existence?

I suggest the answer to that is - no.

Look up all the stuff on mistake as to subject matter.

On its face, it refers to adequate consideration, but consideration hasn't moved from the promisor to the promisee. Was any consideration envisaged between the parties at all, and even if so, what was it? If the agreement isn't supported by consideration, or made under seal (forget about seals), it is not a contract. Common Law might uphold it because of the written word l'Estrange v Graucob, but equity will no suffer a wrong to be without a remedy...non es factum comes into play, Foster v McKinnon

The photographer doesn't need to seek specific performance, because he now has the images, the model has no further part to play that he need to enforce. He is therefore merely anticipating what she might attack him with. She may have a good case to have the contract declared void.

That's just the bones of what would be my answer, you'd need to look up some things and put a better structure on it.

jc

Mr Nonar

Hey guys,

Any help with this Q would be greatly appreciated. Can't seem to make any sense of it.

Thanks in advance.

Steven made his will in 2000 and left €10,000 to his sister, Mary “to be held upon such trusts as will be communicated to her.” In 1999 Steven had given her a sealed envelope and told her that although she would be left €10,000 on his death, she would be required to hold it on trust for the person whose name was contained in the envelope. This envelope, he said, was not to be opened until after his death. Last year he approached Mary again with a second sealed envelope. He told her that he had changed his mind about who should take his property on his death and that the name of the new beneficiary was contained in the new envelope. Steven died last month and Mary has just opened the sealed envelopes. The beneficiary mentioned in the first envelope is Linda, who was a good friend of Steven’s for many years although they had fallen out in recent times. The beneficiary mentioned in the second envelope is Anne Marie, a secret non-marital child, who died two months before Steven died.

JCJCJC

Mr Nonar wrote: »

Hey guys,

Any help with this Q would be greatly appreciated. Can't seem to make any sense of it.

Thanks in advance.

Steven made his will in 2000 and left €10,000 to his sister, Mary “to be held upon such trusts as will be communicated to her.” In 1999 Steven had given her a sealed envelope and told her that although she would be left €10,000 on his death, she would be required to hold it on trust for the person whose name was contained in the envelope. This envelope, he said, was not to be opened until after his death. Last year he approached Mary again with a second sealed envelope. He told her that he had changed his mind about who should take his property on his death and that the name of the new beneficiary was contained in the new envelope. Steven died last month and Mary has just opened the sealed envelopes. The beneficiary mentioned in the first envelope is Linda, who was a good friend of Steven’s for many years although they had fallen out in recent times. The beneficiary mentioned in the second envelope is Anne Marie, a secret non-marital child, who died two months before Steven died.

Just 'having a go' at this too. First - it's not a secret trust - it's half-secret, the existence of the trust is disclosed by the will. Next - discuss the components of valid trusts very briefly, intention, subject and object are all there. Next - communication, the big issue here. The will says 'as will be..' suggesting that subject will be disclosed post the execution of the will in 2000. That tends to put the second envelope in a more favourable position than the pre-execution 1999 one, but isn't conclusive. Law examiners always put dates and figures into problems for a reason, so pay attention to them, they have a role to play usually.

The big problem here is whether a valid trust can be created in Ireland by communication after execution of the will. The best that Delaney can say is 'probably', quoting Riordan v Bannon, Re King's Estate and re Prendeville. That is what the question is really about - that's the meaty issue that is open to discussion, it's an uncertain area of law, do your research there, I've only skimmed it.

If the purported trust in favour of Anne Marie is deemed valid, there is then the problem of her pre-deceasing the testator. That's a failure of beneficiary, so a resulting trust arises in favour of the settlor's estate - the money goes back, basically. There is no intention to benefit the donee evident - sister Mary can't keep it.

That would be my general take on that question. It isn't a tough question really.

Edit - thinking some more about it, I'd also say something about acceptance of the trusteeship by Mary.

colonel1

Hogzy wrote: »

I found that the lecturer was FANTASTIC. She explained everything thoroughly and throughout the whole course she would go back to basic principles the whole time. I cant recommend the property course for griffith enough. It is, in my opinion the best course they offer out of all the other FE1 subjects.



Some manuals do, Some Manuals dont. The property manual didnt have the papers and reports in the manual. But did have a lot of irrelevant material (Given the 2009 LCRA act)



Its the homework facility that i find the best. I wish they had a programme where you could pay less for just the homework facility. When i repeat subjects i end up paying money for a new manual (which i dont need), lectures (which im relucant to watch AGAIN) and the homework facility (which is invaluable.)

It would be great if Griffith charged for just the homework facility so i would have to pay for the other stuff.

