FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

marxo

What are people covering for the Contract Exam???

GildedCage

Just wondering if anyone has recent EU and/or Constitutional sample answers

crosshair12

Amre17 wrote: »

Tort law -

Could someone please tell me what the October 2011 question on negligence was please.. missing that paper for some reason..

Thanks

October 2011 Q3

"Establishing the duty of care between the parties to a tort action now falls within set categories which it is in reality no longer possible to expand or alter to any significant extent. Essentially the tort of negligence has grown up and now provides certainty through restricting the creation of any new duty of care.

Critically discuss this statement paying particular attention to relevant Irish case law."

Fe1exams

itsonlybla wrote: »

Under the 1995 Act, visitors are present with permission, or as of right. Recreational users are present to engage in a recreational activity with or without permission, free of charge. Everyone else is a trespasser, like the entrant in the March 2010 question.

That question also has some Rylands going on.

90% occupiers liability.
Incidentally, you could be pedantic & state that the guy who broke down was contributory negligent under s34(1) Civil Liability Act 1961 for walking down a steep hill where everything was clearly frozen.. (did he exercise reasonable care for his own safety?) could novus actus interveniens apply here also??
Carslogie v Royal Norwegian Govt.
Ex turpia causa and contributory neg can arise in occupiers liability cases, but from previous experience, personally i am not aware of the examiner mixing occupiers liability, r v f and nuisance in the one question.. He seems to like us to distinguish the different categories and recognise them where they may seem at first glance similar. (could be completely wrong here too)

sorchauna

marxo wrote: »

What are people covering for the Contract Exam???

Everything, contract is not something that can have stuff left out cause the questions are really mixed between all the topics!

GildedCage

sorchauna wrote: »

Everything, contract is not something that can have stuff left out cause the questions are really mixed between all the topics!

I agree, At this stage get the nutshell and cover/revise everything in it (short enough without leaving topics out) thats what I did and passed it

Amre17

crosshair12 wrote: »

Amre17 wrote: »

Tort law -

Could someone please tell me what the October 2011 question on negligence was please.. missing that paper for some reason..

Thanks

October 2011 Q3

"Establishing the duty of care between the parties to a tort action now falls within set categories which it is in reality no longer possible to expand or alter to any significant extent. Essentially the tort of negligence has grown up and now provides certainty through restricting the creation of any new duty of care.

Critically discuss this statement paying particular attention to relevant Irish case law."

Thanks very much!

marxo

sorchauna wrote: »

Everything, contract is not something that can have stuff left out cause the questions are really mixed between all the topics!

Well I am leaving out all of SOGA and exclusion clauses and focusing on the rest, was just wondering if anyone had more detailed tips.

chops018

marxo wrote: »

Well I am leaving out all of SOGA and exclusion clauses and focusing on the rest, was just wondering if anyone had more detailed tips.

Well a brief knowledge of SOGA would be good as it can be brought into a question on the buying of goods or services.

Probably ok to leave out exemption clauses - full question on it last sitting.

Main ones: offer, acceptance, consideration, estoppel, privity, terms, construction, invalidity, discharge, remedies.

Denham

I have the March 2012 Tort grid if anyone would like to swop for one of the other 2012 grids?

Strawberry Fields

I'm working off an older manual for equity, to what extent do I need to learn the contents of the charities act or do I crack on with the 4 mcnaghten rules?

DeSourire

godeas16 wrote: »

I'm working off an older manual for equity, to what extent do I need to learn the contents of the charities act or do I crack on with the 4 mcnaghten rules?

She has criticised this in exam reports. The Charities Act is very important so I would do both (in fact I am doing both!) There's not a whole lot to it anyway.

Amre17

What are people's opinions of a professional negligence question in respect of solicitors and barristers appearing on the tort paper next tuesday - does anyone know has it been up before or are any of the prep courses tipping it??

Trying to ruthlessly cut areas at the minute - not easy!

chops018

godeas16 wrote: »

I'm working off an older manual for equity, to what extent do I need to learn the contents of the charities act or do I crack on with the 4 mcnaghten rules?

Section 3 is the only really important section I think. 3(1) sets out the categories like the Pemsel case did, then 3(7)(8) looks at the public benefit requirement and has a personal nexus element - removing poor relations and poor employees cases as being charitable. Section 3(11) sets out all the areas that are other purposes beneficial to the community.

I would start with something like this for answering a question:

Prior to the enactment of the 2009 Act, the relief of poverty was a purpose that was recognised as being prima facie charitable. This purpose appears to have been broadened by the 2009 Act, which speaks of the prevention or relief of poverty or economic hardship. The courts in Ireland may continue to look to the pre-2009 Act case law in deciding what “poverty” means.

This means you can set out the old case law and just say a little bit about the 2009 act showing that you recognise it is there and that it will have an impact on this area. Obviously a discussion of the above sections will help hugely, but if your stuck for time etc.

Denham

Amre17 wrote: »

What are people's opinions of a professional negligence question in respect of solicitors and barristers appearing on the tort paper next tuesday - does anyone know has it been up before or are any of the prep courses tipping it??

Trying to ruthlessly cut areas at the minute - not easy!

its possible it might appear. Id start by looking at an exam grid if you have one.
Do you have exam grids?

Red Stripe

Hi,

I am in serious need of sample answers from the last sitting of Criminal, Land, and Equity or even past papers if anyone out there is in a giving mood?

