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

graduate555

Becks63976 wrote: »

Could anybody tell me wat topic they wrote about for question 1 today. Please

I talked about a bunch of things and hope something hit home.. I said Art 38 was implicated as the crime was too vague and was strict liability, and briefly whether it was an okay restriction on the freedom of assembly and association and then threw in expression because of the posters! I also threw in the proportionality test but didn't really apply it. What did you talk about?

Becks63976

graduate555 wrote:

I talked about a bunch of things and hope something hit home.. I said Art 38 was implicated as the crime was too vague and was strict liability, and briefly whether it was an okay restriction on the freedom of assembly and association and then threw in expression because of the posters! I also threw in the proportionality test but didn't really apply it. What did you talk about?

I talked a little about assembly and then freedom of expression but i was really only guessing.

Robbie25808

In relation to criminal law, if the question says 'advise noel', do we just advise him on his defence?
But if the question says, 'advise noel on his criminal liability do we talk about defence and his charge?

Gunslinger92

Robbie25808 wrote: »

In relation to criminal law, if the question says 'advise noel', do we just advise him on his defence?
But if the question says, 'advise noel on his criminal liability do we talk about defence and his charge?

Yep that's it exactly, advise him of what he could potentially be charged with and any defences

MeganC1554

Starting to worry now. I made a stab at 5 question but ran out of time so had to cut my last question short. I hope 3 decent answers and 2 half hearted answers can get me over the line.

Lumi77

Fe1 2017 wrote: »

The City colleges one is missing a lot. The independent one is definitely better even though it's a good bit longer.

I did Griffith and the manual is very extensive.

Robbie25808

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Yep that's it exactly, advise him of what he could potentially be charged with and any defences

So advise him on any charges for both?

shellbm

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Yep that's it exactly, advise him of what he could potentially be charged with and any defences

This is news to me !! thank you!!

Fe1 2017

MeganC1554 wrote: »

Starting to worry now. I made a stab at 5 question but ran out of time so had to cut my last question short. I hope 3 decent answers and 2 half hearted answers can get me over the line.

Don't worry at all. You only need that. I had 2 good 1 average 1 below average and one case note last time and comfortably passed.

MeganC1554

Don't worry at all. You only need that. I had 2 good 1 average 1 below average and one case note last time and comfortably passed.[/quote]

Thanks so much! You have literally made me feel so much better. I can see some sort of light. Crazy what these god damn exams do to you.

Dunne1995

Anyone got sample answers for 2016 Criminal? I can swap any other year or I have stuff for Contract too.

shellbm

Can i ask one last question in relation regarding the question about DPP v JC today; I approached this by discussing AG v O'Brien, Shaw v DPP and DPP v Kenny and then Hardiman's dissent etc in the decision of JC and my opinion of whether or not this was a regrettable decision etc as the question asked. I didn't move outside the area of unconstitutionally obtained evidence however - was this question asking for a wider comparison, as in comparing this to general rights under Article 38??

Sorry officially moving on now, just have that awful dread feeling about that question

Yoop

shellbm wrote: »

Can i ask one last question in relation regarding the question about DPP v JC today; I approached this by discussing AG v O'Brien, Shaw v DPP and DPP v Kenny and then Hardiman's dissent etc in the decision of JC and my opinion of whether or not this was a regrettable decision etc as the question asked. I didn't move outside the area of unconstitutionally obtained evidence however - was this question asking for a wider comparison, as in comparing this to general rights under Article 38??

Sorry officially moving on now, just have that awful dread feeling about that question

I took this approach too; didn't have time for anything more. It was a pretty open question I feel; you'll be fine as long as you made your points well.

ArthurDayne

Could I ask what people are looking at for Criminal in terms of the essay questions? Any particular material you'd recommend looking at?

makemecrazy

shellbm wrote: »

Can i ask one last question in relation regarding the question about DPP v JC today; I approached this by discussing AG v O'Brien, Shaw v DPP and DPP v Kenny and then Hardiman's dissent etc in the decision of JC and my opinion of whether or not this was a regrettable decision etc as the question asked. I didn't move outside the area of unconstitutionally obtained evidence however - was this question asking for a wider comparison, as in comparing this to general rights under Article 38??

