FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

RizzleKick

I'm working from an Independent College manual and it seems to have completely skipped the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. This arose as a 10% question in April 2012 so just wondered what information people think might be required.

sorchauna

RizzleKick wrote: »

I'm working from an Independent College manual and it seems to have completely skipped the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010. This arose as a 10% question in April 2012 so just wondered what information people think might be required.

I have that manual too but I will cover it for the exams, if a question on family property was to come up, you would be expected to know. I just googled it for information. Alot of law firms website have covered that act so you can get great simple easy information to learn off just from the web. You won't have cases of it, but just know the relevant sections in it.

RizzleKick

Ya I reckon thats the safest bet. Wont lose too much I'm sure if you have all the relevant sections. Thanks:)

chops018

Right, I have the new topics that needed adding in for Criminal and Contract and some revision on the other areas done too. Property seems ok: know succession inside out and the other topics are straightforward enough.

That's my progress thus far, would like to have a bit more done (kinda wanted to have Equity wrapped up by now and been moving onto polishing old topics and learning it all off, but anyway....

Onto Equity: I have some topics covered from the last time, they will definitively need going over, but I will be adding a few in (which I'm going to do this week). This can be such a daunting subject with the amount of topics there are, but I'll lay out my plan for it and ye can let me know what ye think. I've left out some topics, but here's what I'm covering (bear in mind I have a lot of these topics covered already so they will just need revision and that sort):

For the Equity side of things:

1. Injunctions:
- Mandatory/Interlocutory.
- Quia Timet.
- Mareva.
- Anton Piller.

2. Equitable Remedies:
- Specific Performance.
- Rectification.
- Undue Influence.
- Proprietary Estoppel.

FYI: I know I'm leaving out the Maxims and the doctrines - Conversion, Election, Satisfaction (I might cover this) and Performance, but they usually come in part questions which I usually avoid. So seems like an opportunity to cut down.

Now for the Trusts side of things:

1. Express Trusts:
- Three Certainties.
- Strong .v. Baird.
- Donatio Mortis Causa (very briefly as a full question came up last sitting).
- Constitution.

2. Secret Trusts:
- Fully Secret Trusts.
- Half Secret Trusts.

3. Charitable Trusts:
- Four Charitable Purposes.
- Cy Pres Doctrine.

4. Purpose Trusts:
- Rules that make Purpose Trusts invalid.
- Exceptions to those rules.

5. Resulting Trusts:
- Automatic (briefly, came up last sitting for full question).
- Presumed.
- Presumption of Advancement.
- Joint Bank Accounts (seems to come up sometimes).

6. Trusteeship/Administration of Trusts:
- Duty to Invest.
- Circumstances where a trustee may be removed from there position.
(I'm still having a look into other questionable areas on this front).

7. Tracing:
- Very briefly, full question came up last sitting.


I spent a few hours today looking at my grid, then going through numerous sitting of sample answers and previous papers and reports, there is a pattern of what is asked on each topic. For instance if you look at the last few times Mareva has come up it is usually has a question asking about the duty of full and frank disclosure or the duty to show an intention of the other party to dissipate assets to quell the other party seeking damages. Then for Interlocutory it seems to be asked quite a lot on defamation. Obviously I know we must know the basic principles for both types e.g. the Cynamid/Campus Oil for interlocutory, for giving a good answer. But it does seem that certain topics can be narrowed down if you look at what questions are usually asked. Now don't get me wrong, there are areas such as proprietary estoppel and the three certainties where you will have to know everything about them. Then there are the unpredictable areas like charitable trusts where any of the 4 or all of them could come up. Also I know the questions will vary slightly over the years and the problems won't be the same but the area it's concentrating on seems to be the same.

My plan anyway is to cover the mentioned topics above, note what kind of questions are usually asked for each topic - from the sample answers from 2005-2011 that I'm going through, and the grid. Then make a summary/plan for each type of question (1-2 pages) including the important cases/principles. This hopefully won't take too long, especially if I'm going over an area I covered last time and feel it comfortable with it, and it will be a great revision tool and will narrow some of the topics a bit.