I have most sample answers for these subjects up to 2011 in return.

Thanks

DeSourire

Red Stripe wrote: »

Hi,

I am in serious need of sample answers from the last sitting of Criminal, Land, and Equity or even past papers if anyone out there is in a giving mood?

I have most sample answers for these subjects up to 2011 in return.

Thanks

You can buy them on adverts.ie so if you don't get them off someone online you can try there. I can't help sorry.

Red Stripe

DeSourire wrote: »

You can buy them on adverts.ie so if you don't get them off someone online you can try there. I can't help sorry.

Hi,

Thanks for the tip!

ryan606

chops018 wrote: »

Well a brief knowledge of SOGA would be good as it can be brought into a question on the buying of goods or services.

Probably ok to leave out exemption clauses - full question on it last sitting.

Main ones: offer, acceptance, consideration, estoppel, privity, terms, construction, invalidity, discharge, remedies.

Whats SOGA? Hate all these abbreviations!

RandolphEsq

Sale Of Goods Act

sorchauna

Can anyone let me know the difference between s3 assault causing harm and s4 assault causing serious harm in regards to consent?
My manual for s3 mentions Dolny and the fact its strict liability and consent is not a defence. Nor is consent a defence in s4. But then mentions that with sports and defence in can be a defence to s3 and s4 so it just because of s22 of the NFOATP Act which allows you to defeat a s3 and s4 claim if it comes under one of the Common law exceptions? And you can consent to force is sports as long as its not off the ball.

Just want to check if this is right!

FOOKED

Hello,

Would anyone be kind enough to send on any recent sample answers for tort. I've been studying from textbooks and starting to worry I will not be able to answer succinctly. I can swap for 2012 griffith answers in contract if that helps! I'd really appreciate it!

Thanks!

itsonlybla

sorchauna wrote: »

Can anyone let me know the difference between s3 assault causing harm and s4 assault causing serious harm in regards to consent?
My manual for s3 mentions Dolny and the fact its strict liability and consent is not a defence. Nor is consent a defence in s4. But then mentions that with sports and defence in can be a defence to s3 and s4 so it just because of s22 of the NFOATP Act which allows you to defeat a s3 and s4 claim if it comes under one of the Common law exceptions? And you can consent to force in sports as long as its not off the ball.

Just want to check if this is right!

R v Billinghurst [1978] Crim LR 553 is a good case on the limits of implied consent in the sporting context.

Denham

I drew up a timetable...one subject per day...
for those doing 3 + is it better to study all three per day do you think...??
what are people doing?

sorchauna

Denham wrote: »

I drew up a timetable...one subject per day...
for those doing 3 + is it better to study all three per day do you think...??
what are people doing?

Its preference, I like to just stick with a module and to allthe topics in it. Some people will mix it and find its easier on the brain to have a variety. No way is wrong or right, just what your more comfortable with.

UberStressed

Denham wrote: »

I drew up a timetable...one subject per day...
for those doing 3 + is it better to study all three per day do you think...??
what are people doing?

I defo prefer one subject per day, helps me get in the mind set of the subject. I tried mixing subjects but I couldn't focus properly. But maybe depends on your subjects - I'm doing company, EU and equity so they are quite different, but each to their own.

evercloserunion

God, can't stand having exams two days in a row, don't understand how people can do all 8 in these conditions.

What are we covering for company? The ones I'm definitely doing are:
- Separate legal personality
- Ultra vires
- Corporate authority
- All directors' stuff (duties, restriction disqualification, reckless/fraudulent trading etc)
- Corporate borrowing
- Receivership, examinership, liquidation
- Minority shareholder protection

Anything else I should definitely cover? I'm considering maybe shares and/or shareholders and members.

Denham

UberStressed wrote: »

I defo prefer one subject per day, helps me get in the mind set of the subject. I tried mixing subjects but I couldn't focus properly. But maybe depends on your subjects - I'm doing company, EU and equity so they are quite different, but each to their own.

Exactly - but its nice to see how others approach it.....
The other thing is what to study the morning b4 the exam and the night b4....
i take the following approach:
(1) night b4 - recap on my topics - 8,10,12 topics what ever....
(2) the morning b4 - i focus on 3 bankers and hope they come up... i get frazzled studying too many areas in the morning b4... the only thing is im gutted if the three bankers dont appear... it does the sole good being able to ace the first question.. good confidence boost
its doubtful though that you wont be able to predict at least 1 of 3 questions b4 the exam unless the xaminer changes the pattern which happens

DeSourire

What are people covering for Contract? Hope everyone is going well, it's nearly over!!

brannid3

evercloserunion wrote: »

God, can't stand having exams two days in a row, don't understand how people can do all 8 in these conditions.

What are we covering for company? The ones I'm definitely doing are:
- Separate legal personality
- Ultra vires
- Corporate authority
- All directors' stuff (duties, restriction disqualification, reckless/fraudulent trading etc)
- Corporate borrowing
- Receivership, examinership, liquidation
- Minority shareholder protection

Anything else I should definitely cover? I'm considering maybe shares and/or shareholders and members.

I think you're fairly spot on with that list and should get your 5 questions. Share transfer seems to be popular with Courtney if you wanted to fit that in? Maybe disposition of company assets as well. I have the same list as you studied and think I'll just cover share transfer. Dunzo!