Hey Hogzy, thanks very much for the information re the property course. A lecturer who explains everything throughly is just what I need as I am a property newbie. Hopefully the irrelevant stuff will have been removed from the manual for the forthcoming prep course.

littlemac1980

JCJCJC wrote: »

Where is this from - it's a bit wacky. Anyway, my top-of-the-head take on it would be...

We're advising the photographer. He is relying on the document purporting to be a contract. The big issue is does he have an enforceable contract at all.

Does that document reflect the intentions of the parties? Was there a meeting of minds on the subject matter of the relationship between the model and the photographer? Did the model intend to enter legal relations with the photographer in accordance with the terms of the document? Would the officious bystander say that legal contractual relations were coming into existence?

I suggest the answer to that is - no.

Look up all the stuff on mistake as to subject matter.

On its face, it refers to adequate consideration, but consideration hasn't moved from the promisor to the promisee. Was any consideration envisaged between the parties at all, and even if so, what was it? If the agreement isn't supported by consideration, or made under seal (forget about seals), it is not a contract. Common Law might uphold it because of the written word l'Estrange v Graucob, but equity will no suffer a wrong to be without a remedy...non es factum comes into play, Foster v McKinnon

The photographer doesn't need to seek specific performance, because he now has the images, the model has no further part to play that he need to enforce. He is therefore merely anticipating what she might attack him with. She may have a good case to have the contract declared void.

That's just the bones of what would be my answer, you'd need to look up some things and put a better structure on it.

jc

Interestingly I would have come to a completely different conclusion.

I would have found that the release is enforceable, that there was valid consideration, there was a meeting of minds, the terms of the contract were clear and the reasonable man (not the officious bystander) would have understood that a valid contract had come into existence.

I think the consideration point is clearly the most contentious issue, but in my view a model derives a tangible benefit from having her image photographed and disseminated, in a manner she would otherwise have to pay fees for. She understood this, and accepted it was adequate consideration.

I would also have suggested that the nature of the agency agreement between the model and her agent was irrelevant to the photographer, and that he was free to use the photos in a manner consistent with the terms of the contract, i.e. as he wished provided they weren't used for pornography.

legaleagle1

hi guys, have just recently started following the thread so possibly this question has been asked and answered already but i'm planning to sit my first four fe1s in the next round and was just wondering if anyone had any recommendations about what combination of four is good or if ppl feel it's just a personal thing??

Hogzy

legaleagle1 wrote: »

hi guys, have just recently started following the thread so possibly this question has been asked and answered already but i'm planning to sit my first four fe1s in the next round and was just wondering if anyone had any recommendations about what combination of four is good or if ppl feel it's just a personal thing??

EU, Constitutional and Tort are probably the biggest courses in terms of content.

Criminal is quite a small course, as is Contract.

Contract, Property and Equity have a lot of overlapping chapters especially Prop and Equity so i would recommend doing those courses together.

A lot of people seem to have trouble with Company (I have not done this exam yet so cant really comment)


Take what you want from the above. It is a personal decision though. I breezed through EU (passed it twice in a row) yet i have failed Constitutional twice. Its all up in the air tbh

legaleagle1

Hogzy wrote: »

EU, Constitutional and Tort are probably the biggest courses in terms of content.

Criminal is quite a small course, as is Contract.

Contract, Property and Equity have a lot of overlapping chapters especially Prop and Equity so i would recommend doing those courses together.

A lot of people seem to have trouble with Company (I have not done this exam yet so cant really comment)


Take what you want from the above. It is a personal decision though. I breezed through EU (passed it twice in a row) yet i have failed Constitutional twice. Its all up in the air tbh

cool thanks, have you done much in the way of preparatory courses etc or a lot of work yourself.... do you think there's a lot of the work you could do yourself with past papers and books etc or are prep courses of some description really essential??

Miss_F

legaleagle1 wrote: »

cool thanks, have you done much in the way of preparatory courses etc or a lot of work yourself.... do you think there's a lot of the work you could do yourself with past papers and books etc or are prep courses of some description really essential??

Last sitting was my first time attempting the FE1's and I done the prep course from Griffith which I found very good and very easy to understand and follow. Took Contract, Criminal, Tort and Company, of which Company was prob the most difficult for me, found some bits difficult to get my head round, the other 3 pretty straightforward, only advise I could give bout doing the exams is know your stuff entirely, dont just rely on knowing 80% cause random stuff is cropping up.

colonel1

Miss_F wrote: »

Last sitting was my first time attempting the FE1's and I done the prep course from Griffith which I found very good and very easy to understand and follow. Took Contract, Criminal, Tort and Company, of which Company was prob the most difficult for me, found some bits difficult to get my head round, the other 3 pretty straightforward, only advise I could give bout doing the exams is know your stuff entirely, dont just rely on knowing 80% cause random stuff is cropping up.

