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

isawitfirst

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

Q1 I answered as prin and policy etc, no. 2 as unjust attack on property rights and the agency going beyond their powers as for judiciary to determine. I hope that was right!

What do people think of him as a marker got like a page done for my fifth question is he generous for attempting fifth stupidly ran out of time. Does he award many marks for identifying issues s if u fall down in caselaw? Came out feeling very disappointed. 2 to 3 pages per question for four questions but 1 for fifth but not sure it was of good standard. Blanked alot. Anyone who has passed before id welcome any comments
Also what did people answer on the question re defer to declare unconstitutional curious how people approach this?

Thanks for this, that's what I went with too so glad to hear it.

Daly29

isawitfirst wrote: »

Thanks for this, that's what I went with too so glad to hear it.

Hadn't really prepped Q1 and Q2 at all. Think I put P & P down for both as I rember him giving out about people putting it down incorrectly but said he didnt dock marks.

I had nothing on unconstitionality so skipped. Was stretching a bit on Equality. FoE expression Q and Cathlic Constition I was very happy with my answer.

Really hope that that is done, an exhuasting subject.

cowboy123456

hey, seeing some conflicting cases in the notes I was just wondering if anybody could answer if manifest disadvantage or substantial benefit are still requirements of undue influence?

Also if anybody has a sample answer for secret trust problem question I would be very grateful.

Vegetarian2017

Came out quite relieved with other exams but wallfalling after today. I covered alot of material but not in depth per se. Kinda waffled alot, I think correctly identified issues got the main cases but not sure if it was enough.

Anybody esle approach the unconstitutional question or the article 45 question ?

I would love hear from anyone who has seen how he marked their paper?

Daly29

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

Came out quite relieved with other exams but wallfalling after today. I covered alot of material but not in depth per se. Kinda waffled alot, I think correctly identified issues got the main cases but not sure if it was enough.

Anybody esle approach the unconstitutional question or the article 45 question ?

I would love hear from anyone who has seen how he marked their paper?

You attempted all of them so you gave yourself a chance. Its a really big subject and much less predictable than EU so I'm guessing he is reasonably fair otherwise it would have a really high failure rate. I doubt many have 4 answers they are too happy with, just about giving him something to work with.

I never came across A45 really before. After I read it in the exam I was tempted to write about how the judiciary should stay away from policy and should be the executive and shoehorn in SOP functions but that was a real stretch I thought.

rightytighty

Daly29 wrote: »

You attempted all of them so you gave yourself a chance. Its a really big subject and much less predictable than EU so I'm guessing he is reasonably fair otherwise it would have a really high failure rate. I doubt many have 4 answers they are too happy with, just about giving him something to work with.

I never came across A45 really before. After I read it in the exam I was tempted to write about how the judiciary should stay away from policy and should be the executive and shoehorn in SOP functions but that was a real stretch I thought.

I hadn’t prepared for 45 either but looking at the article I saw the only “right” mentioned is to livelihood, so I wrote about that. Then about property rights because the article mentioned appropriation of property too, then threw in Ryan v AG and Hyland v Min for Social Welfare for good measure so hoping he doesn’t just write me off, I know the question was about socio-economic rights etc but just didn’t have it

Vegetarian2017

rightytighty wrote: »

I hadn’t prepared for 45 either but looking at the article I saw the only “right” mentioned is to livelihood, so I wrote about that. Then about property rights because the article mentioned appropriation of property too, then threw in Ryan v AG and Hyland v Min for Social Welfare for good measure so hoping he doesn’t just write me off, I know the question was about socio-economic rights etc but just didn’t have it

yeah that's how i started it re right yo livelihood and mentioned cox and white etc where the bar council right to dissociate came up against right to livelihood and how it is not absolute right due to regulation etc. Not protected as much as FOE but ran out of time to get to socio eco am raging!

Not sure il get about 3 or 4 marks on that because made a mess of it!

Vegetarian2017

Daly29 wrote: »

You attempted all of them so you gave yourself a chance. Its a really big subject and much less predictable than EU so I'm guessing he is reasonably fair otherwise it would have a really high failure rate. I doubt many have 4 answers they are too happy with, just about giving him something to work with.

I never came across A45 really before. After I read it in the exam I was tempted to write about how the judiciary should stay away from policy and should be the executive and shoehorn in SOP functions but that was a real stretch I thought.

