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

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

Options
1309310312314315334

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 142 ✭✭HappyKitten62


    Am I completely screwed?

    I had all notes done a few weeks ago and have been trying to cram since. I have a handful of topics left in each subject to cram. I’ve looked at a few papers but keep putting it off because it’s time consuming and I feel like I should be memorising.

    My first exam is Company. I’ve gone over the topics once and plan on doing a recap this weekend. But then it’s criminal equity and Eu and I don’t know how that’s going to work out....

    Feeling panicked and discouraged.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭sbbyrne


    Am I completely screwed?

    I had all notes done a few weeks ago and have been trying to cram since. I have a handful of topics left in each subject to cram. I’ve looked at a few papers but keep putting it off because it’s time consuming and I feel like I should be memorising.

    My first exam is Company. I’ve gone over the topics once and plan on doing a recap this weekend. But then it’s criminal equity and Eu and I don’t know how that’s going to work out....

    Feeling panicked and discouraged.

    Heya, I know this feeling well! Especially the avoiding exam papers part. But honestly (maybe this is only for me) the exam papers are the best way to memorise because you start recognising where the cases fit in around a question. bite the bullet and have a look at papers with your notes open beside you. Then try another question and another and soon you'll be able to put your notes away and the questions and words in the qs will be memory joggers!

    You've gotten this far, you can keep going don't give up! Trust that the knowledge is going somewhere. Have a cup of tea, take a deep breath and go again! keep calm :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭supercreative


    Anyone have any predictions for the Tort paper? Hoping for passing off and defamation as they tend to be relatively straightforward, he asked a couple of more conceptual questions on the Spring 2019 paper so fingers crossed we get a few less of those!


  • Registered Users Posts: 142 ✭✭HappyKitten62


    sbbyrne wrote: »
    Heya, I know this feeling well! Especially the avoiding exam papers part. But honestly (maybe this is only for me) the exam papers are the best way to memorise because you start recognising where the cases fit in around a question. bite the bullet and have a look at papers with your notes open beside you. Then try another question and another and soon you'll be able to put your notes away and the questions and words in the qs will be memory joggers!

    You've gotten this far, you can keep going don't give up! Trust that the knowledge is going somewhere. Have a cup of tea, take a deep breath and go again! keep calm :)

    You’re so so lovely. Thank you so much for this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27 TheLawGuy


    Could someone please help me out and give me a quick rundown on Prescription and the new law in relation to it? My manual is very confusing and my head is fried from it. Thanks very much :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭supercreative


    TheLawGuy wrote: »
    Could someone please help me out and give me a quick rundown on Prescription and the new law in relation to it? My manual is very confusing and my head is fried from it. Thanks very much :)

    This is my understanding of it.

    Old law

    Section 1 of the Prescription (Ireland) Act 1858: 20 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right capable of being an easement (Re Ellenborough Park) without force, secrecy or permission, and without written or oral consent.

    Section 2: 40 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right capable of being an easement (Re Ellenborough Park) without force, secrecy or permission, and without written consent. If you fulfil these the easement is "absolute and indefeasible" unless enjoyed by written consent.

    Section 3: 20 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right to light without force, secrecy or permission, and without written consent. Same as section 2, if you fulfil these criteria it's absolute and indefeasible unless enjoyed by written consent.

    So the short period takes less time but can be defeated by oral or written consent, whereas the long period requires more time but can only be defeated by written consent. The right to light enjoys the benefits of both: it has a short period and can't be defeated by oral consent.

    New law

    Section 33 and 35 of the LCLRA 2009: easements by prescription require a 12 year period of user as of right, or 30 years against a State authority, or 60 years if the servient land is State foreshore (the land between the high and low water mark).

    The most important thing here is that per the Civil Law (Misc Provisions) Act 2011, unless a claim was brought by 1 December 2012, you can't currently bring a claim for a new easement under the new rules. The earliest day the new rules can be used is 1 December 2021, as this is 12 years from 1 December 2009. Claims against a State authority will have to wait until 1 December 2039, or 1 December 2069 if they pertain to foreshore.

    Hope this cleared things up a bit! Don't worry about the new rules unless there's an essay on the difference between the two.


