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

Legal23

user115 wrote: »

Hey Legal23 definitely sit criminal, sounds like you have the major work done and just a bit overwhelmed with the amount you need to actually keep in your head. I did the exams twice before i got the first 3 and I got criminal both times. He is a very fair marker. I think focus on the substantive offences MS, murder, NFOAP, know all sexual offences very well and know a bit about all the defenses you will pass. Both times I did a question on property offences and literally named the theft and fraud act 2001 and was given marks for it. You'll be grand, it's very hard but try not to let the stress get to you, yes it is an unreal amount of information to hold in your head esp cause your doing other exams but it is amazing what you remember in the exam. When you are responding to questions set out how you understand the law, the issue, then apply that to the question and it will show you know your stuff. Try your best to get a good sleep, makes all the difference when you are trying to understand and learn things off. Really hoping they all go very well for you

Oh thank you so much, I think I am just so overwhelmed at this stage... The amount of statutes and cases.. The doubt creeps in that I don't know anything... Although its not great knowing you haven't passed, it's reassuring to know others have been in the same situation and got the magic three. I'm going to focus abit tonight on defences and then focus all day tomorrow on the rest and just give it a go on Wednesday. Thanks again I really appreciate it.

Vegetarian2017

Legal23 wrote:

Oh thank you so much, I think I am just so overwhelmed at this stage... The amount of statutes and cases.. The doubt creeps in that I don't know anything... Although its not great knowing you haven't passed, it's reassuring to know others have been in the same situation and got the magic three. I'm going to focus abit tonight on defences and then focus all day tomorrow on the rest and just give it a go on Wednesday. Thanks again I really appreciate it.

Definitely go for it, don't worry so much once you can talk like u understand the concepts. Referring and applying the caselaw / limbs of a test. I named a few statutes wrong etc in mine. i nearly bottled for last exam as wasn't sure re criminal and got the magic 3.

Gunslinger92

Anyone else tabbing the shït out of their companies act on anything at all that might be useful in the exam? :pac:

iamanengine

After such a rough Tort paper I reckon Criminal is gunna be a beaut

bigtophat13

iamanengine wrote: »

After such a rough Tort paper I reckon Criminal is gunna be a beaut

I hope this is the way it works!

bigtophat13

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Anyone else tabbing the shït out of their companies act on anything at all that might be useful in the exam? :pac:

I did this for last set and it worked beautifully, used it as a total crutch for Summary Approval Procedure and the transfer of shares and wrote a shockingly good answer considering how uncomfortable with it I was!

iamanengine

bigtophat13 wrote: »

I hope this is the way it works!

Classification of Offences incoming I can feel it!

Lol

lawless11

iamanengine wrote: »

Classification of Offences incoming I can feel it!

Lol

Wouldn't we all wish for that now haha

I believe it can happen

bigtophat13

iamanengine wrote: »

Classification of Offences incoming I can feel it!

Lol

lawless11 wrote: »

Wouldn't we all wish for that now haha

I believe it can happen

I actually haven't prepped for that yet and likely won't get time even though I expect it!

bigtophat13

For co-ownership, are the partition acts gone since the LCLRA? I think they are but making sure.

jewels652

iamanengine wrote: »

Classification of Offences incoming I can feel it!

Lol

Me too!!!! 😂

nimcdona

bigtophat13 wrote: »

For co-ownership, are the partition acts gone since the LCLRA? I think they are but making sure.

Yep they're gone, think its section 31 of LCLRA

nimcdona

iamanengine wrote: »

Classification of Offences incoming I can feel it!

Lol

Do you reckon its relatively safe to ignore the definition of crime since it came up last year and just look at classification?

bigtophat13

nimcdona wrote: »

Yep they're gone, think its section 31 of LCLRA

You're dead right, went looking at Wylie there. I always find it so conceited where they're like " the land reform commission thought xyz" which just means "I thought"

iamanengine

nimcdona wrote: »

Do you reckon its relatively safe to ignore the definition of crime since it came up last year and just look at classification?

Yep. That’s my thinking.

Disclaimer: My predictions for Tort were wildly inaccurate

iamanengine

bigtophat13 wrote: »

I actually haven't prepped for that yet and likely won't get time even though I expect it!

If you have the notes done you could genuinely learn enough for an answer with a good hours worth of study, less even.

leavingcert17

iamanengine wrote: »

Yep. That’s my thinking.

Disclaimer: My predictions for Tort were wildly inaccurate

Is that characteristics?

bigtophat13

iamanengine wrote: »

If you have the notes done you could genuinely learn enough for an answer with a good hours worth of study, less even.

My only understanding of the way to answer that is his sample answer and that's quite lengthy

Scratch that, found it in my manual and it's 4 pages there! He can't expect his level!

laurar2019

what are 5 reforms of the act?? i can only think of 2

bigtophat13

laurar2019 wrote: »

what are 5 reforms of the act?? i can only think of 2

Not doing company but I know Summary Approval Procedure, Codification and expansion of directors duties are 2 of them. Something to do with the punishment of directors too I think!

kasey0123

laurar2019 wrote: »

what are 5 reforms of the act?? i can only think of 2

codification of directors duties in 228, Sumary approval procedure, ultra vires doctrine abolished for LTDS, charge system has changed and maybe Table A replaced.. or new LTD/DAC framework..

sapphire309

laurar2019 wrote: »

what are 5 reforms of the act?? i can only think of 2

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Not doing company but I know Summary Approval Procedure, Codification and expansion of directors duties are 2 of them. Something to do with the punishment of directors too I think!

I was literally just thinking the same thing.

Think the most significant reform from the previous regime is that the model LTD company won't have a defined objects clause.

Also majority written resolutions are new to the act I think

JCormac

Have a sneaking suspicion that Adverse Possession will come up as an Essay Q this sitting

lisac223

Is anyone else absolutely dying or is that just me?!

iamanengine

leavingcert17 wrote: »

Is that characteristics?

It’s Arrestable/Serious, Minor/Non-Minor, Indictable/Summary, Civil/Criminal

z6vm1dobfnca3x

Am I right in saying that an accessory is essentially an umbrella term for someone who either aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an offence?

lawless11

Kyree Bumpy Shrimp wrote: »

Am I right in saying that an accessory is essentially an umbrella term for someone who either aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an offence?

Yep, also you have the accessory after the act S.7 CLA 1997.


(Accessory liability and Common Design/Joint Enteprise always confuse me as to which one is which as well)

bigtophat13

lawless11 wrote: »

Yep, also you have the accessory after the act S.7 CLA 1997.


(Accessory liability and Common Design/Joint Enteprise always confuse me as to which one is which as well)

It confuses everyone, in R v Gnago even the house of lords were like "well you're either aiding or you're in common design but either way you're guilty"

They both have the same punishment right? Tried as primary offender?

I actually mix up all the incohate ones as well, it's a nuisance.

z6vm1dobfnca3x

lawless11 wrote: »

Yep, also you have the accessory after the act S.7 CLA 1997.


(Accessory liability and Common Design/Joint Enteprise always confuse me as to which one is which as well)

Thanks.

My understanding is that you have S.7 CLA 1997 which captures aiding, abetting counselling & procuring i.e. accessories to the principal offence. (Also covers accessories after the fact e.g. impeding arrest of the principal offender).

You then have the old common law principles of Common Design / Joint Enterprise which capture secondary participants outside the remit of the above act - seems to apply where there are unusual consequences that arise from the joint enterprise e.g. the whole issue of whether Noel Murray could be convicted of capital murder.

Kind of thinking out loud there but hopefully it helps you too.

fe12019

Has anyone got an up to date constitutional law grid they could send on or even just last October's paper?