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

LS3

Would anyone have sample answers for Constitutional they could swap or sell me? I have 7 other subjects. thanks

nicolesd

anyone have any good clear notes on charitable trusts/cyrpres?

JayFE1

illy.m wrote: »

Hey guys, would anyone have any tips for equity? I have sample answers and notes made out, however I seem to have trouble with the subject as there is just so much. I have failed it twice. Its my last one. Would anyone who passed have their paper by any chance? - just to see the standard/structure required for a pass. I cant get my head around it.

I was a 1:1 in Equity and have it passed in the FE1s. It’s been a while since I last done it but I’ll try my best to help - Separate the course into the Equitable and the Trusts topics so it’s an even balance. Don’t overload on one side. The likes of Tracing and Creation of an Express Trust is more common in Uni than the FE1s whereas Trustees Duties appear more frequently on the FE1s than in Uni. I’d go hard on Injunctions - Mareva, Quia Timet and Mandatory. I done the statistical probability on it before and Mareva was the highest value. I would’ve really fancied a Mareva to appear March just gone as Quia and Mandatory were in the sittings prior. Obviously, if it didn’t come up March the odds would increase ever more for you next month. I personally found the equitable side more interesting so I’d also be on Proprietary Estoppel and Undue Influence too. On the Trust side, Charitable Trust is long and a little boring however it would be another banker. DMCs is also littered in past papers and it’s about half the size than the above. It’s an absolute must.

I don’t have my actual paper pal however in terms of standard and structure something like this for say Undue Influence - Definition (Henchy J, Harris v Swordy). 1-2 lines on Actual & Presumed. 1-2 lines on Class 2A. It will always be 2B usually husband / wife with a bank. Into the bulk of it now - O’Donovan and Roche in Ireland. O Brien and Etridge in England. List the Etridge guidelines. I criticised O’Donovan and then Roche here with big support for the English position. Bring it back to Roche saying Etridge will most likely be endorsed in its entirety in the future going by recent CA decisions in Fox and Curran and all claims must be supported by evidence not just “bald assertions”. Maybe a bit on Carroll and Joyce regarding the independence of the solicitor. If you wanted to show off, throw in some commentary from Delaney or McGhee. That’s about 4 pages and you’re outta there with a good mark!

illy.m

JayFE1 wrote: »

I was a 1:1 in Equity and have it passed in the FE1s. It’s been a while since I last done it but I’ll try my best to help - Separate the course into the Equitable and the Trusts topics so it’s an even balance. Don’t overload on one side. The likes of Tracing and Creation of an Express Trust is more common in Uni than the FE1s whereas Trustees Duties appear more frequently on the FE1s than in Uni. I’d go hard on Injunctions - Mareva, Quia Timet and Mandatory. I done the statistical probability on it before and Mareva was the highest value. I would’ve really fancied a Mareva to appear March just gone as Quia and Mandatory were in the sittings prior. Obviously, if it didn’t come up March the odds would increase ever more for you next month. I personally found the equitable side more interesting so I’d also be on Proprietary Estoppel and Undue Influence too. On the Trust side, Charitable Trust is long and a little boring however it would be another banker. DMCs is also littered in past papers and it’s about half the size than the above. It’s an absolute must.

I don’t have my actual paper pal however in terms of standard and structure something like this for say Undue Influence - Definition (Henchy J, Harris v Swordy). 1-2 lines on Actual & Presumed. 1-2 lines on Class 2A. It will always be 2B usually husband / wife with a bank. Into the bulk of it now - O’Donovan and Roche in Ireland. O Brien and Etridge in England. List the Etridge guidelines. I criticised O’Donovan and then Roche here with big support for the English position. Bring it back to Roche saying Etridge will most likely be endorsed in its entirety in the future going by recent CA decisions in Fox and Curran and all claims must be supported by evidence not just “bald assertions”. Maybe a bit on Carroll and Joyce regarding the independence of the solicitor. If you wanted to show off, throw in some commentary from Delaney or McGhee. That’s about 4 pages and you’re outta there with a good mark!

THANK YOU!!! This is of great help. I also got a paper of someone. Hopefully, I will get it this time.

aisoburke1994

Any tips for Constitutional or Tort? I am doing almost every topic in fear that a random question will come up.
What topics do you think will come up this time for tort? Does anyone think the exams will be harder because we will be at home taking them?

shaunadennyham

aisoburke1994 wrote: »

Any tips for Constitutional or Tort? I am doing almost every topic in fear that a random question will come up.
What topics do you think will come up this time for tort? Does anyone think the exams will be harder because we will be at home taking them?

No sure why would they make them harder???? It’s still a closed book exam. Plus the exam papers were written before we knew it was going online

LS3

Prime day is on Amazon today so if anyone is looking for a cheap webcam or laptop have a look!

IgoPAP

aisoburke1994 wrote: »

Any tips for Constitutional or Tort? I am doing almost every topic in fear that a random question will come up.
What topics do you think will come up this time for tort? Does anyone think the exams will be harder because we will be at home taking them?

If you're doing almost every topic for Tort you're wasting your time and more likely to do badly in the exams.

LS3

IgoPAP wrote: »

If you're doing almost every topic for Tort you're wasting your time and more likely to do badly in the exams.

I did every topic and passed.

Iso_123

IgoPAP wrote: »

If you're doing almost every topic for Tort you're wasting your time and more likely to do badly in the exams.

I think this may be true for some other subjects but not for Tort. I have to say, I ended up covering most topics for Tort as it is very difficult to predict and there is some mixing of topics. If you use your time wisely it is possible to get all the topics covered and do very well!

Subjects like property that are more predictable I would agree that it is a waste of time to do every topic though!

StabiloLaw

IgoPAP wrote: »

If you're doing almost every topic for Tort you're wasting your time and more likely to do badly in the exams.

For me personally, I needed to cover almost every topic for Tort.

I passed with a high enough grade and can confirm I'm happy I didn't leave out too much as the paper can be so unpredictable.

hullaballoo

For at least 10 years the examiner's report for Tort has been lamenting the inability of candidates to identify the issues in questions which is a direct result of leaving topics out.

You are not required to know the topics in intricate detail but you are required to know the topics. Working smarter not harder, know a little bit about everything rather than a lot about a limited number of things for tort. There are a finite number of torts, learn what they are. There are limited ancillary principles, know what they are.

McMahon and Binchy is the best resource for students if you can avoid the temptation to keep reading and instead dip in and out to bolster notes. It is much more productive than trying to learn from manuals. IME, manuals can be incoherent and confusing at times, which can bog you down and limit productivity.

shaunadennyham

For tort it’s so important to cover res ipsa loquitor, defamation, economic torts, trespass to the person, land based torts, passing off and professional negligence as the examiner frequently examines these topics

Mod
Pls do not discuss the various examiners, tutors etc here

Jeremiah25

Would anyone have any advice on how to best identify the issues being asked in Cons. questions?

Probably what I found most difficult in the March paper! Thanks

Aoibhin511

The closer the clock ticks to the end of "early next week" the more restless I become

Lawlaw12

illy.m wrote: »

Hey guys, would anyone have any tips for equity? I have sample answers and notes made out, however I seem to have trouble with the subject as there is just so much. I have failed it twice. Its my last one. Would anyone who passed have their paper by any chance? - just to see the standard/structure required for a pass. I cant get my head around it.

Another tip for equity is to go through the past papers.
After studying each topic I looked through all the past papers and the questions are actually very repetitive - I found that for most topics it would only be asked in 2 or 3 ways repeated again and again... sometimes in the problem questions she doesn't even change the names of the people involved it's literally the exact same question. So if you go through all the papers you'll see the exact 2/3 ways that topic would be asked on the exam and then you can look at the reports to see what the examiner wants in your answer.
Obviously there's no guarantee that the questions won't be changed in any given sitting but this was something that really helped me to focus my study and cut out irrelevant material.

StabiloLaw

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

The closer the clock ticks to the end of "early next week" the more restless I become

I see they've added the timetable on the Law Society website- I'm hoping this isn't the "additional information" we've been waiting for...

michaelot97

Has anybody got up to date equity exam grids or sample answers they would be able to send me? Thanks in advance

nicolesd

can anyone explain rule in claytons case in tracing in equity? cant get my head around it or figure out when to use it!

SKLaw

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

Would anyone have any advice on how to best identify the issues being asked in Cons. questions?

Probably what I found most difficult in the March paper! Thanks

I had the same problem before. I used the exam grid to start with and familiarised myself with how each topic is being asked. Seems like such a long process but it got me to identify the issues in each question without the aid of the exam grid eventually

SKLaw

nicolesd wrote: »

can anyone explain rule in claytons case in tracing in equity? cant get my head around it or figure out when to use it!

the easiest way I remembered it is just starting off with the principle that the trustee mixes money from more than 1 trust. So let's say there are 3 trusts A, B and C.

Trust A has 10k which is deposited into an account, then the trustee deposits 5k belonging to Trust B into the same account. Later on the trustee deposits 5k belonging to Trust C into that same account. When the trustee takes out 15k from that account, there's 5k left so Trust A and Trust B will have a claim against the trustee for the amounts they didn't get from the account.

(Somebody correct me if I'm wrong please )

ScatmanWhack

Have tried calling LS today to ask when we'll get an update and haven't been able to get through - has anybody had any luck/news?

nicolesd

i also tried contacting and kept getting hung up on! does anyone know or think we will get results of recheck back before the exams start? applied fora tort recheck but wondering will i even find out before the november sitting!

ScatmanWhack

nicolesd wrote: »

i also tried contacting and kept getting hung up on! does anyone know or think we will get results of recheck back before the exams start? applied fora tort recheck but wondering will i even find out before the november sitting!

The Law Society must be a management/communications consultant's wet dream. Imagine the amount of work EY or PwC would get out of having to sort out the mess that is LS.

JayFE1

nicolesd wrote: »

can anyone explain rule in claytons case in tracing in equity? cant get my head around it or figure out when to use it!

It’s just “First in, First out” of a bank account involving two or more trustees monies. If you had 1k on Trust which was placed in an account first and I also had a 1k Trust which was placed in the same account and then the account was dissipated leaving 500 quid then you would take the whole 500 and I would get nothing.

It’s a presumption which can be rebutted by the adducement of evidence establishing the contrary ie. in a Re Hallets type of case or where the interests of justice require it e.g. the funds would then be distributed pari-passu (We both under the above example would take 500 quid each). It’s three years since I did Tracing in Uni so my authorities are a little hazy however if you have your notes in front of you, the interest of justice style exceptions were first set forth by the Lords and endorsed over here around 1987 IIRC. Claytons is never the answer but always the starting point. It’s too rigid and may often lead to unfair, undue and unreasonable results. Claytons is open to heavy criticism and you’ll pick up marks for doing so. After criticism, qualify that criticism with the recent case involving AIB (around 2015, hazy on the respondents name) where Barrett J, applied it to a “relatively simple overdraft in / out scenario lacking the complexity of many modern financial transactions”. You could finish by saying traditionally Claytons was the rule with the above cases the exception however in modern times Clayton has become the exception.

Just also on the general topic of tracing, definitely contrast the common law and equitable rules to start and watch out for transient purchases - spending money on assets that can’t be traced into e.g. a solicitor taking trust monies and spending it all on champers on a wild night out. I think it was Lord Greene in Re Diplock [1948] that said equity is as useless as the common law when the money is spent on a dinner! Assets that have been transferred to “Equities darling” aka a 3rd party bona fide purchaser for value e.g. taking 10k and buying a car only to sell it on to the above and fluctuations in asset price e.g. he spent the money on a rare Rolex. Now, it’s worth even more and the client is entitled to that extra value.

JayFE1

aisoburke1994 wrote: »

Any tips for Constitutional or Tort? I am doing almost every topic in fear that a random question will come up.
What topics do you think will come up this time for tort? Does anyone think the exams will be harder because we will be at home taking them?

I don’t think you can do every topic - it’s just too much. I think you have to gamble a little and find some value. I feel you can cut more topics in Tort than Constitutional. I passed Tort in Aug and have Cons next month. I think Tort was 12 topics in total after I cut whereas Constitutional at the moment is 16. I think at this stage defamation is essentially guaranteed so a must. Negligence and Causation are nearly compulsory. Res Ipsa - Nah. It also came up in August so odds decrease for you next month. Vicarious Liability and Employers are an either / or IMO and didn’t feature in Aug so odds increase. Prior to Aug, I felt Damages and Limitations were red hot to feature and the latter came up. I’d be all over Damages next month. I’d also have Passing Off, Assault / Battery / FI (Airsoft gun / sporting context exam paper style) and NS on any list to study. Nervous Shock is due a good run (a good 3 outta 5 papers kinda run IMO). Professional Negligence, Occupiers and Product Liability to finish. I left out Nuisance, Pure Economic Loss, Rylands, Fire & Animal and anything else I didn’t list. I didn’t regret it.

fe1student2803

Does anyone who has passed criminal law have any tips for passing it? Finding preparing for it very hard

Fe123

How long does it take people on average to fully learn a topic 😭

DFMCD190384

fe1student2803 wrote: »

Does anyone who has passed criminal law have any tips for passing it? Finding preparing for it very hard

I found it hard too but he is a very decent marker. I wrote out all of my topics and then I used a recording app on my phone. I recorded all my legislation and sections and found that after a couple of listens I was singing it back to myself. Worked for me. I covered Sexual Offences, Non Fatal Offences Against Person, Murder Manslaughter, theft offences, all the Defences and also MR and AR. Hope this helps.

EmmaO94

fe1student2803 wrote: »

Does anyone who has passed criminal law have any tips for passing it? Finding preparing for it very hard

I too found it really difficult - not helped by most people calling it an 'easy' FE1! I failed it first time - got my topics all jumbled up and confused in my head.

Second time (passed with 58 thank god!) I studied grids to help narrow it down and just poured over past papers. It helped to be aware that there's a lot of topic mixing in this paper, so be prepared for that.

As they say, study a mile-wide but an inch deep, and I think that's particularly pertinent for the papers where a lot of topic mixing is involved; you don't want to get stung by a nasty 'part b' etc of a question!

From memory, I studied homicide (guaranteed question), rape & sexual offences (also pretty much guaranteed), manslaughter, assault etc, offences against property, right to silence & bail. Hope this helps!