After failing it last time due to only covering like 8 areas (fully) then only being able to attempt 3 questions on the exam I feel this is a good way to get all (or a lot) of the topics in, and I'll have summaries/plan's for questions for quick revision. I'm just hoping I can get this done in the next week or week and a half so I can move onto concentrating on learning the material off for all 4 subjects. Getting too close now to be getting stuck into 1 or 2 topics for two or three days to be honest. Last time I only had about a week before the exams for learning off, and to add to that I left out a lot of topics. Hoping this time it will be better and that the plan above will work. I did it somewhat for Criminal and Contract, kind of only added in the topics I needed for that and will just learn off the ones I did last time again.

What do you guys think? How are you approaching it, or indeed approaching it in general at this stage? I just want to have 3 weeks or little under for pure revision and learning off, but also want to cover as much as I can as I feel these were the two main things that got me last sitting - not leaving myself enough time to learn the stuff off, and restricting my options by not covering enough topics.

Procrastastudy

Chops do you mind me asking - did you do an undergrad law degree? If so do you remember any of it? First year is now a distant memory to me and I only did my last exam last week.

chops018

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Chops do you mind me asking - did you do an undergrad law degree? If so do you remember any of it? First year is now a distant memory to me and I only did my last exam last week.

Yeah I have a law Degree and a Masters. I remember bits and pieces, not much though, only some parts stick. Then when you are going over it for the exams you will see yourself going "oh yeah", but also you will see yourself understanding areas a lot better than you did when you were in first year. These exams are rotten, don't underestimate them when you get to them, they need a lot of work. In saying that some people go off and study 7 or 8 topics, get pox lucky and all the topics they studied would come up and they pass with flying colours. Then there is me, study 8-10 topics and then in the exam only be able to attemp 3-4 questions instead of 5. My own fault really, just trying to cover as much as possible now, but it's so hard to remember so much material.

Procrastastudy

chops018 wrote: »

Yeah I have a law Degree and a Masters. I remember bits and pieces, not much though, only some parts stick. Then when you are going over it for the exams you will see yourself going "oh yeah", but also you will see yourself understanding areas a lot better than you did when you were in first year. These exams are rotten, don't underestimate them when you get to them, they need a lot of work. In saying that some people go off and study 7 or 8 topics, get pox lucky and all the topics they studied would come up and they pass with flying colours. Then there is me, study 8-10 topics and then in the exam only be able to attemp 3-4 questions instead of 5. My own fault really, just trying to cover as much as possible now, but it's so hard to remember so much material.

Never doing the FE1s - I'm hoping to do the proper ones at the Inns :P

userlady

Hi, I am looking for Griffith Company sample answers. I have EU griffith sample answers and Constitutional City to offer in return if anyone is interested in doing a sample answer swap PM me

boomtown84

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Never doing the FE1s - I'm hoping to do the proper easy ones at the Inns :P

FYP

Ned_led16

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Never doing the FE1s - I'm hoping to do the proper ones at the Inns :P

Are they really that much easier.. and if so ...why is that?

Procrastastudy

What I was saying was in jest.

My half baked ill-informed theory is this:

FE1s limit the number of solicitors going into the profession - the anecdotal evidence I have is the the FE1s have been getting harder and harder in recent years.

The KI Entrance exams are there to make sure dunder heads don't get into the KI but at the same time make sure the course is full. Bearing in mind it doesn't really matter how many barristers there are they're all self employed.

There is also the fact that there are more FE1 exams but the KI is 5 in a week in one go.

In all honesty we were just joshing but there's my theory for whats its worth.

Also this had no bearing on my decision on which route to take. Lets face it cape v sitting in an office all day reporting to a boss. No contest

hopefullegal

Hi guys

Sitting 4 FE1s in Oct: Contract, Tort, Company and Property. Started studying a week ago and only 5 weeks left! I know I'm cutting it fine!

I've just finished a law degree and I've got the Independent Colleges manuals for each. My approach at the moment is to learn tenish pages a day of each then a week of exam papers and then the exams. I've no sample answers.

Am I going about things the right way!? Any advice would be great!!

sorchauna

hopefullegal wrote: »

Hi guys

Sitting 4 FE1s in Oct: Contract, Tort, Company and Property. Started studying a week ago and only 5 weeks left! I know I'm cutting it fine!

I've just finished a law degree and I've got the Independent Colleges manuals for each. My approach at the moment is to learn tenish pages a day of each then a week of exam papers and then the exams. I've no sample answers.

Am I going about things the right way!? Any advice would be great!!

