FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

Bayb12

:P

annmc882 wrote: »

Not Vic anyways

False imprisonment. It is mentioned he is a council worker but it says advise against bob so probably wouldn't need to bring in vicarious

laurenburne

annmc882 wrote: »

Not Vic anyways

I see it as a false imprisonment question ..you could possibly mention trespass ( which could lead to contributory negligence under civil liability) and vicarious liability as Bob was an employee of the council. so could get into was he working under course/scope of his employment.

Mainly I see false imprisonment though ...I could be wrong but that's what I would launch into.

I'm feeling the nerves now.

Robbie25808

Hey for property I am studying:
About Property
Equity and Notice
Systems of Land Registration
Succession
Co-Ownership
Licence and Rights of Residence
Family Property
Easements
Adverse Possession
Landlord and Tenant Law

Do you think this is enough for the exam? Really dont like the Mortage chapter!

shellbm

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Hey for property I am studying:
About Property
Equity and Notice
Systems of Land Registration
Succession
Co-Ownership
Licence and Rights of Residence
Family Property
Easements
Adverse Possession
Landlord and Tenant Law

Do you think this is enough for the exam? Really dont like the Mortage chapter!

Hey, I asked this yesterday and couple pages back except I didn't do Equity and Notice or Licenses and Right of residence - I did do mortgages. The general response was that it was enough to have choice in the paper

ArthurDayne

laurenburne wrote: »

I see it as a false imprisonment question ..you could possibly mention trespass ( which could lead to contributory negligence under civil liability) and vicarious liability as Bob was an employee of the council. so could get into was he working under course/scope of his employment.

Mainly I see false imprisonment though ...I could be wrong but that's what I would launch into.

I'm feeling the nerves now.

Yeah to be honest I feel just prepared enough to do well provided the paper is reasonably forgiving. All it will take is a couple of curveballs and I'll be falling apart ha

LegalLaaaaady

Does anyone have tips for identifying Tort PQs? I'm finding it extremely difficult to do so and have come at odds with the examiners reports with almost every broadly based question!

Any help is really appreciated! Thanks

the great communicator

LegalLaaaaady wrote: »

Does anyone have tips for identifying Tort PQs? I'm finding it extremely difficult to do so and have come at odds with the examiners reports with almost every broadly based question!

Any help is really appreciated! Thanks

Read the last bit carefully when he asks you to to advise or if there's a duty already established etc. Some of them are very vague but it seems he gives marks for any logical argument

laurenburne

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Yeah to be honest I feel just prepared enough to do well provided the paper is reasonably forgiving. All it will take is a couple of curveballs and I'll be falling apart ha

Yeah me too. If I go in and see questions on occupiers liability, state authority liability, fire, damages, solicitor negligence and employer liability it will be the end for me.

the great communicator

laurenburne wrote: »

Yeah me too. If I go in and see questions on occupiers liability, state authority liability, fire, damages, solicitor negligence and employer liability it will be the end for me.

Don't worry that'd be the end for 90% of candidates including myself.

laurenburne

the great communicator wrote: »

Don't worry that'd be the end for 90% of candidates including myself.

You have me a good laugh reading that. I hope so haha. This time is the worst. Wondering when to call it a night before you've no time left in the morning haha

ArthurDayne

laurenburne wrote: »

You have me a good laugh reading that. I hope so haha. This time is the worst. Wondering when to call it a night before you've no time left in the morning haha

Yea I didn't look over any of those except employer liability --- just kinda looked at it in conjunction with vicarious liability.

For Limitations - have people just learned off an essay ? Seems to be an essay question. I'd prefer to avoid the essays if possible because my brain can't take much academic stuff but it seems inevitable limitations will appea in some form

Supermax1988

ArthurDayne wrote: »

For Limitations - have people just learned off an essay ? Seems to be an essay question. I'd prefer to avoid the essays if possible because my brain can't take much academic stuff but it seems inevitable limitations will appea in some form

I just learned the legislation and I have a handful of cases. It seems to have only ever come up as an essay question. I don't want to have to do an essay question if I can help it but it's a nice one to have in the locker if I get caught out with the problem questions.

the great communicator

I got into bed, out of nowhere I got the thought that the defenses to rylands was coming up and now I'm downstairs learning off that part of the chapter. These exams do funny things to your mind.

ArthurDayne

Good luck tomorrow later everyone -- and may the odds be ever in your favour!

Becks63976

Hi, could someone please help me out with question 4 on the autumn2015 constitutional paper. I just cannot seem to get my head around what it is asking.
Thanks in advance

shellbm

Becks63976 wrote: »

Hi, could someone please help me out with question 4 on the autumn2015 constitutional paper. I just cannot seem to get my head around what it is asking.
Thanks in advance

Personally I would approach that as a question asking about Freedom of Expression, possibly mentioning the right to earn a livelihood being affected? Also I would mentioned Article 15.2, no authority other than the oireachtas has power to make law.

shellbm

shellbm wrote: »

Personally I would approach that as a question asking about Freedom of Expression, possibly mentioning the right to earn a livelihood being affected? Also I would mentioned Article 15.2, no authority other than the oireachtas has power to make law.

Just checked the examiner report, he mentioned he right to livelihood was somewhat irrelevant as the ban did not prevent him from practicing...

Robbie25808

What is the story with legislation.
Can we highlight?
Can we tab the pages?

Do we have to and it in the day before and if so where and what times?

Thanks

Ferry.Man

Robbie25808 wrote: »

What is the story with legislation.
Can we highlight?
Can we tab the pages?

Do we have to and it in the day before and if so where and what times?

Thanks

Ya you can highlight and tab it! And you can hand it in the day before up to 1 o clock or the morning of the exam but if you hand it in on the morning you wont get it for about 30 min or an hour into the exam!!

Gunslinger92

Hope tort went well lads!

odwyer94

Tort wasn't too bad! Happy enough with the paper. Not certain I passed but made a reasonable enough stab at five questions at least.

Robbie25808

The Residential Tenancies Act 2004 contains a number of significant reforms for the private rented
sector in Ireland, in particular in the area of security of tenure and tenancy termination
procedures. Consider whether the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 has succeeded in its aim of
providing a clear legislative framework for tenancy obligations for landlords and tenants in Ireland.
Critically discuss this statement with reference to case law.

Anybody know any cases for a question like this? There are none in the manuals which I have!

laurenburne

odwyer94 wrote: »

Tort wasn't too bad! Happy enough with the paper. Not certain I passed but made a reasonable enough stab at five questions at least.

I feel the exact same. I was initially happy when I came out because I was able to make a stab at five questions but now I'm not feeling it as much.

Was that a question on vicarious liability? It confused me.

odwyer94

laurenburne wrote: »

I feel the exact same. I was initially happy when I came out because I was able to make a stab at five questions but now I'm not feeling it as much.

Was that a question on vicarious liability? It confused me.

I think if you came out of the exam happy it's a good sign, you're probably just overanalysing it now!

I'm not sure. That was the question that confused me and I likely went down on. I originally thought it was vicarious liability but then I decided it wasnt and just talked about standard of duty instead. Probably not correct though.

the great communicator

odwyer94 wrote: »

I think if you came out of the exam happy it's a good sign, you're probably just overanalysing it now!

I'm not sure. That was the question that confused me and I likely went down on. I originally thought it was vicarious liability but then I decided it wasnt and just talked about standard of duty instead. Probably not correct though.

It was definitely on standard of care but vicarious was relevant because the coach was an employee of the school.
It's the perfect example of a question where he writes in the exam reports "most achieved a passing grade but few excelled". So wouldn't worry about it

shellbm

Literally feel like I know nothing for constitutional despite studying for months. Is there any indication of the pass rate? SO tempted not to sit it

graduate555

the great communicator wrote: »

It was definitely on standard of care but vicarious was relevant because the coach was an employee of the school.
It's the perfect example of a question where he writes in the exam reports "most achieved a passing grade but few excelled". So wouldn't worry about it

In one or two past papers I'm sure he mentioned that a certain problem scenario offered a wide scope to deal with a number of issues. I tried out vicarious, switched to standard of care, then threw in waiver. I feel like it was open to interpretation, I went way way over time compared to the other questions so I doubt he expected anyone to address all potential issues

Bayb12

graduate555 wrote: »

In one or two past papers I'm sure he mentioned that a certain problem scenario offered a wide scope to deal with a number of issues. I tried out vicarious, switched to standard of care, then threw in waiver. I feel like it was open to interpretation, I went way way over time compared to the other questions so I doubt he expected anyone to address all potential issues

Did anyone say it was omissions/affirmative duties?

OMGWACA

shellbm wrote: »

Literally feel like I know nothing for constitutional despite studying for months. Is there any indication of the pass rate? SO tempted not to sit it

Definitely sit it, you'd be silly not to. What do you have to lose by sitting it? You will be amazed at what you remember and what comes back to you. Have faith in yourself! Best thing to do I find is not look at any notes for the half hour beforehand, then when you look at the paper all the info in your brain is on a level pegging, no one piece of information is more important than another. That way, you'll open the paper and everything will be much clearer for you! Relax and all your hard work over the last few weeks/months will pay off! But definitely sit it, you've paid for it, you may as well, and you will absolutely surprise yourself!

amomcnico91

shellbm wrote: »

Literally feel like I know nothing for constitutional despite studying for months. Is there any indication of the pass rate? SO tempted not to sit it

I read his exam reports and he tends to indicate that there is a high pass rate. 70% is what I've heard. Honestly, sit it. I've passed 7/8 of these exams and I can honestly say I've never felt prepared going into any of them. I'm sitting the exam tomorrow too, and I'm very nervous.  A little bit of self belief goes a long way. You have loads of time to read over everything. 
Best of Luck.