  • Registered Users Posts: 27 TheLawGuy


    This is my understanding of it.

    Old law

    Section 1 of the Prescription (Ireland) Act 1858: 20 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right capable of being an easement (Re Ellenborough Park) without force, secrecy or permission, and without written or oral consent.

    Section 2: 40 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right capable of being an easement (Re Ellenborough Park) without force, secrecy or permission, and without written consent. If you fulfil these the easement is "absolute and indefeasible" unless enjoyed by written consent.

    Section 3: 20 years' continuous use next before some suit or action (i.e. up until the date in the problem Q) of a right to light without force, secrecy or permission, and without written consent. Same as section 2, if you fulfil these criteria it's absolute and indefeasible unless enjoyed by written consent.

    So the short period takes less time but can be defeated by oral or written consent, whereas the long period requires more time but can only be defeated by written consent. The right to light enjoys the benefits of both: it has a short period and can't be defeated by oral consent.

    New law

    Section 33 and 35 of the LCLRA 2009: easements by prescription require a 12 year period of user as of right, or 30 years against a State authority, or 60 years if the servient land is State foreshore (the land between the high and low water mark).

    The most important thing here is that per the Civil Law (Misc Provisions) Act 2011, unless a claim was brought by 1 December 2012, you can't currently bring a claim for a new easement under the new rules. The earliest day the new rules can be used is 1 December 2021, as this is 12 years from 1 December 2009. Claims against a State authority will have to wait until 1 December 2039, or 1 December 2069 if they pertain to foreshore.

    Hope this cleared things up a bit! Don't worry about the new rules unless there's an essay on the difference between the two.

    Thank you so much. That clears everything up, really appreciate it :) if you need anything let me know and i'll see what i have.


  • Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭supercreative


    TheLawGuy wrote: »
    Thank you so much. That clears everything up, really appreciate it :) if you need anything let me know and i'll see what i have.

    No worries! If you have any Tort predictions that'd be fantastic :) no worries if not though!


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


    I would just add that the old rules are still in use until 2021 also due to the 2011 Act.

    My personal Tort predictions/hopes are - Land Tort, Limitations, Nervous Shock, Negligent Misstatement, DOC/Ordinary Negligence, Vicarious, Products, Damages


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    Property - Mortgage Question (apologies in advance!)

    I think she'd be inclined to ask (going from papers) a pre-09 mortgagee powers Q, as post 09 is wholly in the 2009 act. Would others agree?

    Then, I am just confirming, I presume mortgagor rights remain the same pre/post 09? Seem largely unaffected by 09 and focus more on equitable principles from my understanding.

    Then, if she were to ask a Q on post 09, would it be as simple as simply giving the relevant sections of LCLCA (89-111 approx, have all key highlighted and tabbed) and then the Start Mortgages debacle for the right to take possession? E.g. power of sale in s96, then s100 seems to largely mirror the criteria in s20 of 1881 Conveyancing Act?

    Thanks!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭supercreative


    I would just add that the old rules are still in use until 2021 also due to the 2011 Act.

    My personal Tort predictions/hopes are - Land Tort, Limitations, Nervous Shock, Negligent Misstatement, DOC/Ordinary Negligence, Vicarious, Products, Damages

    That's great, thank you!


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭holliek


    I would just add that the old rules are still in use until 2021 also due to the 2011 Act.

    My personal Tort predictions/hopes are - Land Tort, Limitations, Nervous Shock, Negligent Misstatement, DOC/Ordinary Negligence, Vicarious, Products, Damages

    What do you mean by limitations?


  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭lisac223


    Constitutional

    What do you guys think are the most important 'Trial in Due Course of Law' topics? Looking to cut some out as it is such a huge chapter!

    Thanks!


  • Registered Users Posts: 66 ✭✭lawlad101


    Can anyone help with the Company Law questions on Summary Approval Procedure and the Table A stuff?

    They're just legislative provisions and I'm not really sure how you could write on essay on them without just transcribing the act or am I clearly missing something?


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


    holliek wrote: »
    What do you mean by limitations?

    Limitations of Actions - Time limits on bringing claims, Statute of Limitations.

