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

annmc882

Lumi77 wrote: »

There is quite a bit of case law and you have to know the legislation but it's easier to study and you d be surprised what the brain can do.
Fingers crossed
Good luck

A day is a long time I suppose and it is revision too... Thanks. Hopefully its a nice paper.

Vegetarian2017

Criminal - is the new sexual offences act 2017 examinable this sitting thanks

nmwcc

Does anyone know the decision of Tola Capital Management v Joeseph Linders 2014 in relation to mandatory interloc injunctions??

Paleblood

nmwcc wrote: »

Does anyone know the decision of Tola Capital Management v Joeseph Linders 2014 in relation to mandatory interloc injunctions??

My manual just says that Cregan J continued the Maha Lingham line of authority that favours the 'strong case test', but he also added that the Court should adopt "whatever course would carry the lowest risk of injustice". So it's not an either/or situation - both tests are available to the Court albeit it's leaning more toward 'strong case'.

Hope that helps.

ArthurDayne

The grid I am using for Equity seems to suggest that Anton Pillar injunctions have never come up . . . . is this the case or this grid way off the mark?

Paleblood

ArthurDayne wrote: »

The grid I am using for Equity seems to suggest that Anton Pillar injunctions have never come up . . . . is this the case or this grid way off the mark?

My grid says April 2009, but nothing since then.

Paleblood

yournerd wrote: »

CAme up in march 2017 I think but nothing before thatn

It was Mareva in March 2017.

Paleblood

I'm not expecting Anton Piller to come up but I've still revised it. It's small and very straight forward. I've put a lot of work into the rest of the injunctions chapter and I'd hate for the whole thing to go to waste just because of 2 or 3 pages of Anton Piller.

You can't protect yourself against a curveball but you can still use some common sense and protect yourself against the cheap shots.

Tony_TwoLegs

ArthurDayne wrote: »

The grid I am using for Equity seems to suggest that Anton Pillar injunctions have never come up . . . . is this the case or this grid way off the mark?

And Quia Timet last October. Either it's overdue or the Examiner doesn't give a s***

fe1hunzo

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

Criminal - is the new sexual offences act 2017 examinable this sitting thanks

It won't come up as a question to discuss it (I hope he won't do that anyways). But mention it if sexual offences that are relevant come up. I could see something with an individual under 15/ or a "protected" person for a problem question (as the victim of the crime)
The more recent the better for criminal in terms of examples and points of reference the better you will do.

Paleblood

Sorry if this has been asked before. I know we're allowed underline, highlight and tab legislation. But does 'tabbing' refer to just using colour coded tabbing or can we actually write on the tabs?

ArthurDayne

Paleblood wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked before. I know we're allowed underline, highlight and tab legislation. But does 'tabbing' refer to just using colour coded tabbing or can we actually write on the tabs?

As far as I am aware, no writing is allowed (though in the most non-FE1 fashion I am actually not sure what the authority is for that(!)) so for me it usually comes down to colour coding the tabs by topic and a healthy dose of underlining.

nmwcc

Are Bayers examinable at all???

Paleblood

ArthurDayne wrote: »

As far as I am aware, no writing is allowed (though in the most non-FE1 fashion I am actually not sure what the authority is for that(!)) so for me it usually comes down to colour coding the tabs by topic and a healthy dose of underlining.

Many thanks.

MO94

Paleblood wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked before. I know we're allowed underline, highlight and tab legislation. But does 'tabbing' refer to just using colour coded tabbing or can we actually write on the tabs?

I wrote the section numbers on my tabs for company and they cut off the bit with writing. I was chancing my arm anyway but it’s good to know!

Paleblood

nmwcc wrote: »

Are Bayers examinable at all???

My lecturer skipped straight passed it. He didn't even mention it.

BASHBAG

Hey,

Just wondering what kind of questions are asked regarding the ownership topic in property?

Only have two past papers, So not much to go off

The Talking Bread

BASHBAG wrote: »

Hey,

Just wondering what kind of questions are asked regarding the ownership topic in property?

Only have two past papers, So not much to go off

Basically all the same, walking through a field with dog etc

goconquer

Any chance I could get a copy of your grid, I've been playing in the dark for all my revision!?

annmc882

Would anyone be kind enough to send on an exam grid for criminal, mine is out of date

Can send on notes, sample ans, etc in return.

Thanks.

illy.m

I have a quick question in relation to estoppel for contract exam. I know it was mentioned a few times that promissory is examined in contract and proprietary in equity. I have a sample answer in front of me for contract that does mention proprietary estoppel and 4 cases on it in detail and then goes on to promissory estoppel. So we do need to know both for contract?

XxMCRxBabyxX

Anyone looking for the Criminal Grid, just PM me your email address and I'll forward it on!

annmc882

illy.m wrote: »

I have a quick question in relation to estoppel for contract exam. I know it was mentioned a few times that promissory is examined in contract and proprietary in equity. I have a sample answer in front of me for contract that does mention proprietary estoppel and 4 cases on it in detail and then goes on to promissory estoppel. So we do need to know both for contract?

Techincally yes, in reality no.

Came up once in years so if ur not doing equity just know what it is - basic principal.

illy.m

thank you!

Tony_TwoLegs

nmwcc wrote: »

Are Bayers examinable at all???

They tend to be an arm of other injunctions and rarely if ever applied on their own.
I can't see how a question would revolve around one on it's own. It interferes with your rights like Mareva and AP, so just know its remit is all

lawgirl23

Paleblood wrote: »

Sorry if this has been asked before. I know we're allowed underline, highlight and tab legislation. But does 'tabbing' refer to just using colour coded tabbing or can we actually write on the tabs?

You're definitely not allowed to write anything on the tabs, even the section numbers. I saw a girl with no scissors trying to tear through those plastic tabs that she had sellotaped to the paper about 5 minutes before a company law exam once because the woman at the desk wouldn't take the book with any writing on!!

nmwcc

Guys I am so so pushed for time for Equity... Could anyone hazard a guess as what I could possibly leave out? Leaving out constructive trusts as it is.. is it safe to leave out;

Promissory Estoppel
DMC
Strong v Bird

Anything else?

LegalAnna

For criminal tomorrow, could anyone give me a summary of the definition of Denham J in DPP V Dolny? It's assault causing harm! Cannot find it for the life of me and it'll more than likely come up because of the DPP v Browne case from this year!

FOHSMH254

Anyone know what came up in Criminal in March 2017/October 2016?

I know it's likely "everything" but a few specifics would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

annmc882

characteristics of a crime
provocation were 2 essay questons

special cc
court criminal appeal was asked

bail mentioned in prob q

and the usual.
the 4 part question didn't come up