Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

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

1231232234236237334

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭Freckley201


    If anyone has any sample answers for company I have some other topics to share.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭bigtophat13


    holliek wrote: »
    I've just focused on unconstitutionally obtained evidence and have all the above cases for that. Is illegally relevant?

    Not really, a very fine point. In a problem question they will surely be based on Uncon and an essay will be some spin on the Article generally, DPP v JC or Uncon so don't worry


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    I am!

    Oh, thank god.

    I had doubts about it since the examiner changed a couple of sittings back, so it's a gamble

    It was either that or Family Property & there's not enough time in the world to study that topic


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 ThomasC94


    Does anyone have past exam papers for criminal, property and/or contract?

    All I can offer is the grids up to October 2016 for Criminal and Property

    Thanks


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    JCormac wrote: »
    Oh, thank god.

    I had doubts about it since the examiner changed a couple of sittings back, so it's a gamble

    It was either that or Family Property & there's not enough time in the world to study that topic

    As far as I know the old examiner is back again, that was only for one year! Also registration is due, up I think.

    My prediction for the Property paper is, in no particular order:

    Succession - 2 Q's
    Finding
    Registration of Land
    Mortgages
    Adverse Possession
    Easements
    Then the mixed 3 part question

    (I actually think Landlord and Tenant might come up but I didn't cover it so I left it out lol)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Breacnua


    As far as I know the old examiner is back again, that was only for one year! Also registration is due, up I think.

    My prediction for the Property paper is, in no particular order:

    Succession - 2 Q's
    Finding
    Registration of Land
    Mortgages
    Adverse Possession
    Easements
    Then the mixed 3 part question

    (I actually think Landlord and Tenant might come up but I didn't cover it so I left it out lol)

    co - ownership also.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    As far as I know the old examiner is back again, that was only for one year! Also registration is due, up I think.

    My prediction for the Property paper is, in no particular order:

    Succession - 2 Q's
    Finding
    Registration of Land
    Mortgages
    Adverse Possession
    Easements
    Then the mixed 3 part question

    (I actually think Landlord and Tenant might come up but I didn't cover it so I left it out lol)

    Ah savage.

    I just hope the second Succession Q isn't an essay question based purely on s117. Yikes

    My prediction would be basically the same; with the Easement question hopefully being problem based


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    JCormac wrote: »
    Ah savage.

    I just hope the second Succession Q isn't an essay question based purely on s117. Yikes

    My prediction would be basically the same; with the Easement question hopefully being problem based

    Yeah I don't know if I have enough on S.117 to do a full Q by itself. Does that often come up? I would have thought it usually comes up with LRS


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭bigtophat13


    Yeah I don't know if I have enough on S.117 to do a full Q by itself. Does that often come up? I would have thought it usually comes up with LRS

    It's come up either or, last exam was very much based on the formal aspects of the will with an essay on the extrinsic evidence aspects and a problem on the form of it based on destruction and witnessing and what not. So it will be up in some guise for sure.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    It's come up either or, last exam was very much based on the formal aspects of the will with an essay on the extrinsic evidence aspects and a problem on the form of it based on destruction and witnessing and what not. So it will be up in some guise for sure.

    Oof, hopefully we get lucky!

    I just checked my notes though and I have 10 cases on S.117 so actually that would probably be fine to get a passing mark, I'm guessing!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    Yeah I don't know if I have enough on S.117 to do a full Q by itself. Does that often come up? I would have thought it usually comes up with LRS

    Q5 October 2017.

    I don't mind if it comes up as part of a problem question tbh. It's just the critical analysis of it that I'm dreading, if it comes up that way.

    Fingers crossed anyway


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭Gunslinger92


    Is it necessary to learn the procedure by which shares are transferred, i.e. all about share certificates?

    I wouldn't say so, there's bugger all about it in my manual and in the sample answers I have


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭bigtophat13


    Oof, hopefully we get lucky!

    I just checked my notes though and I have 10 cases on S.117 so actually that would probably be fine to get a passing mark, I'm guessing!

    As long as you know enough about your cases to show you understand the topic you're golden imo!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    JCormac wrote: »
    Q5 October 2017.

    I don't mind if it comes up as part of a problem question tbh. It's just the critical analysis of it that I'm dreading, if it comes up that way.

    Fingers crossed anyway

    Just had a look at Q5. The statement mentions legal right share so you would be in the clear to take about LRS and appropriation of the family home as well!

    But I agree, had a look at the examiner report, "The question quite clearly merited a critical consideration"...nope


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭bigtophat13


    Anyone who attended the UCD talk in January, what cases did they focus on does anyone know? Would be much appreciated as Carolan is the external and gave that talk.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 Nikcan18


    Can anyone shed light on their study time table? I'm still working full time but getting a lot done in work and then a couple of chapters in the evening. Finishing study at 9pm but still feel like I should be doing more.. March needs to hurry up and end already😂


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 Notions


    JCormac wrote: »
    Anyone else banking on a Land Registration essay for Property?

    Same!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 Notions


    I’m looking and L.L and Tenant now and see someone has commented that they think it won’t come up. What’s the general consensus?

    I was thinking the opposite.