True, very hard to know the standard for that or what he awards marks for but yes that sounds about right. I hear it is a tough one to pass all the same.

20082014

sbbyrne wrote: »

EU - Direct Effect

Would anyone be able to explain the relevance/importance of the Marleasing judgment to me, please?

I dont have much for this in my notes but what I do have is:

The case is in relation to indirect effect. in this case it was an action in relation to a Directive against a private person. As directives are only vertically directly effective, indirect effect had to be used here as it was horizontal.

the case confirmed the position in Colson (national courts are required to interpret their national law in light of the wording and purpose of the directive) and said that indirect effect should be applied irrespective of whether the national law was adopted before or after the directive.

Sorry that's all I have, hope it is of some assistance!

Freckley201

Ugh, one good question and four word vomits. Disaster. Time screwed me. I didn’t get to go into nearly as much detail as I wanted. Just threw down a bunch of cases and pulled conclusions out of the air it felt like.

Nightmare

scooby321

Freckley201 wrote: »

Ugh, one good question and four word vomits. Disaster. Time screwed me. I didn’t get to go into nearly as much detail as I wanted. Just threw down a bunch of cases and pulled conclusions out of the air it felt like.

Nightmare

I did the exact same thing.

roseyp123

Constitutional

I left Constitutional last sitting & was devastated, I was so stuck for questions I answered the case-notes with no more than 3/4 of a page for each case and no detailed info. My 5th question was literally 2 pages and I had no case-law. Still managed to pass - I viewed my script & I think he is a relatively fair marker Try not to worry about it too much!

sbbyrne

20082014 wrote: »

I dont have much for this in my notes but what I do have is:

The case is in relation to indirect effect. in this case it was an action in relation to a Directive against a private person. As directives are only vertically directly effective, indirect effect had to be used here as it was horizontal.

the case confirmed the position in Colson (national courts are required to interpret their national law in light of the wording and purpose of the directive) and said that indirect effect should be applied irrespective of whether the national law was adopted before or after the directive.

Sorry that's all I have, hope it is of some assistance!

Thank you so much, that's really helpful!

Insta92

Constitution went awful today. Complete messed up question 1 and 2, only focused on fair procedures for question 2 and didn’t even touch on property rights. Only good question I had was question 8 freedom of expression and prior restraint of publication.

How did everyone answer the question about the religious wording of the Constitution?

Daly29

Insta92 wrote: »

Constitution went awful today. Complete messed up question 1 and 2, only focused on fair procedures for question 2 and didn’t even touch on property rights. Only good question I had was question 8 freedom of expression and prior restraint of publication.

How did everyone answer the question about the religious wording of the Constitution?

Mine was a bit abstract, only thing I knew overtly religious was the Premable. Quoted that, said it influenced judiciary, said it meant legislation and judiaciary dealt with natural law too much, Norris case, Zappone, required referendums to change it and only with referendum changes that it is somewhat divorced from religious undertones.

Ooops, didnt mention prior restraint. Had a lot of good points I thought tho.

Vegetarian2017

Insta92 wrote: »

Constitution went awful today. Complete messed up question 1 and 2, only focused on fair procedures for question 2 and didn’t even touch on property rights. Only good question I had was question 8 freedom of expression and prior restraint of publication.

How did everyone answer the question about the religious wording of the Constitution?

Fair procedures was in it though? So you never know, not everyone will have time to cover every issue. I covered FOE never mentioned prior restraint.

DUMSURFER

HappyKitten62 wrote: »

Hey! I was panicking mainly because I’m trying to cover as much of the course as I can - this is my first sitting so I’m anxious about leaving things out. But it’s getting close to crunch time now, I actually didn’t realise it hadn’t come up since then, maybe I should not bother with it!?

Nope, cover it... Just went through the papers and my grid is 1000% wrong when it comes to Constructive... I'm starting to cover it right now myself. Comes up enough that it should be looked at. That said, besides the last sitting it hadn't come up in about 3 years and before that never came up two sitting in a row. In the examiner report for the last sitting, he noted that very few people answered the question on it so could be a sneaky one for him to go back to. Although, those who did answer it, answered it well and he was satisfied with candidates knowledge on it so I say he'll probably leave it off. But I'm going to do up notes on it now anyway, not ideal but FE1's is a quantity covered over quality cover for sure. Thank you for potentially averting an emergency on my side

20082014

EU LAW

Should I add anything to this list?

Institutions
Sources of EU Law
Principles underpinning the exercise of legislative power
Direct & Indirect Effect
Member state Liability
Judicial Review
EU citizenship
Equal Pay, Equal Treatment & Non-discrimination
Free Movement of Workers
Free Movement of Services and Freedom of Establishment
Free Movement of Goods (Art.34-36 and Art.110 & 30)

I have also very very briefly looked over fundamental rights, no cases or anything, just the basics if I need to throw it into a question.

Would there be anything else worthwhile to do?

Suzannec

scooby321 wrote: »

I did the exact same thing.

I too did the exact same thing, it was awful

Suzannec

Would anyone please have the exam report to the last criminal sitting please?

BemusedKettle

Q6 - I never heard of this case - NVH v Min. for Justice -but based on what was given in the question I went through the findings of unconstitutionality and retrospective effect thereof chapter...... please tell me that's someway applicable

sbbyrne

20082014 wrote: »

EU LAW

Should I add anything to this list?

Institutions
Sources of EU Law
Principles underpinning the exercise of legislative power
Direct & Indirect Effect
Member state Liability
Judicial Review
EU citizenship
Equal Pay, Equal Treatment & Non-discrimination
Free Movement of Workers
Free Movement of Services and Freedom of Establishment
Free Movement of Goods (Art.34-36 and Art.110 & 30)

I have also very very briefly looked over fundamental rights, no cases or anything, just the basics if I need to throw it into a question.

Would there be anything else worthwhile to do?

I'm doing pretty much the same, hoping we should be covered with that?
Although if anyone has any suggestions i'm also all ears!

iamanengine

Contract

In Consumer Protection are the only EU Regulations you need to know the Unfair Terms and Off-Premises/Distance contract ones?

JCormac

European Law


Hypothetically (of course), on a scale of 1 to 10 how much would one be screwed for leaving out Free Movement of Services, Sources of EU Law and Institutions?

LawGirl3434

JCormac wrote: »

European Law


Hypothetically (of course), on a scale of 1 to 10 how much would one be screwed for leaving out Free Movement of Services, Sources of EU Law and Institutions?

Not screwed at all. FMOS rarely, if ever, comes up and when it does it tends to be with the equally unusual FMOW, which was just up. Institutions also just came up and really is all in the legislation. What I would say on it is to do a flashcard on FMOS of 4/5 cases - that way if a lovely FMOW Q did come up that you had it, and wouldn't cost you doing an otherwise handy Q.

Sources of EU law is handy enough - think as far as I can see he only asks the difference between directives and regulations, but once again not insanely common so really don't think unreasonable to cut

LawGirl3434

Anyone doing sources of EU law, can anyone explain to me the Variosa case? He's mentioned it in marking scheme but not in my notes anywhere

JCreaghy

Anyone else doing criminal and equity next week and freaking out? How are people allocating study time? Any advice?

Daly29

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

Fair procedures was in it though? So you never know, not everyone will have time to cover every issue. I covered FOE never mentioned prior restraint.

I agree, i found it a tough paper and tried to prepare as best I could, guessing the majority of people found it tough. The majority of people are not going to have found all the issues, covered all the bases, the majority will pass and be fine, he has scope to be fairer depending on the paper, it's a bit more subjective than other subjects. I think be people found the last paper pretty straightforward so looks like he would know this would be more challenging and mark accordingly. I'm telling myself this anyway so I can move without being total disheartened and try and get some cert passes in the last 4 next week :-)

Couldn't do the case note question either, only McCrystal was ever previously asked. Wouldnt think that was picked by many at all. Go to never before asked and stick two others in would seem like a logical approach. Basically gave people 5/7 from a ridicosly big subject. That makes things pretty difficult for everyone.

Louis Litt

Contract

What EU legislation are people covering for consumer contracts??

saraocallaghan

JCreaghy wrote: »

Anyone else doing criminal and equity next week and freaking out? How are people allocating study time? Any advice?

I’m doing equity, contract AND eu! I’m assigning a day and half to each. A day this weekend to contract and eu and the half day before each and then a day and half this weekend to equity. Mildly panicking to say the least!