Coming straight from your degree has it plus in that you will have some of the law fresh in your mind. My main concern for myself sitting them as a first timer also is not treating them like my law degree exams. In college, I just learnt off the topic, stuck an intro and conlusion onto it and regardless of what the question was bout, they were going to get the same answer and you'd happily get a 2.1! What I am trying to keep in mind everytime I study is do I understand it. I did a masters and that really showed me the value in understanding. If you have examiners report you will see in any subject, points not given if you did not advise the client etc. Keep this in mind when answering the questions.

Also its not the length of the notes but the quality. Some of my company notes go on for 20ish pages and then in property you can have something like finding in 4 pages. Certain stuff should be covered, any recent cases or any new legislation come out. This should be easy for you as a very recent graduate as you will have this flagged in your BCL.

Also note key topics, Yes try cover everything you can but they are some stuff you'd be stupid to leave out i.e. succession is one if not two questions in property, directors (everything with them) should be covered in company and contract consideration/estopell, offer and acceptance, remedies, discharge of contracts etc. Im doing those three like you but not Tort so no idea what would you not leave out there. Try even get a exam grid. If your time gets tight and you need to drop stuff, make sure what your dropping is worth the risk.

I think its been said loads of times on this board that these exams are much harder than a degree. Understanding it and applying it is key. What I would say is as your learning look at the questions. I'd highly recommend getting the sample answers. You can buy them if you search in boards or some one may send you some.

Good Luck!

hopefullegal

Thanks a lot sorchauna really appreciate the advice! I know what you mean about the different answering style. Any other exam technique tips?

The manuals I'm using are Oct 2011 so I'd better make sure recent developments aren't left out (the only glaring omission I can see so far is Civil Partnerships re Property). If anyone knows of anything big that's happened in tort/contract/company/property in the last 9 months a heads up would be great!

Also, as sorchauna mentioned, if anyone is selling sample answers/exam grids PM me. (btw are sample answers from Griffith/Independent Colleges?)

Hope to god I pass three of these!

sorchauna

hopefullegal wrote: »

Thanks a lot sorchauna really appreciate the advice! I know what you mean about the different answering style. Any other exam technique tips?

The manuals I'm using are Oct 2011 so I'd better make sure recent developments aren't left out (the only glaring omission I can see so far is Civil Partnerships re Property). If anyone knows of anything big that's happened in tort/contract/company/property in the last 9 months a heads up would be great!

Just google that act in property. Think I said before a lot of law firms d short pieces on their websites about recent developments and its a good starting point for simple breakdown of the most important aspects of the act which should referred to. Funnily enough Im using the same manuals and its just that and the LCLRC 2009 be careful of. Its been a few years now since its implemented so I must check bailli website myself, check no new cases are pending.

Watch out in contract, you may think its not important cause its a few lines in themanual and you have half a questions. I was doing remedies today and there was a half question on specfic performane and quatum merit. My manual had a few lines and no cases so I'd to look them up cause if thay had come up in Oct, I'd not know. There would be nothing worse than not being able to answer part of the a question you need to do. Make sure you know what topics are linked together! Contract and company can have overlap between chapters so bear that in mind.

Thats the way Im doing it. As I said, Ive not sat these yet so you may get better advise off people who done these and passed and they should be followed over my advice!

Glinda!

hopefullegal wrote: »

Hi guys

Sitting 4 FE1s in Oct: Contract, Tort, Company and Property. Started studying a week ago and only 5 weeks left! I know I'm cutting it fine!

I've just finished a law degree and I've got the Independent Colleges manuals for each. My approach at the moment is to learn tenish pages a day of each then a week of exam papers and then the exams. I've no sample answers.

Am I going about things the right way!? Any advice would be great!!

Completely agree wit sorchauna, hit the nail on the head with the advice. Especially two points made, first is it is all about being able to show to know, understand and can apply the legal principles to the question asked. And that is the crucial difference between college and FE1 exams. It is a given that you can look up the textbook to quote Courtney or a ream of caselaw etc, what you have to be able to show is the basic legal principles. Like Chops, I got too caught up in the standard of the answer you need to pass and went into far too much depth and didn't cover enough of the course in each topic. Knowing a few cases of as many topics as you can is much more valuable than knowing everything about a few topics. Its more logical too because its not possible to know everything in perfect detail!

The other point i defo agreed with sorchauna on is contract. Def thought would be sound exam, short enough syllabus etc, WRONG!

And lastly, dont get too stressed about time you have left to study, i think a few weeks of good study will absolutely stand to you much better than looking at it for too long, it will still be fresh in your memory and I think its a far better position to be in! I would advise you to get your hands on some sample answers as will cut down on the sheer amount of reading and great for glance over the night before! Best of luck with them!

Hopefully we'll b lookin back @ the exams as fully qualified solicitors with actual jobs rather than some oblivious self-employed 'Barrister' who will find out the reality of the real world that 'self-employed' means cant even get dole let alone work :rolleyes:

Procrastastudy

Glinda! wrote: »

Hopefully we'll b lookin back @ the exams as fully qualified solicitors with actual jobs rather than some oblivious self-employed 'Barrister' who will find out the reality of the real world that 'self-employed' means cant even get dole let alone work :rolleyes:

Just in case that was a pop at me for being flippant and trying to have a bit of a laugh - I'm well aware of the situation in regards to barristers - I assume you're aware of how it's nigh on impossible to find a training contract? I'm also well aware the FE1s require more work to pass.

If it was more of a general pop then seems you've acquired the ol' chip on the shoulder earlier than some.

Either way I wish you the best of luck - and remember a sense of humour will see you though the rough patches.

NoQuarter

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Are they really that much easier.. and if so ...why is that?

From someone who has done both FE1s and the Inns entrance exams this is my view on it.

I equate them at pretty much the same difficulty but they have different challenges.

FE1s have more narrow questions and that understandably makes them that bit more difficult. However, there are 8 question choices as opposed to the 5 on the inns papers. The FE1s require 5 answers in 3 hours as opposed to 3 answers in the same time with the inns. This means that you have to spend more time on the inns questions, and that means you need to have more to write about obviously. So in that regard its easier to have a choice of 8 rather than 5.

A big difficulty with the inns exams is that there is a compulsory question. What that means is that you cant leave ANYTHING out of study, cherry picking is not an option unlike in the FE1s where you can take the risk of leaving 2-3 topics out.

The obvious point, FE1s are 8 exams, KI is only 5. 5 in a row but if you were doing all 8 of the FE1s they would be in a row too. It is easier to have a choice though and lots of people choose topics based on the time table to allow for that ever-important in between day!

TL;DR: The FE1 questions are that bit tougher but the layout of the Inns exams are more difficult so IMO the difficulty level is similar in both.

userlady

Hi I am looking to to a sample answer swap. I am looking for company griffith sample answers. I have EU Griffith, Tort Griffith and Constitutional City colleges and Griffith to offer in return.

sorchauna

Glinda! wrote: »

Hopefully we'll b lookin back @ the exams as fully qualified solicitors with actual jobs rather than some oblivious self-employed 'Barrister' who will find out the reality of the real world that 'self-employed' means cant even get dole let alone work :rolleyes:

I know I feel like going into these the way things are and how hard it is to get a traineeship, you kinda need to have blind faith to put the time and money into these exams. But I really hope we can pass it!

I work in the legal industry though and I do think its harder for young barristers to get the work at the moment, in this climate being self employed is much harder than being in a firm and not really needing to bring in all the business to an extent. It does beg the question that maybe we could open it up in a way that allows people go straight to barristers. There is a still that taint over the legal industry! People assume your robbing them blind not knowing how expensive the legal system is...But I digrest.

Hope Study is going well for everybody and that the panic has not set in yet!

sorchauna

Is it just me or does anybody else thing we should be allowed bring the LCLRC Act 2009 with us into property! I menat if we can have all the Companies Cct or Eu treaties which us, why can't they allowed this!

Ok rant over now...

-splatto-

Hi,

Would anyone be able to just briefly tell me what are the topics which came up in last March's sitting as per the exam grid in the following subjects

Contract
Constitutional
Company
EU

I have exam grids in each up until Oct 11 and just want to fill in the blanks.

I have the papers from the last sitting but havnt recieved the reports yet so just want to make sure im not missing anything

Thanks

Glinda!

TL;DR: The FE1 questions are that bit tougher but the layout of the Inns exams are more difficult so IMO the difficulty level is similar in both.[/QUOTE]

Differences between the FE1 exams and King Inn's are really only in the format they are set. The big picture is whether you want to become a solicitor or barrister, and this is a thread for the FE1 exams for those studying for them to ask questions to others in the same boat, not for flippant remarks from someone that obviously has no intention of sitting them and is going down the easier road in his/her view of the Inns.

