nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

RandolphEsq

Equity tomorrow. What are people predicting/hoping for with injunctions. I would like some sort of essay on Campus Oil principles and deviation from them or an essay on Anton Piller, Marevas.

Find more posts tagged with

fe1 preparation

fe1's

Quick Links

Comments

Pickpocket

Yoop wrote: »

I'm also a terribly slow writer. To be honest I don't think it matters as much for the FE1s as it did for undergraduate exams; you're not expected to have the same amount of detail - the main things the examiners are looking for here are can you spot the issues and can you apply the correct law to the facts. I've passed seven first time and my answers were between 2.5 to 3.5 pages with essay questions obviously being longer than problems. I definitely don't think I have ever written more than 4 pages for one answer.

Try not to worry too much about it; the main thing is to make sure and keep an eye on time and if you run out of time just throw down some bullet points. I think it will be pretty clear from the overall answer whether you know your stuff or not. Also; being concise is a skill in itself

That's hugely encouraging. Thank you!

pottsss777

Does anyone have EU notes for Free Movement of Goods? I can swap for other EU notes

Cecef13

Redo91 wrote: »

Was S 8 of the 1963 Companies act relating to modification of the ultra vires rule transposed into the 2014 act or was it repealed?

The 2014 Act abolished the ultra vires rule but be careful to leave it out as he likes asking to identify 5 major changes made by the 2014 act and you should mention the abolishing of the rule.

pottsss777

Does anyone have an equity grid? I can swap for property and EU.

odwyer94

Any predictions for EU? So far I've written notes for the following:

Institutions

Subsidiarity

Supremacy

Infringement

Preliminary reference procedure

Judicial review

Citizenship

Equality

FMOW

Mutual Recognition of Judgements

...Any suggestions on what else I should do if any?

CP92

Hi guys, does anyone know if it's okay to highlight and tab the LCLRA and Succession Act for the exam?

Thanks

starbar91

EQUITY: Hi guys, looking for your help on this q:

Exceptional categories in which non-charitable purpose trusts may be enforced.

Does this include animals? Sport and recreation? I'm very confused!

Much appreciated

ally1234

starbar91 wrote: »

EQUITY: Hi guys, looking for your help on this q:

Exceptional categories in which non-charitable purpose trusts may be enforced.

Does this include animals? Sport and recreation? I'm very confused!

Much appreciated

Hi Starbar,
Yes that includes animals, sports etc.
This category falls under Purpose Trusts. 'Im crossing my fingers a question comes up on this topic!

starbar91

ally1234 wrote: »

Hi Starbar,
Yes that includes animals, sports etc.
This category falls under Purpose Trusts. 'Im crossing my fingers a question comes up on this topic!

Many thanks ally1234! This was doing my head in. Also another q for you: "The Doctrine of Satisfaction" - this is another name for the Wholly and Exclusively Charitiable Test?!

irishasj

Did anyone get to attend Eoin Carolan's talk yesterday in UCD on the constitutional updates from 2016? If so, could you tell me what the main topics where please and thank you

Gunslinger92

irishasj wrote: »

Did anyone get to attend Eoin Carolan's talk yesterday in UCD on the constitutional updates from 2016? If so, could you tell me what the main topics where please and thank you

It's today, there's a lad at work at it, I'll ask him and tell ye what he says!

irishasj

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

It's today, there's a lad at work at it, I'll ask him and tell ye what he says!

Can't even tell what day of the week it is anymore!! I'll be lucky to be passing exams haha!

Thanks a mill, that would be great

Yoop

CP92 wrote: »

Hi guys, does anyone know if it's okay to highlight and tab the LCLRA and Succession Act for the exam?

Thanks

Yep, highlight and tab away

ally1234

starbar91 wrote: »

Many thanks ally1234! This was doing my head in. Also another q for you: "The Doctrine of Satisfaction" - this is another name for the Wholly and Exclusively Charitiable Test?!

Im not fully certain re the other name for Satisfaction, somebody else on here might be able to shed some light on this for you. I know that satisfaction usually comes up as question on its own. Usually in the choice question part.
Going back to charitable trusts its wise to include Cy Pres in your study plan, its definitely due to appear sooner rather than later!

FreeFallin94

For company law, does anyone know anything about how to convert a voluntary liquidation into an official liquidation?

It came up as a big part of a problem question in October 2013, but I can't seem to find anything in the manual I'm using about how to do that. Thanks in advance!

hullaballoo

A petition is brought to get an order winding the company up on the grounds that either the liquidator is acting inappropriately or that the shareholders are refusing to swear a declaration of solvency.

The mechanisms are provided for under Part 11 of the Act but essentially, a members voluntary liquidation can be converted into a creditors voluntary liquidation by the liquidator or on application to the Court if there is no liquidator or the liquidator is disputing the need. A petition can also be brought in relation to a company in voluntary liquidation for any of the grounds applicable to a petition brought in the ordinary course. Case law indicates such a petition will likely only be successful on the above grounds because liquidators usually know what they are doing and you'd need to show the liquidator's a wrong un.

20029422

ally1234 wrote: »

Hi Starbar,
Yes that includes animals, sports etc.
This category falls under Purpose Trusts. 'Im crossing my fingers a question comes up on this topic!

does this topic come up often?I don't think it does it is very small I'm wondering should I study also

shellbm

Does anyone know where I can order an "official copy" of the Succession Act and 2009 Act ?