    There were two Supreme Court cases this year

    Green v Hardiman and O'Sullivan v Ireland


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭holliek


    Does anyone have sample answers on vicarious liability?


  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭jus_me


    Hi guys what came up in - COMPANY LAW MARCH 2019?


  • Registered Users Posts: 75 ✭✭supercreative


    Can anyone help me with Q2 March 2014 in Tort? The examiner's report says it's about negligence and so does the exam grid I have, but the sample answer I have says it's about nuisance, which is probably what I would have assumed as well. Help pls!


  • Registered Users Posts: 27 TheLawGuy


    Can anyone help me with Q2 March 2014 in Tort? The examiner's report says it's about negligence and so does the exam grid I have, but the sample answer I have says it's about nuisance, which is probably what I would have assumed as well. Help pls!

    The exam grid I have says it's about nuisance and also the sample answer I have is about nuisance. I would have assumed it was about nuisance aswel so maybe in the examiner report they meant to say nuisance instead of negligence? im not sure but i would think its a question in relation to nuisance. Could be wrong though


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭holliek


    Can anyone help me with Q2 March 2014 in Tort? The examiner's report says it's about negligence and so does the exam grid I have, but the sample answer I have says it's about nuisance, which is probably what I would have assumed as well. Help pls!

    I looked it up but I'm in the same boat I'm afraid. My grid is saying DOC/SOC/Causation but sample ans is public nuisance


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 347 ✭✭Wonderstruck


    Can anyone help me with Q2 March 2014 in Tort? The examiner's report says it's about negligence and so does the exam grid I have, but the sample answer I have says it's about nuisance, which is probably what I would have assumed as well. Help pls!

    It is one of those "cause" past questions (as opposed to "advise Boris" or whoever) - that means you're supposed to only really handle causation issues. I presume you're trying to say it's a Private Nuisance where Jerry's particularly impacted?

    I thought it was Negligence and kind of issues arising could include

    1. "But for" test and the bricks
    2. Novus Actus Interveniens and the weather and the string blowing away - a break in causation yes or no?
    3. Contributory negligence and Jerry being drunk
    4. Forseeability that anyone would be on the road at all / trip over a brick further away from the pile
    5. Omission from Tom for failing to fix his wall
    Etc

    I don't have any sample answers so I have no idea what aformentioned answer says :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 11 Jack McCoy


    Can anyone help me with Q2 March 2014 in Tort? The examiner's report says it's about negligence and so does the exam grid I have, but the sample answer I have says it's about nuisance, which is probably what I would have assumed as well. Help pls!
    TheLawGuy wrote: »
    The exam grid I have says it's about nuisance and also the sample answer I have is about nuisance. I would have assumed it was about nuisance aswel so maybe in the examiner report they meant to say nuisance instead of negligence? im not sure but i would think its a question in relation to nuisance. Could be wrong though
    holliek wrote: »
    I looked it up but I'm in the same boat I'm afraid. My grid is saying DOC/SOC/Causation but sample ans is public nuisance

    Q2 in March 2014 is a question about an accident on a public footpath. There is no interference with the Plaintiff's interest in land. I doubt be puts on public nuisance questions?

    Q2 in April 2014 is about a tree falling into a neighbor's property and appears to be about nuisance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭user115


    Company

    Do people think corporate authority or SAP is more likely to come up in company?

    For company I'm kind of running out of time but I think I'll be set with:

    -Directors duties
    -Restriction and disq
    -Corporate borrowing
    -Shh remedies
    -Share transfer
    -SLP
    -Company formation

    There has to be at least 4 if not 5 questions in them, shh remedies and share transfer often both appear in a sitting...and then if I do either SAP or corporate auth I should be okay....what are others covering?


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


    OK guys, final topic check for Tort. I'm covering:

    Land Torts
    Trespass to Person
    Vicarious
    Occupiers
    Products
    Passing Off
    Limitations
    Liability for Animals/Fire
    Defamation
    Damages
    Concurrent Wrongdoers
    Res Ipsa
    Nervous Shock
    Pure Economic Loss/Negligent Misstatement
    Negligence - DOC,SOC,Causation,Remoteness
    Employers

    Surely I would have to get very unlucky not to have 5? Still worried regardless


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18 Legal23


    Hi guys,

    Can I just ask how people are going about revising for these puke wrenching exams...