Sorry officially moving on now, just have that awful dread feeling about that question

I spoke about O'Brien, Kenny, Cash and JC (general facts about law progression) and in my conclusion said there are several safeguards like Garda preserving evidence, presumption of innocence and the fact the dpp aren't looking for a guilty verdict, merely a result of justice in my conclusion to show that there are still safeguards in place

shellbm

makemecrazy wrote: »

I spoke about O'Brien, Kenny, Cash and JC (general facts about law progression) and in my conclusion said there are several safeguards like Garda preserving evidence, presumption of innocence and the fact the dpp aren't looking for a guilty verdict, merely a result of justice in my conclusion to show that there are still safeguards in place

Cheers for the reply guys, I took the same approach myself for the conclusion but just kept case law to those specific cases. I can rest a little easier now .. On to the next !

the great communicator

shellbm wrote: »

Can i ask one last question in relation regarding the question about DPP v JC today; I approached this by discussing AG v O'Brien, Shaw v DPP and DPP v Kenny and then Hardiman's dissent etc in the decision of JC and my opinion of whether or not this was a regrettable decision etc as the question asked. I didn't move outside the area of unconstitutionally obtained evidence however - was this question asking for a wider comparison, as in comparing this to general rights under Article 38??

Sorry officially moving on now, just have that awful dread feeling about that question

No I did the same I think your approach was spot on.

Lumi77

Couldn't sleep all night thinking about question 3 yesterday.
Did anyone else do that question please
Thank you

20029422

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Could I ask what people are looking at for Criminal in terms of the essay questions? Any particular material you'd recommend looking at?

suppose it could be any defence and all the topics with recklessness strict liability etc hard to narrow it down

the great communicator

Lumi77 wrote: »

Couldn't sleep all night thinking about question 3 yesterday.
Did anyone else do that question please
Thank you

Sorry to hear that and I've been in that situation before.
Was that the one with the sick father?

I didn't attempt it myself but it was a very broad question by the looks of it and I'm sure you've picked up marks for whatever you wrote

Lumi77

the great communicator wrote: »

Sorry to hear that and I've been in that situation before.
Was that the one with the sick father?

I didn't attempt it myself but it was a very broad question by the looks of it and I'm sure you've picked up marks for whatever you wrote

Thank you yes that's the one. It's my first sitting so my head as you imagine is in bits.

binkevii

Does anyone have a criminal law exam grid? Please and thank you.

graduate555

Does anyone know what the difference is between the inchoate offence of incitement and the accessory offences? And conspiracy versus a common design? Or would you just say someone could be guilty of both?

Yohnathan

Has anyone please got an up to date Contract Law Grid please?

irishasj

https://www.lawsociety.ie/Documents/education/Overall%20MASTER%20Timetable.pdf

Has the dates blocked off for October 2017 FE-1's as 3rd to 12th of October

Maybe don't take them as set but provisional?

Robbie25808

In relation to defence of intoxication, it is a defence for specific intent only.

If you commit an offence which is one of strict liability, is there no defence of intoxication? e.g. assault causing harm is a strict liability offence so requires no mens rea.

Lumi77

Robbie25808 wrote: »

In relation to defence of intoxication, it is a defence for specific intent only.

If you commit an offence which is one of strict liability, is there no defence of intoxication? e.g. assault causing harm is a strict liability offence so requires no mens rea.

I think insanity applies also in the same content.

shellbm

Robbie25808 wrote: »

In relation to defence of intoxication, it is a defence for specific intent only.

If you commit an offence which is one of strict liability, is there no defence of intoxication? e.g. assault causing harm is a strict liability offence so requires no mens rea.

Yeah, thats right. The defence of self-induced intoxication only applies to crimes of specific intent and it not available to any crime which is considered one of basic intent - where the prosecution don't need to show intention on part of the accused (strict liability offences). However in the context of innocent intoxication, the "basic" and "specific" part is irrelevant. It is a defence to every criminal charge.

Thats my understanding of it anyway

LegalAnna

irishasj wrote: »

https://www.lawsociety.ie/Documents/education/Overall%20MASTER%20Timetable.pdf

Has the dates blocked off for October 2017 FE-1's as 3rd to 12th of October

Maybe don't take them as set but provisional?

Is it just me or did they only block off 7 days for the October exams? Maybe I'm just reading it wrong!

shellbm

Sorry if this is obvious, its my first time sitting criminal. Are you expected to know the section and act of every offence? I understand the main ones should be learned off but would it be expected to know say the precise section of something like forgery?