    Also the past Qs only question RTA 2004 and Alientation no mention of determining whether an agreement is a license or a lease.

    Do we think it will come up? And if so, is risking it based on those two only dodge?

    Mortgages is a rotten Q.

    P.s. I’ve covered
    1) finding
    2) family property
    3) licenses
    4) land registration
    5) co ownership
    6) easements
    7) adverse possession

    To do: Succession and mortgages or LL & tenant.
    Opinions welcome


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    Notions wrote: »
    I’m looking and L.L and Tenant now and see someone has commented that they think it won’t come up. What’s the general consensus?

    I was thinking the opposite.

    Also the past Qs only question RTA 2004 and Alientation no mention of determining whether an agreement is a license or a lease.

    Do we think it will come up? And if so, is risking it based on those two only dodge?

    Mortgages is a rotten Q.

    P.s. I’ve covered
    1) finding
    2) family property
    3) licenses
    4) land registration
    5) co ownership
    6) easements
    7) adverse possession

    To do: Succession and mortgages or LL & tenant.
    Opinions welcome

    Registration, Finding, Mortgages and LL&T were tipped by one of the colleges to come up. Along with Succession and AP which tend to come up every year.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 294 ✭✭Vegetarian2017


    Company
    SLP
    Ultra vires
    Corporate authority
    directors
    legislative control
    restrictions & disqual
    min shareholders
    borrowing
    recievership
    realisation of assets

    Is there anything anyone esle is not covering re above or anything i could leave out that won't be mixed with another topic ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 189 ✭✭Supermax1988


    Company
    SLP
    Ultra vires
    Corporate authority
    directors
    legislative control
    restrictions & disqual
    min shareholders
    borrowing
    recievership
    realisation of assets

    Is there anything anyone esle is not covering re above or anything i could leave out that won't be mixed with another topic ?

    I think if you're doing Minority shareholders, do winding up too. They can be mixed in together for a PQ. Receivership is the most popular liquidation topic but I think winding up could be due a run. Hasn't been up in the last 2 I think?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭Gunslinger92


    Yep, hasn't been up for the last two sittings. It can come up by itself too where you're asked to advise on the law on liquidation on the grounds of inability to pay debts, id love that question!

    Also hoping for transfer of shares, very short and straightforward topic


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    Company
    SLP
    Ultra vires
    Corporate authority
    directors
    legislative control
    restrictions & disqual
    min shareholders
    borrowing
    recievership
    realisation of assets

    Is there anything anyone esle is not covering re above or anything i could leave out that won't be mixed with another topic ?


    I'm leaving out ultra vires and receivers (as it came up last sitting). I am doing winding up, share transfer, and hoping to do corporate authority if I have time!

    What is legislative control ...? :confused:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭iamanengine


    Is it time to start panicking yet?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 237 ✭✭z6vm1dobfnca3x


    The OPW have decided to close their public shop... :mad:

    Instead, I had to order legislation over the phone and it is being posted today.

    Did anyone else do this? How long did it take to arrive?

    Guy on the phone said possibly tomorrow but he can't guarantee.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    Is it time to start panicking yet?

    You're only starting now?

    My days have been 60% panic 40% study since the start of February ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    As an aside, for Criminal, does anybody have any cases regarding the disposal of a weapon (either used in an assault or murder, I'm not fussy) by a secondary party?

    Basically, if an older brother provides a weapon to his younger brother that the younger brother uses in an Arrestable offence, after which the older brother was caught disposing of that weapon - Would the older brother be tried as an Accessory after the Fact [s7(2)] or as a party to a Common Design?

    - This would be despite the fact that the older brother was never present at the scene of the crime


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    The OPW have decided to close their public shop... :mad:

    Instead, I had to order legislation over the phone and it is being posted today.

    Did anyone else do this? How long did it take to arrive?

    Guy on the phone said possibly tomorrow but he can't guarantee.


    Mine took roughly 3 days. I'm in Tipp and I presume it was posted from Dublin.

    Hopefully they'll be hasty given the time to exams though


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15 AJM95


    Is it foolish not to be covering either mortgages or landlord and tenants? For property


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 237 ✭✭z6vm1dobfnca3x


    AJM95 wrote: »
    Is it foolish not to be covering either mortgages or landlord and tenants? For property

    I'm not covering either.

    But I might do a small bit on mortgages as a backup.

    I hate Landlord / Tenant though - awful topic.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭bigtophat13


    JCormac wrote: »
    You're only starting now?

    My days have been 60% panic 40% study since the start of February ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    As an aside, for Criminal, does anybody have any cases regarding the disposal of a weapon (either used in an assault or murder, I'm not fussy) by a secondary party?

    Basically, if an older brother provides a weapon to his younger brother that the younger brother uses in an Arrestable offence, after which the older brother was caught disposing of that weapon - Would the older brother be tried as an Accessory after the Fact [s7(2)] or as a party to a Common Design?

    - This would be despite the fact that the older brother was never present at the scene of the crime

    I would imagine he could be either / both. He's inciting and likely aiding/abetting/procuring when he gives him the weapon, once the bro commits the offence surely that's common design? (NI case maybe Lynch where he drove them to the pub they threw the bomb into?) and disposing is accessory after the fact.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement