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

20029422

anyone have the solutions to the October 2016 contract paper or a list of all the topics that came up in that paper.please.

Redhighking

Hi guys,

Was wondering if anyone could tell me what came up for EU in October 2016?

Also would anyone be interested in a potential 'study group' for the FE-1s this sitting (Dublin area) - could be a good way to bounce ideas/questions off others preparing for the exams. I plan to sit EU, Company and Contract in March myself.

Leraf

Redhighking wrote: »

Hi guys,

Was wondering if anyone could tell me what came up for EU in October 2016?

Also would anyone be interested in a potential 'study group' for the FE-1s this sitting (Dublin area) - could be a good way to bounce ideas/questions off others preparing for the exams. I plan to sit EU, Company and Contract in March myself.

I have a Grid for EU and the October 2016 paper, if it helps?

I would be interested in a study group however it would be very much dependent on the when/where/how aspect as between these exams and work I might find it tough. If you do set it up, you might be good enough to send on the details so I can see if i can manage it also.

Redo91

Would anyone with a Company grid be able to send it on to me? Someone was kind enough to give me one already but it's condensed down to 18 chapters when there's 23 in my manual so I'm finding it hard to pick out what topics have come up from my manual.

Edit: My manual is City Colleges if that's any help.

Yoop

claiomh solais wrote: »

The Law Society says on the FE-1 applcation page: ''We are now accepting online FE-1 applications in certain circumstances''

Who is this option available to? Would be so much simpler to do it online and pay the exams by card!

I was able to apply online for the last sitting which was my second so I had assumed that it was for people who had already sent in all the documents and photo ID etc. It doesn't seem to be an option at all for this sitting though; I had to send it off the old-fashioned way

odwyer94

Redo91 wrote: »

Would anyone with a Company grid be able to send it on to me? Someone was kind enough to give me one already but it's condensed down to 18 chapters when there's 23 in my manual so I'm finding it hard to pick out what topics have come up from my manual.

Edit: My manual is City Colleges if that's any help.

PM your email and I'll send it on!

FreeFallin94

Would anyone here be able to tell me what came up on the Company October exam paper? I'd be highly grateful!

odwyer94

Can anyone tell me what came up in EU in October?

louser1

Hi
I am planning on sitting Tort and EU, time has gotten away from me and I don't have as much study done as I wanted to at this stage. Am I crazy to continue with the two or is it possible. I work full time thanks

20029422

FreeFallin94 wrote: »

Would anyone here be able to tell me what came up on the Company October exam paper? I'd be highly grateful!

1.5 main reforms of 2014 act
2.table a/optional provisions
3.directors duties
4floating charge
5transfer of shares
6winding up
7reciever
8 section 212

FreeFallin94

20029422 wrote: »

1.5 main reforms of 2014 act
2.table a/optional provisions
3.directors duties
4floating charge
5transfer of shares
6winding up
7reciever
8 section 212

Thanks a million - hopefully this means separate corporate personality is a sure thing this time around!

This might be a stupid question, but what do you mean by table a/ provisions? I don't recognise that at all from the notes I've made out for company so far!!

REPLY:
Have a quick scan of the Companies' Act, and the schedules attached

20029422

FreeFallin94 wrote: »

Thanks a million - hopefully this means separate corporate personality is a sure thing this time around!

I hope that aswel I'm not really sure about that question it is on one of the first few chapters I skipped it in the exam

L124

Hey just wondering if anyone had up to date grids for Property, Contract, Constitutional and Tort that they wouldn't mind sending on please?

oneinamill

Hi. Has anyone got sample answers? I'm a Newby in need. A Virginia to the Fe1's...

Redo91

Hi. Does anyone mind outlining the three principles set down by Rommer J in Re City Equitable Fire under Directors Duties? It appears in my manual that the author forgot to include them as they go to talk about the third of these (idiot's dividend) without listing the three before. Very annoying. The amount of errors in some of the manuals is shocking. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Mod
I realise you are under time pressure, but that will apply throughout your professional life.

It is possible nowadays to read reports of almost any case anywhere on the 'net and do your own notes on it

Asking for answers like this is close to breach of our forum rule against giving legal advice.

The reason for the rule is that the owners of Boards.ie require to be protected against any possible claims for wrong or incomplete advice.

Apart from that good luck to ye all in the exams and in your careers

novus actus

Anyone know if Griffith have provided solutions to the last company law sitting?

Redo91

Redo91 wrote: »

Hi. Does anyone mind outlining the three principles set down by Rommer J in Re City Equitable Fire under Directors Duties? It appears in my manual that the author forgot to include them as they go to talk about the third of these (idiot's dividend) without listing the three before. Very annoying. The amount of errors in some of the manuals is shocking. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Mod
I realise you are under time pressure, but that will apply throughout your professional life.

It is possible nowadays to read reports of almost any case anywhere on the 'net and do your own notes on it

Asking for answers like this is close to breach of our forum rule against giving legal advice.

The reason for the rule is that the owners of Boards.ie require to be protected against any possible claims for wrong or incomplete advice.

Apart from that good luck to ye all in the exams and in your careers

Sorry. I've tried searching for a report of the case already but any I found required a paid subscription. I didn't realise I was in breach of forum rules by asking what I did as I thought the rule against legal advice on here only applied to current cases and not ones already ruled upon.


Mod
OK; Can anyone help Redo91?

hullaballoo

The actual judgment itself seems to be next to impossible to access online so unless you have access to a good legal library, there's not much chance of getting sight of it.

Wikipedia has some discussion of the 3 principles and quote from the judgment:

Romer J wrote:

There are, in addition, one or two other general propositions that seem to be warranted by the reported cases: (1.) A director need not exhibit in the performance of his duties a greater degree of skill than may reasonably be expected from a person of his knowledge and experience. A director of a life insurance company, for instance, does not guarantee that he has the skill of an actuary or of a physician. In the words of Lindley M.R.: "If directors act within their powers, *429 if they act with such care as is reasonably to be expected from them, having regard to their knowledge and experience, and if they act honestly for the benefit of the company they represent, they discharge both their equitable as well as their legal duty to the company": see Lagunas Nitrate Co. v. Lagunas Syndicate.[2] It is perhaps only another way of stating the same proposition to say that directors are not liable for mere errors of judgment. (2.) A director is not bound to give continuous attention to the affairs of his company. His duties are of an intermittent nature to be performed at periodical board meetings, and at meetings of any committee of the board upon which he happens to be placed. He is not, however, bound to attend all such meetings, though he ought to attend whenever, in the circumstances, he is reasonably able to do so. (3.) In respect of all duties that, having regard to the exigencies of business, and the articles of association, may properly be left to some other official, a director is, in the absence of grounds for suspicion, justified in trusting that official to perform such duties honestly. In the judgment of the Court of Appeal in In re National Bank of Wales, Ld,[3] the following passage occurs in relation to a director who had been deceived by the manager, and managing director, as to matters within their own particular sphere of activity: "Was it his duty to test the accuracy or completeness of what he was told by the general manager and the managing director? This is a question on which opinions may differ, but we are not prepared to say that he failed in his legal duty. Business cannot be carried on upon principles of distrust. Men in responsible positions must be trusted by those above them, as well as by those below them, until there is reason to distrust them. We agree that care and prudence do not involve distrust; but for a director acting honestly himself to be held legally liable for negligence, in trusting the officers under him not to conceal from him what they ought to report to him, appears to us to be laying too heavy a burden on honest business men." That case went to the House of Lords, and is reported there under the name of Dovey v Cory[4] Lord Davey, in the course of his speech to the House, made the following observations:
"I think the respondent was bound to give his attention to and exercise his judgment as a man of business on the matters which were brought before the board at the meetings which he attended, and it is not proved that he did not do so. But I think he was entitled to rely upon the judgment, information and advice, of the chairman and general manager, as to whose integrity, skill and competence he had no reason for suspicion. I agree with what was said by Sir George Jessel in Hallmark's Case,[5] and by Chitty J. in In re Denham & Co. 84, that directors are not bound to examine entries in the company's books. It was the duty of the general manager and (possibly) of the chairman to go carefully through the returns from the branches, and to bring before the board any matter requiring their consideration; but the respondent was not, in my opinion, guilty of negligence in not examining them for himself, notwithstanding that they were laid on the table of the board for reference."

These are the general principles that I shall endeavour to apply in considering the question whether the directors of this company have been guilty of negligence.

Sauce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re_City_Equitable_Fire_Insurance_Co

Redo91

hullaballoo wrote: »

The actual judgment itself seems to be next to impossible to access online so unless you have access to a good legal library, there's not much chance of getting sight of it.

Wikipedia has some discussion of the 3 principles and quote from the judgment:



Sauce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re_City_Equitable_Fire_Insurance_Co

Thanks so much for your help!

angelicapickle

Any tips on what to study for Constitutional?
Is this excessive/not enough? I find it hard to tell, I find the past exam papers tricky so I don't want to cut it too fine on the day. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

1. Personal Rights
2. Property Rights
3. Freedom of Expression
4. Family & Education
5. Principles of Judicial Review
6. Findings of Unconstitutionality
7. Separation of Powers
8. Amending the Constitution
9. Nation, People, State, Sovereignty
10. Institutions of State I – the President, AG
11. Institutions of State I – the Oireachtas
12. Institutions of State I – the Judiciary
13. Due Course of Law Art. 38.1
14. Right to Silence (check latest paper
15. Constitutional Interpretation
16. Religious Freedom
17. Right to Life (I realise this comes up very rarely, but I just recently studied it in detail in college so said I might as well throw it in)

smeal

Anybody awaiting recheck results...

I rang the Law Society as I seen the date for results had been removed- apparently the results were posted to anybody awaiting rechecks on Thursday and won't be available online

Rebelgirl87

smeal wrote: »

Anybody awaiting recheck results...

I rang the Law Society as I seen the date for results had been removed- apparently the results were posted to anybody awaiting rechecks on Thursday and won't be available online

Ya l got my results on Friday by post. You might get them today or tomorrow if you didnt get them already.

Gunslinger92

Yep I came back from a holiday last Friday and was greeted with my equity recheck coming back unchanged

So - what are ye studying for equity? :pac: I'm just gonna do that this round, I've left it too late to start studying a brand new topic

oneinamill

I'm afraid I'm in the same boat..wish I could locate quality sample answers to compare to the ones I'm doing myself to see if I've enough or too much info included..I don't want to get stuck for time in the exam if I go too in depth. Any advice anyone?

FreeFallin94

Would anyone be able to tell me what topics came up in October on the EU law paper? Thanks in advance!

Bayb12

Was anyone with previous passes able to apply online?

Rebelgirl87

Bayb12 wrote: »

Was anyone with previous passes able to apply online?

You can apply online from now on once you have sat your first round of exams.

Bayb12

And do you know what section of the website it is?

Redhighking

FreeFallin94 wrote: »

Would anyone be able to tell me what topics came up in October on the EU law paper? Thanks in advance!

same position as FreeFallin94 - if anyone could post what came up would extremely grateful!

Rebelgirl87

Bayb12 wrote: »

And do you know what section of the website it is?

If you google fe1 online application open the lawsociety weblink & scroll down till you see online application. Best of luck to you.