Just found it very ignorant remark, I get it wasn't intended in that way and I sincerely wish you the very best of luck. I hope though you are actually doing the Inns because you want to be a Barrister not because you think its the easier option. No legal career is easy but you hv to really want to do it or you wont get through it.

I have a training contract and I got it purely out of being willing to do whatever legal work comes your way. I took a Legal Assistant Position that I was suggested for by one of my lecturer's who asked me what I wanted to do after my Masters and I told her everything and anything and I meant it. It stuck with her and she put me forward for the job and was offered a TC from it.

Keep focused on the exams neways first and foremost and get them under your belt!!

Procrastastudy

While I think you are in dire need of getting a sense of humour / not letting little things bother you it was not my intention to offend. So on that basis I appoligise.

I am well aware of the issues in going down the barrister route - I personally know a barristers and solicitor who told me to avoid it when I researched it before giving up quite a reasonable job paid at about what a NQ gets in a reasonable firm. I also happen across quite a few new barristers in the various activities I help arrange for GCD and when you speak to a them and tell them you're a law student looking to go down that route the first question is normally 'Are you mad?'

I would say that the barrister route, although in my personal view is easier to get into, the life once you are there is much harder. At least a solicitor knows whether they have a job or not.

As for being here - I was asked to post here rather than start a separate post for undergraduates. Personally - and I have mentioned something like this before - I'd love to see a sticky with links to a KI thread, FE thread and Undergrad thread. The consensus seems to be post here though so I'm afraid we'll just have to learn to get on. Just to also mention it wasn't an unsolicited post either it stemmed from a tongue in cheek comment I made, which very quickly gained a tongue in cheek slap down by someone here - which someone then ended up asking a question which I tried to answer - admittedly with my own half arsed theory.

The212

hope everyones study is going well!

panic setting in a little now and as I don't know anyone else taking the exams.. feeling quite alone in the whole bloody thing .. but anyway not to worry.

just re Constitutional guys, I have my topics list (which is very open to modification) which consist of SOP, Due Course, Personal Rights,Property Rights, The Pres and A26, Freedom of Speech, Unenum Rights, Judicial Review, Equality , Public Administration and The Courts.

by looking at that, do you think its anywhere near sufficient?

also anyone's opinion on what is likely to make an appearance (or really any other tips re the paper) would be greatly appreciated. sorry for the bombardment its just that here is really my only place to vent!

thanks a million

Sparky29

Hey guys, first time back in here in awhile, down to last 3 of Equity, Company and EU so 3 real exciting topics

Been trying to find information, mainly just the facts of the case of Fanning v University College Cork (2002) as its been suggested as a good one to know for the Maxim of he who comes to equity must come with clean hands as it is nice to have a somewhat modern case to put down in such an exam. but i cannot find the facts anywhere online, (using google!)

Dont suppose anyone here has a brief summary of how it is relevant to that maxim or the facts? cheers

Procrastastudy

Sparky29 wrote: »

Hey guys, first time back in here in awhile, down to last 3 of Equity, Company and EU so 3 real exciting topics

Been trying to find information, mainly just the facts of the case of Fanning v University College Cork (2002) as its been suggested as a good one to know for the Maxim of he who comes to equity must come with clean hands as it is nice to have a somewhat modern case to put down in such an exam. but i cannot find the facts anywhere online, (using google!)

Dont suppose anyone here has a brief summary of how it is relevant to that maxim or the facts? cheers

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/sino_search_1.cgi?sort=rank&query=Fanning%20and%20v%20and%20University%20and%20College%20and%20Cork&method=boolean&highlight=1&mask_path=/

I shall sumerise in my own (likely in accurate) style:

Lecturer at UCC (sacked?) brings case to the High Court - p!sses off High Court Judge by being a knob. "Lacking of candour and clarity" - appeals to SC who pass it back down to the High Court to be heard in front of another judge.

Sparky29

Awesome, thanks!

lynnie1

Hey guys, this is probably a stupid question but do you actually have to SIT the fourth exam, like I mean phsyically go in and write your name or can you give it a miss if your planning on failing it??

Strawberry Fields

lynnie1 wrote: »

Hey guys, this is probably a stupid question but do you actually have to SIT the fourth exam, like I mean phsyically go in and write your name or can you give it a miss if your planning on failing it??

Yes you have to go in sign your number and stay the 30/45 minutes. You'll see a fair few leaving at that stage.