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

laurar2019

Guys im confused with s62 burdens... how are they cracks if the land owner knows about them like if they have to be registerred?

laurar2019

dont understand land reg at all

lawyersuffolk

AJM95 wrote: »

Anyone staying in the red cow know if you can check out after you exam or do you have to be checked out before hand?

I asked at reception and they said you have to be out by 12 or your charged per hour, not sure how much though! So unfair tbh

Sineaddh

lawyersuffolk wrote: »

I asked at reception and they said you have to be out by 12 or your charged per hour, not sure how much though! So unfair tbh

That’s such a nuisance! Would expect them to be more accommodating as they’re getting so much money from us.

With regard to bags would you think it best to leave with red cow storage or FE1 storage?

lawyersuffolk

Sineaddh wrote: »

That’s such a nuisance! Would expect them to be more accommodating as they’re getting so much money from us.

With regard to bags would you think it best to leave with red cow storage or FE1 storage?

I know so inconsiderate! I'm sure both are fine never used them and only knew about the red cow one but it would definitely be safer if you had your laptop or money to leave it in a friend's room or someone you know who is staying tomorrow night if you know anyone!

Daly29

Finding is short, they have only asked the same problem Q on someone finding something possibly buried. Once or twice an essay on Webb case but rare.

Tort and Company didn't follow the usual trend but if you are stuck the below sounds like the best approach.

You should have 4 and if the problem Q on finding doesnt come up hopefully you hve enough for an essay Q on it which fingers crossed be your 5.


QUOTE=Sineaddh;109671825]Thanks so much! Do you think at this stage by best bet is adverse possession, succession, easements, finding and the land reg essay? Concerned about size of topics too so that’s why I’m thinking these[/QUOTE]

vid36

I don't think the charge per hour for overstaying is that high. I think I read somewhere it is €10 per hour.

iamanengine

laurar2019 wrote: »

Guys im confused with s62 burdens... how are they cracks if the land owner knows about them like if they have to be registerred?

S.69 burdens compliment the mirror principle, they are registered and a purchaser will see them on the folio.

S.72 burdens are the cracks in the mirror principle. They are overriding interests, they aren’t registered but are still binding on a purchaser. E.g. S.72(J) The right of every person in actual occupation who does not have a legal interest.

However this problem is overcome by S.72 Decalarations which a landowner can sign to say there are no overriding interests on the property and a purchaser can rely on this.

ThomasC94

Did anyone else order the property acts for the exam and not get them? Ordered mine last week and they still haven't arrived

iamanengine

Also, don’t want to worry anyone but Mortgages and Landlord and Tenant are expected up this time around, they didn’t come up last paper

lisac223

lawyersuffolk wrote: »

I asked at reception and they said you have to be out by 12 or your charged per hour, not sure how much though! So unfair tbh

I just got a late check out there just go to reception and say you'd like to pay for a late check out, it's an extra hour and €10! Sound for peace of mind though otherwise I'd be fretting about where to keep my stuff!

JCormac

Here's a case-list I made for Landlord & Tenant at some stage.

Those are the cases in my manual. Forgot I even did it out.

Personally, I'm not doing that topic, so I can't vouch for the cases themselves but hopefully it'll be of some use to someone.

Daly29

Trying to construct an essay to learn off for Easements. Find the Acquiring part very confusing. Feel free to give your two cents anyone:

Acquiring:

1)Express (in deed)
2) Implied (section 40 in place now yes so I don't have to worry about old methods??)
3) Prescription
Common Law Prescription (time immortal)
Lost Grant Pres
Statutory Pres

All above will be abolished by s.35 in 2021

Number 3 is too confusing and a bit pointless to try and learn at this stage. Just a note to say 3 being abolished by s.35

Any glaring misunderstanding in that feel free to let me know??? Number 2 correct? Would most problem Qs fit into an implied Easement?

Hopefully Mr Wong needs to build his Chinese restraunt again in a problem Q! Otherwise my legal advice might have to be, give me a call in 2021.

A short note on the above would be great :-)

nimcdona

For 117 application in succession, how many cases on average are yous learning and to what detail? My manual literally has 8 pages of every single detail of the cases so hope thats not expected

Daly29

Capture a note on some of these from the examiner report:

S 117- claim by Julie that Proper provision has not been made for her during her lifetime
Jurisdiction of the Courts from a just and prudent parent point of view - Candidates
were required to discuss in detail the factors do the court take into consideration here?
Relevant cases - Re lAC; FM v. TAM; CK v. FC; Re ABC; XV v. RT; EB v. SS; WC v. CC;
McDonald v Norris

nimcdona wrote: »

For 117 application in succession, how many cases on average are yous learning and to what detail? My manual literally has 8 pages of every single detail of the cases so hope thats not expected

channing90

Can someone tell me if the question in criminal exam was murder or assault manslaughter for the attack by the 3 lads in the soccer team and also who was liable for the death of the women who ran across the road in the harassment question that had loads of offences.

Also i checked out of the Redcow after an exam at like 12;50 before and they never said a word so id say its safe to check out late, there busy at that time a anyway so they just want to clear people out of reception.

AJM95

lawyersuffolk wrote: »

I asked at reception and they said you have to be out by 12 or your charged per hour, not sure how much though! So unfair tbh

Will have to make sure I'm out before hand so, thanks very much

JCormac

Chances of the Adverse Possession question tomorrow being Essay-based?

holliek

What are people learning under freedom of expression? I've looked at press freedoms (mainly all EU cases) and a bit of commentary on art 10 of the convention. Anything else I need to look at?

jewels652

Is there a kind soul willing to share questions and answers for Eu law ?? I have materials for other topics.

Tía

Smiley283

What happened in Somers v weir?

And what's the abbreviation again for the civil partnership and certain rights and obligations of cohabitants act 2010?

z6vm1dobfnca3x

Smiley283 wrote: »

What happened in Somers v weir?

And what's the abbreviation again for the civil partnership and certain rights and obligations of cohabitants act 2010?

Somers v Weir - the transaction was void because the plaintiff had constructive notice re the wife’s lack of consent. The plaintiff did not ask to see the separation agreement here.

Abbreviation is CPCROC 2010.

Daly29

Good chance, I did a bit extra on dev of doctrine in Leigh & Jack. If he asks for reform think I'll have to focus on that and say because of the confusion and as suggested by the LRC after Durack they should make it clear in statute. There was a Q on reform in Oct 2015 but I dont really know what other reforms and bit late to be coming up with them now anyway.

JCormac wrote: »

Chances of the Adverse Possession question tomorrow being Essay-based?

BemusedKettle

Guy, s. 30 help please.

So A, B, C, D hold as Joint Tenants.
D sells to E.
E takes as tenant in common and A, B & C are still Joint tenants.
S. 30 has nothing to say here, right?

And if A, B,C, D hold as joint tenants and D sells to F for the use of himself.
This would sever all Joint tenant relationships so this is void if he didn't get permission under s 30, right?

And if A, B, C, D hold as Joint tenants
A sells to B.
What happens here?

Confused

z6vm1dobfnca3x

BemusedKettle wrote: »

Guy, s. 30 help please.

So A, B, C, D hold as Joint Tenants.
D sells to E.
E takes as tenant in common and A, B & C are still Joint tenants.
S. 30 has nothing to say here, right?

And if A, B,C, D hold as joint tenants and D sells to F for the use of himself.
This would sever all Joint tenant relationships so this is void if he didn't get permission under s 30, right?

And if A, B, C, D hold as Joint tenants
A sells to B.
What happens here?

Confused

First scenario - consent has to be given by all parties for conveyance.

Second scenario - consent of all parties required before selling to F. If consent provided, F will be a TIC while the A, B, C will still be JTs in relation to each other.

Same in third scenario as B was already a JT.

If I’m wrong, please let me know.

z6vm1dobfnca3x

Kyree Bumpy Shrimp wrote: »

Same in third scenario as B was already a JT.

Sorry - the unities of title and time would be broken here so therefore cannot be a JT.

lawyersuffolk

lisac223 wrote: »

I just got a late check out there just go to reception and say you'd like to pay for a late check out, it's an extra hour and €10! Sound for peace of mind though otherwise I'd be fretting about where to keep my stuff!

I rang reception & they said it wasn't possible to extend it even an hour because they're all booked up tomorrow but might just leave my stuff here and see what happens!!

bigtophat13

BemusedKettle wrote: »

Guy, s. 30 help please.

So A, B, C, D hold as Joint Tenants.
D sells to E.
E takes as tenant in common and A, B & C are still Joint tenants.
S. 30 has nothing to say here, right?

And if A, B,C, D hold as joint tenants and D sells to F for the use of himself.
This would sever all Joint tenant relationships so this is void if he didn't get permission under s 30, right?

And if A, B, C, D hold as Joint tenants
A sells to B.
What happens here?

Confused

Kyree Bumpy Shrimp wrote: »

First scenario - consent has to be given by all parties for conveyance.

Second scenario - consent of all parties required before selling to F. If consent provided, F will be a TIC while the A, B, C will still be JTs in relation to each other.

Same in third scenario as B was already a JT.

If I’m wrong, please let me know.

I think the third scenario is a little off. If A,B and C are JT and A "releases" his interest to B extinguishing his interest, B takes A's section himself and remains as a JT with C over the other 2 thirds! Per Wylie I have here (if I'm reading right)

Daly29

You are correct. Trespassers bottom of the list for people with the best title. Mentioned in Parker, Waverly, Webb and possibly Peel.

Just finished writing essays on the topics. Now to get it from the page into my brain.

JCormac wrote: »

Personally I'd lay out both scenarios at the end of the question.

Eg: If the court comes to the conclusion the item was found above the ground, X has the better title - Though if it was below the ground, Y has the better title.


With regard to the trespassing bit, I'm not entirely sure tbh, but I'm under the impression that trespassers get nil. I'd look at Parker v British Airways holding. Think it might have been Obiter Dictum?

Just a thought. Take my advice with a pinch of salt though; as I may be wrong on the trespassing bit

bigtophat13

Succession x2
AP
Easement
Finding

I would kill for this.


I asked something similar a few weeks ago but just clarifying. I buy a house and it was never registered:

1. I will send my conveyance to the Registry of Deeds for lodgment - first in time etc.
2. I will get a first registration completed also as it is now compulsory.

Is that true? Because both systems still exist?


----

Because you can lodge a lot more things in the registry it's still relevant, not just conveyances so you still need it as well, I think that makes sense.