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

holliek

I know the test for certainty of objects has changed for discretionary trusts in the UK but has it remained the same for Ireland? From my notes I've written that the test is that the whole class must be ascertainable, so is this the same standard as fixed trusts then?

jewels652

Naddy666 wrote: »

Not at all this is exactly what I am learning too. Far too much in competition to cover.

Thanks Naddy666
Competition is such a big topic I don’t have the time to cover it.
Also in relation to the institutions I am only doing the the European Parliament, the commission and the council.
Some of the materials I have only has the European council and others only have it as the council, would it be safe to assume they are the same ??

JCormac

Anybody have any ideas on which essay topics for Contract are likely to come up?

I know it's a toss-up between Privity reform & Minor Capacity reform, but that's about it

holliek

JCormac wrote: »

Anybody have any ideas on which essay topics for Contract are likely to come up?

I know it's a toss-up between Privity reform & Minor Capacity reform, but that's about it

Anyone got a sample answer/notes on either of those essays?

sapphire309

jewels652 wrote: »

Thanks Naddy666
Competition is such a big topic I don’t have the time to cover it.
Also in relation to the institutions I am only doing the the European Parliament, the commission and the council.
Some of the materials I have only has the European council and others only have it as the council, would it be safe to assume they are the same ??

They are 2 different bodies.

The Council is the main decision making and legislative body - that's most likely the one to come up in the exam and the one you'll discuss. It's made up of govt ministers from the MSs. Article 16 TEU lays out its functions and powers.

The European Council on the other hand was only given full institutional status with Lisbon and its role seems to largely be confined to policy making. It's powers are in Article 15 TEU. Just important to note it doesn't have a legislative role in the EU.

ErinLP44

question regarding EQUITY

in an essay question such as that of oct 2018 on mareva injunctions in general and how the courts balance the right of the plaintiff and defendant in order to decide whether to grant- how far are you expected to discuss world wide freezing orders as part of this question? confused as to whether or not they are directly under the heading of marvel injunction or whether they are almost considered as a separate remedy in themselves which should be overlooked in this question

jewels652

sapphire309 wrote: »

They are 2 different bodies.

The Council is the main decision making and legislative body - that's most likely the one to come up in the exam and the one you'll discuss. It's made up of govt ministers from the MSs. Article 16 TEU lays out its functions and powers.

The European Council on the other hand was only given full institutional status with Lisbon and its role seems to largely be confined to policy making. It's powers are in Article 15 TEU. Just important to note it doesn't have a legislative role in the EU.

Thanks for that, I probably would have figure it out if I read through them

At this stage is taking me forever to memorise stuff I don’t know what’s happening. Anybody going throug the same ??

Breacnua

holliek wrote: »

Anyone got a sample answer/notes on either of nethose essays?

Neither of these might come up
There are plenty other essay Qs shes liable to ask, privity essay was up on last paper, capacity in march 17.

LawGirl3434

Breacnua wrote: »

Neither of these might come up
There are plenty other essay Qs shes liable to ask, privity essay was up on last paper, capacity in march 17.

Essays stress me so much for contract as feel none of my topics I would have enough info on for an essay ugh

LawGirl3434

Contract

Does the George Mitchell test for fair and reasonable terms apply at common law for exemption and exclusion clauses or just statute?

Wonderstruck

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Essays stress me so much for contract as feel none of my topics I would have enough info on for an essay ugh

Yeah and everything overlaps with everything I am finding, I would prefer something long that is at least discrete. Never got my head much around contract in undergrad either.......

Legal_Eagle_95

EU

Seeing as last sitting had fundamental rights for general principles - is it safer to focus on general principles as a whole for an essay question?

Wonderstruck

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Contract

Does the George Mitchell test for fair and reasonable terms apply at common law for exemption and exclusion clauses or just statute?

I have a copy of McDermott bros Contract Law right in front of me and I want to help but I'm not entirely getting your q? Which statute(s) specifically?

Breacnua

Wonderstruck wrote: »

I have a copy of McDermott bros Contract Law right in front of me and I want to help but I'm not entirely getting your q? Which statute(s) specifically?

I am scratching my head to and wondering do I know any of this area at all now..

sbbyrne

Equity Q

What cases are ye using for unconscionability in Estoppel?
Thanks

LawGirl3434

Breacnua wrote: »

I am scratching my head to and wondering do I know any of this area at all now..

Oh god I am probably on another planet don't worry.

Ok so when it's a business to business contract, my understanding is that they can contract out of s13, s14 and s15 SOG. However, they can only do this is it is 'fair and reasonable' to do so. For consumer contracts, can't contract out of s13, 14 and 15 and no one can contract out of s12 ever.

So in my consumer protection legislation I have two cases - George Mitchell v Finnerty Lock Seeds and Ed Murray LTD v BP International Foundations, where the courts looked at the circumstances to see if it was 'fair and reasonable' to contract out of clauses that would fall under s13-s15.

So my question was would these cases apply in a non legislation based question? Exemption and exclusion clauses - as the cases don't refer specifically to contracting out of SOG 1983/ 1980, but rather just to contracting out of clauses in general.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

Wonderstruck

sbbyrne wrote: »

Equity Q

What cases are ye using for unconscionability in Estoppel?
Thanks

You could try looking at it backwards - when was there no unconscionablity yet estoppel was awarded (you can see I don't think very much of estoppel....).

E.g. McMahon v Kerry CC (no unconscionablity whatsoever on P's part and imho no promise nor reliance this case makes zero sense)

Yeomans Row v Cobbe - the court didnt think much of a professional property developer saying he was tricked as a way of proving reliance (UK case)

Dillwyn v Llewelyn - old case but there was no sneakiness... the promised land was given as an imperfect gift unintentionally

Wonderstruck

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Oh god I am probably on another planet don't worry.

Ok so when it's a business to business contract, my understanding is that they can contract out of s13, s14 and s15 SOG. However, they can only do this is it is 'fair and reasonable' to do so. For consumer contracts, can't contract out of s13, 14 and 15 and no one can contract out of s12 ever.

So in my consumer protection legislation I have two cases - George Mitchell v Finnerty Lock Seeds and Ed Murray LTD v BP International Foundations, where the courts looked at the circumstances to see if it was 'fair and reasonable' to contract out of clauses that would fall under s13-s15.

So my question was would these cases apply in a non legislation based question? Exemption and exclusion clauses - as the cases don't refer specifically to contracting out of SOG 1983/ 1980, but rather just to contracting out of clauses in general.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

Ahhh okay now I get where you're at.... Do you mean using that seeds case as a test on exclusion clauses removing liability on matters not in that section of the SOG 1980 (in business to business contracts)? Is that correct?

LawGirl3434

Wonderstruck wrote: »

Ahhh okay now I get where you're at.... Do you mean using that seeds case as a test on exclusion clauses removing liability on matters not in that section of the SOG 1980 (in business to business contracts)? Is that correct?

Yes! As in could it be used as a general “is this fair and reasonable to dick over your consumer” example

sbbyrne

Wonderstruck wrote: »

You could try looking at it backwards - when was there no unconscionablity yet estoppel was awarded (you can see I don't think very much of estoppel....).

E.g. McMahon v Kerry CC (no unconscionablity whatsoever on P's part and imho no promise nor reliance this case makes zero sense)

Yeomans Row v Cobbe - the court didnt think much of a professional property developer saying he was tricked as a way of proving reliance (UK case)

Dillwyn v Llewelyn - old case but there was no sneakiness... the promised land was given as an imperfect gift unintentionally

Ah ok, thank you!!

sapphire309

EU

If a question comes up in relation to something like the ordinary legislative procedure, are we expected to write out the procedure, i.e. first reading, second reading, conciliation etc? I get a bit confused in these legislation-based exams because surely that'd take up most of your allocated time for that question and it's simply a matter of copying and pasting from the Treaties? Or would you simply write that it is provided for in Article 289 TFEU and the full procedure is detailed in Art 294 ..? I know you get marks for citing legislative provisions so it's easy marks when you have your book beside you, but I don't want to be wasting time because I struggle with my timing at the best of times in these exams.

Wonderstruck

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Yes! As in could it be used as a general “is this fair and reasonable to dick over your consumer” example

If it's a consumer I'd go straight to the Unfair Terms directive but some contacts aren't covered by that directive / neither are core terms so you'd have to fall back to something...

McDermott says on p595 "tentatively" summarising Photo Production Ltd v Securior Ltd they mention this judgement Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia (Transportation and highways) technically courts can refuse to enforce a contract on public policy grounds but this would only be in very rare cases.

Imho when it's consumer I'd stick to consumer law rather than old case law it cos it's way more generous than what a business can do in a business to business transaction no need to invent the wheel.

LawGirl3434

Wonderstruck wrote: »

If it's a consumer I'd go straight to the Unfair Terms directive but some contacts aren't covered by that directive / neither are core terms so you'd have to fall back to something...

McDermott says on p595 "tentatively" summarising Photo Production Ltd v Securior Ltd they mention this judgement Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia (Transportation and highways) technically courts can refuse to enforce a contract on public policy grounds but this would only be in very rare cases.

Imho when it's consumer I'd stick to consumer law rather than old case law it cos it's way more generous than what a business can do in a business to business transaction no need to invent the wheel.

Cool thanks - so if it’s expemption and exclusion clauses with a customer just go right to the unfair terms directive? And if business to business possibly George Mitchell and you’d bring in test for negligence etc here like pretty much just case law?

Ugh this is confusing

jus_me

Any equity predictions ?

Leraf

jus_me wrote: »

Any equity predictions ?

Or anyone willing to share what they are covering ? Seriously trying to cut topics now

laurar2019

the chapter on remedies in contract law is 20 or 30 pages in my manual - independent college dublin, do you need to know the whole chapter ?? or are there parts that never come up

Charles OCK

FE1s2018 wrote: »

Equity Predictions:

Note Question- Nature of Equity/ Maxims
Resulting Trust (1 part of)
Satisfaction

Essay- Three Certainties
Constructive trusts
Specific Preformance

PQ- DMC
QT Injunction
Charitable/ Cy-Pres
Rectification

Thats quite a specific prediction..

holliek

Does anyone have equity papers/reports? Mine only go upto 2016

jus_me

FE1s2018 wrote: »

Equity Predictions:

Note Question- Nature of Equity/ Maxims
Resulting Trust (1 part of)
Satisfaction

Essay- Three Certainties
Constructive trusts
Specific Preformance

PQ- DMC
QT Injunction
Charitable/ Cy-Pres
Rectification

Is the nature of equity like the development

sbbyrne

FE1s2018 wrote: »

Equity Predictions:

Note Question- Nature of Equity/ Maxims
Resulting Trust (1 part of)
Satisfaction

Essay- Three Certainties
Constructive trusts
Specific Preformance

PQ- DMC
QT Injunction
Charitable/ Cy-Pres
Rectification

is this city colleges (or one of those independent colleges) predictions?