Yes, I would second Miss F here in that you really must know the stuff inside out, especially in contract. Contract is short, but there is quite a lot of stuff to learn especially as for every rule, there is an exception. Company is huge, and questions can come from any part of the Law Society Company Law syllabus, plus his papers have become rather unpredicatable e.g. Borrowing was a banker question in the past, and it didn't appear on the last paper, much to my disgust. Criminal is easier to recall as the case facts are much more interesting. It is possible to leave out bail and procedure and still pass, but you must know everything else pat. Interestingly in the last paper the banker question on the classification or indicia of a crime (he used to ask about the indicia at one sitting and the classification of a crime at the next), didn't appear possibly because people tended to confuse classification and characteristics (indicia).

Good luck with the exams Legal Eagle1 (actually equity is a good subject to pick for the first time round as there are areas one can omit).

legaleagle1

great, thanks everyone.... just have to get the thesis for the masters I'm doing out of the way first and then hopefully pass at least three of the four. thanks for all the advice

JCJCJC

legaleagle1 wrote: »

great, thanks everyone.... just have to get the thesis for the masters I'm doing out of the way first and then hopefully pass at least three of the four. thanks for all the advice

I hope you're doing the thesis in something FE1-relevant, things like family law, planning and environment law etc are no help, unfortunately, interesting though they may be.
I agree with the advice you've been given - I would group equity, contract and tort together, because equity plays a large role in the other two. Perhaps do property as your fourth, because so much of equity concerns succession - donation mortis causa, trusts etc and since succession under statute and common law comes into property in a big way too so you might find it logical to get it all into your head in one go.
If you're not long out of college, or still there as you post suggests, I would recommend the GCD one-day intensive courses to get you recalibrated for FE1-style exam questions, they have got me through my initial three so far, maybe more if the Gods smile in June. Also, try and get your FE1 campaign underway while you still have access to college library facilities and databases. Even if you finish this May or June, go in to college for your FE1 study for the autumn exams. You won't miss the databases until you are at home without them.

JC

JCJCJC

littlemac1980 wrote: »

Interestingly I would have come to a completely different conclusion.

I would have found that the release is enforceable, that there was valid consideration, there was a meeting of minds, the terms of the contract were clear and the reasonable man (not the officious bystander) would have understood that a valid contract had come into existence.

I think the consideration point is clearly the most contentious issue, but in my view a model derives a tangible benefit from having her image photographed and disseminated, in a manner she would otherwise have to pay fees for. She understood this, and accepted it was adequate consideration.

I would also have suggested that the nature of the agency agreement between the model and her agent was irrelevant to the photographer, and that he was free to use the photos in a manner consistent with the terms of the contract, i.e. as he wished provided they weren't used for pornography.

Interesting. Any answer is valid for an exam as long as it is reasonable, well argued and displays a knowledge of the law, this isn't arithmetic. I hope Dr Brian Foley BL chips in on this to put us straight! I would perhaps also add 'nemo dat quod non habet' - the model can't give what she doesn't have - ie rights to pictures of herself, because she has already assigned them. In that case, the photographer is caught by 'the title you have is only as good as the title you get' so his claim to the rights is weakened further.

jaybeeveedub

has anyone come across any good articles on the changes that the charities act makes to purpose trusts for the equity course??

can't find anything on westlaw!

jaybeeveedub

Under the Childrens Act 2001 as amended by CJ 2006, no child under 12 shall be charged with a crime unless such crime is murder, manslaughter, rape agg sexual assault....

If a child is being charged with manslaughter, can they be charged with unlawful act manslaughter, if they are not capable of committing such an unlawful act?

S.54 Allows for secondary participation in a crime which otherwise would not be a crime due to the age of the principal offender in the first degree

Does something similar apply to the unlawful act? There doesn't seem to be anything suggesting it in the legislation.

Caselaw would suggest that the crime must be complete and that any defences to the UA must be disproved by the prosecution (scarlett[1994])...

skeenan89

do all these questions mean that people are starting to study for the october exams already? im still getting over the march exams ....

CFOLEY85

Hi all. Just wondering can anyone tell me how long a solr has to be qualified before they can take on a trainee??

_JOE_

CFOLEY85 wrote: »

Hi all. Just wondering can anyone tell me how long a solr has to be qualified before they can take on a trainee??

5 PQE off the top of my head...

jaybeeveedub

defintiely starting study now.... There is no way I cant get them... I need to know the stuff inside out and backwards!!

so anyone know of a good source for Charities Act and equity other than Wylie's LandLaw...???