    I have my notes but I seem to be retyping them as I'm revising... I thought this would help me to learn but I literally finish and feel like I know nothing☹️☹️ (I seem to let my head get the better of me when it comes to these exams)

    Is there a better way, should I be rhyming off my notes or writing questions.. Feeling completely overwhelmed, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated..


  • Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭Hamerzan Sickles


    OK guys, final topic check for Tort. I'm covering:

    Land Torts
    Trespass to Person
    Vicarious
    Occupiers
    Products
    Passing Off
    Limitations
    Liability for Animals/Fire
    Defamation
    Damages
    Concurrent Wrongdoers
    Res Ipsa
    Nervous Shock
    Pure Economic Loss/Negligent Misstatement
    Negligence - DOC,SOC,Causation,Remoteness
    Employers

    Surely I would have to get very unlucky not to have 5? Still worried regardless

    Edit: you already had Limitations down, I missed it. My list is identical to yours but I am leaving out Employer's Liability.

    Does anyone know how to answer Q1 March 2018, the one with the mother and the two boys aged 17. I was thinking it's assumption of negligence for a third party/negligence of children but none of the cases seem to match the facts presented in the problem question. Would love if anyone could help me out here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 131 ✭✭JCormac


    Legal23 wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    Can I just ask how people are going about revising for these puke wrenching exams...

    I have my notes but I seem to be retyping them as I'm revising... I thought this would help me to learn but I literally finish and feel like I know nothing☹️☹️ (I seem to let my head get the better of me when it comes to these exams)

    Is there a better way, should I be rhyming off my notes or writing questions.. Feeling completely overwhelmed, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated..


    It's totally normal to feel overwhelmed with it all!

    The night before Contract last sitting I wasn't anywhere near prepared and was considering not even going in.

    Left the exam in bits and all. Ended up passing & know of loads of people that were in similar situations with the other exams that also passed when they were sure they failed - Just don't give up, you'll surprise yourself on the day! It's absolutely crazy what comes back to you during the exam :)

    If you feel you're short of time re. learning cases atm, focus on the cases the particular FE1 examiner lists in their Report(s). It's not an exhaustive list of every case you'll need, but it's definitely a good foundation.

    After reading something I always found it effective to talk the topic through with someone in person, (or even talk at a dog/cat if you live alone) because it becomes apparent when you're trying to articulate on something the areas you're not familiar with/need to read up on.

    That's my two cents anyway.

    Chin up!


  • Registered Users Posts: 23 Amanda226


    Any tips for studying Constitution most important topics to be learning? so much information!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Breacnua


    Hi everyone,

    I have a room prepaid for Wed 2nd and Thurs 3rd in the Aspect Hotel Dublin Park West Dublin 12. It is a short drive from the Red Cow. Might not be the best by foot but I am not sure.

    It is a Standard Twin Room (2 single beds) with Check-in Wed, 2 October 2019 and Check-out Fri, 4 October 2019 At noon.

    If anyone is interested I can do a good rate as I got it cheap myself and don't want it to go to waste. i paid non - refundable few months ago.


    DM me.

    Thanks


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


    Edit: you already had Limitations down, I missed it. My list is identical to yours but I am leaving out Employer's Liability.

    Does anyone know how to answer Q1 March 2018, the one with the mother and the two boys aged 17. I was thinking it's assumption of negligence for a third party/negligence of children but none of the cases seem to match the facts presented in the problem question. Would love if anyone could help me out here.

    That makes me feel a bit better, I think we should be well covered.

    For your Q, I think it's DOC for Third Parties. Cases like Dorset Yacht Club, Breslan v Corcoran, Ennis v HSE etc

    Honestly not sure though. In the examiner report he says "Liability for the actions of others and the issues of control of others in their responsibility."

    The mention of control makes me think vicarious liability. As per Moynihan v Moynihan it can extend outside the employer/employee relationship, but doubtful it's that


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement