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

SwD

Does anyone have notes on institutions they’d be willing to share?

EAL2019 wrote: »

Thats more or less all I'll have for them too! Main Treaty Articles, composition, functions and how they were changed under Lisbon. Like theres only so much you can really know about them.



For the democratic deficit angle its mostly about whether the Lisbon changes were sufficient etc and whether the role of the Parliament in particular is sufficient, so you'd basically have that covered anyway.

iana2017

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks

bobbyness

iana2017 wrote: »

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks

Would also be looking for a tort grid if anyone can help out. Thanks for asking

iamanengine

Are ROT clauses a regular feature in the borrowing question?

They're kind of annoying, could do without them

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

Are ROT clauses a regular feature in the borrowing question?

They're kind of annoying, could do without them

I have a feeling they’ll be on the paper. March 19 was the Causes of Crystallisation, I THINK October was late registration. ROT is the only other large section of the area that comes to mind.

Jeremiah25

It's going to be a long night...

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

I have a feeling they’ll be on the paper. March 19 was the Causes of Crystallisation, I THINK October was late registration. ROT is the only other large section of the area that comes to mind.

I'm hoping for a nice book debts Q

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

It's going to be a long night...

Yep, I'm absolutely shattered and I have 3 coffees in me

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

I'm hoping for a nice book debts Q



Yep, I'm absolutely shattered and I have 3 coffees in me

For FCOBD is it just s92(b) Accounting Act 17, Keenan Bros, Wogan, Holidair, Spectrum?

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

For FCOBD is it just s92(b) Accounting Act 17, Keenan Bros, Wogan, Holidair, Spectrum?

I also have Siebe Gorman v Barclays Bank and Re Brightlife Ltd

Breacnua

ihatethesea wrote: »

Offer/Acceptance
Consideration
Consumer Protection
Terms/Exemption Clauses
Remedies
Discharge
Mistake/Misrep

I feel like its the bare minimum but i don't have time to do more!

know the bare bones of capacity - what it is 2-3 cases

know the re with estoppel and consideration

you will do fine with that

jewels652

SwD wrote: »

Does anyone have notes on institutions they’d be willing to share?

I am using the night before notes you can get them online if you subscribe to their website.

supercreative

Does anyone know when the Summary Approval Procedure last came up for Company? Trying to get an idea for how it'll be asked.

Edit: also, LTDs vs DACs?

nmurphy1441

With exclusion clauses....

If a defendant includes in its terms and conditions that a plaintiff is excluded from bringing a claim in tort in negligence, is the plaintiff bound by it and therefore can’t bring a claim due to the terms and conditions? Assuming that the exclusion clause has been incorporated correctly...

supercreative

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

With exclusion clauses....

If a defendant includes in its terms and conditions that a plaintiff is excluded from bringing a claim in tort in negligence, is the plaintiff bound by it and therefore can’t bring a claim due to the terms and conditions? Assuming that the exclusion clause has been incorporated correctly...

I think so, assuming that it isn't an unfair term under the 1995 Regulations and that it has been signed properly etc. Not my strongest area though.

coalition

supercreative wrote: »

Does anyone know when the Summary Approval Procedure last came up for Company? Trying to get an idea for how it'll be asked.

Edit: also, LTDs vs DACs?

LTD v DAC and SAP came up together in October 2017

supercreative

coalition wrote: »

LTD v DAC and SAP came up together in October 2017

Cheers!

godfather2

supercreative wrote: »

I think so, assuming that it isn't an unfair term under the 1995 Regulations and that it has been signed properly etc. Not my strongest area though.

If the clause is properly incorporated he can rely upon unfair contract terms directive which states unfair consumer terms a contract are illegal. There is list of terms presumed to be unfair under the directive, exclusion of liability for personal injury is one of them.
Or
S.39 and s.40 sale of goods supply of services id also of use but the directive is broader.

Kellyg248

Send your email and I will forward to you if you like ...

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks[/quote]

nmurphy1441

godfather2 wrote: »

If the clause is properly incorporated he can rely upon unfair contract terms directive which states unfair consumer terms a contract are illegal. There is list of terms presumed to be unfair under the directive, exclusion of liability for personal injury is one of them.
Or
S.39 and s.40 sale of goods supply of services id also of use but the directive is broader.

So would this be under the Canada Steamship Line case?

Jeremiah25

Anyone any idea what the company marker is like?

godfather2

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

So would this be under the Canada Steamship Line case?

I would be more inclined to stick to legislation on that question. Except for whether the clause was specifically brought to his attention and done so before the contract was concluded. I would use your case law there

Law1997

Hi it’s the worrier again...

For Contract, will I pass if I have knowledge of offer & acceptance, consideration, intention to create, estoppel, capacity, terms, duress, mistake, misrep, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, undue influence, discharge & remedies

By knowledge I mean I know as much of it as is in my manual but when reading the reports there’s a few nitty gritty bits in problem qs that I don’t have info on, and then she sometimes will ask an entire essay on duty to mitigate loss when it’s such a tiny section in my chapter on remedies.

Will this get me the pass? I feel like I nearly should have gone outside the manual but no time for that now feel like I’m at a disadvantage - my manual is up to date but there’s always something I’m missing.

CarrigView

Anybody have an idea where's handy to park around Neptune Stadium? Don't venture over to the North side so often!

iamanengine

Brain capacity has never been lower...am ded

Law1997

iamanengine wrote: »

Brain capacity has never been lower...am ded

Me too

rightytighty

Mental that people have passed 8 in one sitting.

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

Mental that people have passed 8 in one sitting.

I'll never understand how that is possible. This is my first time having two on consecutive days and finding it very very tough to concentrate, reading the same sentences over and over but not taking anything in...would not recommend!

Fe119

Law1997 wrote: »

Hi it’s the worrier again...

For Contract, will I pass if I have knowledge of offer & acceptance, consideration, intention to create, estoppel, capacity, terms, duress, mistake, misrep, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, undue influence, discharge & remedies

By knowledge I mean I know as much of it as is in my manual but when reading the reports there’s a few nitty gritty bits in problem qs that I don’t have info on, and then she sometimes will ask an entire essay on duty to mitigate loss when it’s such a tiny section in my chapter on remedies.

Will this get me the pass? I feel like I nearly should have gone outside the manual but no time for that now feel like I’m at a disadvantage - my manual is up to date but there’s always something I’m missing.

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

Law1997

Fe119 wrote: »

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

Thank you! That’s a good way of thinking of it

Breacnua

Fe119 wrote: »

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

duty to mitgate -- there is many cases that u learn for other parts that can be used here - she just wants u to think outside the box