Yoop

shellbm wrote: »

Does anyone know where I can order an "official copy" of the Succession Act and 2009 Act ?

Office of Public Works. Go to the Government Publications part of the website and you'll find email address and telephone numbers to contact them.

LegalLaaaaady

CP92 wrote: »

Hi guys, does anyone know if it's okay to highlight and tab the LCLRA and Succession Act for the exam?

Yes you can tab and highlight but do not write in the Acts! A useful tip that I found (in relation to the Companies Act 2014) was to colour-tab the book for sections that were relevant to each other! I'm not sure if this will help with the LCLRA/SA but with bigger legislation it worked a treat for me

shellbm

LegalLaaaaady wrote: »

Yes you can tab and highlight but do not write in the Acts! A useful tip that I found (in relation to the Companies Act 2014) was to colour-tab the book for sections that were relevant to each other! I'm not sure if this will help with the LCLRA/SA but with bigger legislation it worked a treat for me

Sorry this might be so obvious but I am so paranoid they will take the Acts from me haha - you can underline any words/sentences in pen, right? I have quite a few words underlined that stand out to me for some reason or another.

Redo91

shellbm wrote: »

Sorry this might be so obvious but I am so paranoid they will take the Acts from me haha - you can underline any words/sentences in pen, right? I have quite a few words underlined that stand out to me for some reason or another.

Ya you can underline all you want. Just no writing.

angelicapickle

Any suggestions/tips for what is predicted to appear for Constitutional?

Redo91

In the case of Murray v Browne a liquidator requested an extentsion of time to bring a S820 request for a restriction order. It says in my manual the request for the extension was made under S567 of the act but there appears to be no such provision in that section so I'm guessing it's another typo. Anyone please able to tell me what section it's under? Thanks

hullaballoo

Redo91 wrote: »

In the case of Murray v Browne a liquidator requested an extentsion of time to bring a S820 request for a restriction order. It says in my manual the request for the extension was made under S567 of the act but there appears to be no such provision in that section so I'm guessing it's another typo. Anyone please able to tell me what section it's under? Thanks

What? The Director of Corporate Enforcement is the person who grants an extension of time in s. 819 applications!?

Can you find the case? Murray v. Browne wasn't the title of the proceedings anyway. Do you have a citation?

ETA: never mind, I've found the case. It was pre-2014 Act so let me read it and get back to you.

Redo91

hullaballoo wrote: »

What? The Director of Corporate Enforcement is the person who grants an extension of time in s. 819 applications!?

Can you find the case? Murray v. Browne wasn't the title of the proceedings anyway. Do you have a citation?

ETA: never mind, I've found the case. It was pre-2014 Act so let me read it and get back to you.

Thanks once again. It mentioned in the wording of the relevant section that an application shouldn't be brought any earlier than 3 months and no later 5 months from the date the report was sent to the Director of Corporate Enforcement. I couldn't see any wording at all in S 567 to that effect so I figured it must be a typo.

Thanks again for all your help!

hullaballoo

Ok, so as I said, the case was dealt with under the pre-2014 regime. It was a s. 150 application where the liquidator was seeking to have the time for bringing an application extended under s. 56 (2) of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001.

The 2014 Act purports to deny the Courts jurisdiction to extend the time for bringing applications under s. 819 by setting out at s. 684 (4) (b) "such greater period of time as the Director [of Corporate Enforcement] may allow for the purposes of the application [under s. 819.]" http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/38/enacted/en/print#sec683

For comparison, the old provision allowing the Court to extend time and to "advise" the Director(!) http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/28/section/56/enacted/en/html

hullaballoo

Incidentally, the wording under s. 56 (2) gave rise to a quirk in that if the ODCE didn't come back with its letter not relieving a liquidator within the prescribed time, the liquidator had to apply to extend time, arguably (but not really) incurring more costs in the process through no fault of the liquidator's.

Realistically, the 2014 Act effectively got rid of s. 819 applications from the Courts' lists altogether because there is almost no reason why a director in respect of whom a restriction is sought would risk going to court. The risks are so great that even a stand-up director would probably just take the administrative restriction at zero cost rather than pay a few thousand to have it contested.

Redo91

hullaballoo wrote: »

Ok, so as I said, the case was dealt with under the pre-2014 regime. It was a s. 150 application where the liquidator was seeking to have the time for bringing an application extended under s. 56 (2) of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001.

The 2014 Act purports to deny the Courts jurisdiction to extend the time for bringing applications under s. 819 by setting out at s. 684 (4) (b) "such greater period of time as the Director [of Corporate Enforcement] may allow for the purposes of the application [under s. 819.]" http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/act/38/enacted/en/print#sec683

For comparison, the old provision allowing the Court to extend time and to "advise" the Director(!) http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/28/section/56/enacted/en/html

Thanks so much for clearing that up. So am I right in saying that the 3 month and 5 month periods that applied pre-2014 are no longer relevant and there's a 2 month window which can be extend at the Director of Corporate Enforcement's discretion?

hullaballoo

There's a slightly pedantic point to be made, so I'll make it.

Under the old regime, the liquidator had to make the s. 150 application between 3-5 months after he made his s. 56 report to the ODCE. Under the new Act, the liquidator has 2 months from the date on which the Director of Corporate Enforcement has notified the liquidator that the Director has not relieved the liquidator