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

MeganC1554

Is anybody staying in the ibis? Is it easier to walk to red cow or drive? First time staying here... Thanks

Yoop

MeganC1554 wrote: »

Is anybody staying in the ibis? Is it easier to walk to red cow or drive? First time staying here... Thanks

It's only about a 10-15 minute walk from Ibis to the Red Cow. I always go up by train so I don't know about driving between them.

laurenburne

annmc882 wrote: »

oh and doctrine for exceptions - essay Q maybe?

Your right on fire...I need to cover that. It's not the nicest to study.

Oh lord what's exceptions?

Lindyloo 1

MeganC1554 wrote: »

Is anybody staying in the ibis? Is it easier to walk to red cow or drive? First time staying here... Thanks

Me too. Just back from sussing out the walk and its grand. 15 mins max. Prob much less stressful to walk than deal with traffic and parking if you don't absolutely have to.

annmc882

Lindyloo 1 wrote: »

Me too. Just back from sussing out the walk and its grand. 15 mins max. Prob much less stressful to walk than deal with traffic and parking if you don't absolutely have to.

Don't drive
I learned the hard way!

annmc882

laurenburne wrote: »

Your right on fire...I need to cover that. It's not the nicest to study.

Oh lord what's exceptions?

proof of negligence I meant

Robbie25808

Quick question in relation to the question below:

The Mareva injunction is a very powerful remedy which if improperly invoked will bring about an injustice, something that it was designed to prevent."
Per O'Flaherty J in O'Mahony v Horgan [1995] 2 IR 411 a

Discuss how the Courts have endeavoured to balance the rights of plaintiffs and defendants when faced with an application for a mareva injunction. Make reference in your answer to relevant case law

As Maerva Injunction is prohibitory and quia timet in nature, do we need to discuss quia timet injunctions? e.g. discuss AG v Manchester Corp, Irish Newspapers v Irish Press, Rathmines v Pembroke Hospital, Szabo v Esat Digiphone?
I am just wondering as in the exam grid, for the question above, the lecture has ticked mareva injunction and quia timet?

Lindyloo 1

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Quick question in relation to the question below:

The Mareva injunction is a very powerful remedy which if improperly invoked will bring about an injustice, something that it was designed to prevent."
Per O'Flaherty J in O'Mahony v Horgan [1995] 2 IR 411 a

Discuss how the Courts have endeavoured to balance the rights of plaintiffs and defendants when faced with an application for a mareva injunction. Make reference in your answer to relevant case law

As Maerva Injunction is prohibitory and quia timet in nature, do we need to discuss quia timet injunctions? e.g. discuss AG v Manchester Corp, Irish Newspapers v Irish Press, Rathmines v Pembroke Hospital, Szabo v Esat Digiphone?
I am just wondering as in the exam grid, for the question above, the lecture has ticked mareva injunction and quia timet?

No need to discuss quia timet here.

Gunslinger92

Robbie bless you you're obsessed with the aul quia timets but unless the question is specifically on them, which I highly doubt it will, you don't need to discuss them

MeganC1554

Lindyloo 1 wrote: »

MeganC1554 wrote: »

Is anybody staying in the ibis? Is it easier to walk to red cow or drive? First time staying here... Thanks

Me too. Just back from sussing out the walk and its grand. 15 mins max. Prob much less stressful to walk than deal with traffic and parking if you don't absolutely have to.

Cool is it over that blue bridge I take myself in the morning when I leave the ibis?

binkevii

how likely Satisfaction will come up?

Lindyloo 1

MeganC1554 wrote: »

Cool is it over that blue bridge I take myself in the morning when I leave the ibis?

Yep and then follow the Luas track - no doubt there will be droves of us heading over!

Lindyloo 1

binkevii wrote: »

how likely Satisfaction will come up?

It's been a note question on last four sittings. No harm to have a paragraph on it.

laurenburne

annmc882 wrote: »

proof of negligence I meant

Res ipsa. Yes

BASHBAG

Hey folks,

Just wondering could anyone answer a small query re Company Law and the Transfer and Transmission of shares.

When there is an ulterior motive suggested by a shareholder seeking a rectification, and the court infers from the refusal that the allegation is well founded, what happens next?

Does the court order the registration of the shares or is there some other remedy available to the refused shareholder?

graduate555

BASHBAG wrote: »

Hey folks,

Just wondering could anyone answer a small query re Company Law and the Transfer and Transmission of shares.

When there is an ulterior motive suggested by a shareholder seeking a rectification, and the court infers from the refusal that the allegation is well founded, what happens next?

Does the court order the registration of the shares or is there some other remedy available to the refused shareholder?

Think it follows the same art s. 173 - they either rectify the register as there is insufficient cause for omitting them as a member or it can refuse rectification and order compensation instead - that's my understanding at least!

BASHBAG

graduate555 wrote: »

Think it follows the same art s. 173 - they either rectify the register as there is insufficient cause for omitting them as a member or it can refuse rectification and order compensation instead - that's my understanding at least!

Thanks for the reply. I thought as much, it seems the most logical solution.

LLBeatle

It's definitely the night before now at this stage, do you think City Colleges will be sticking the night before notes up?

XxMCRxBabyxX

LLBeatle wrote: »

It's definitely the night before now at this stage, do you think City Colleges will be sticking the night before notes up?

I think they did this before, that the NBNs were posted well into the exams or even after they were finished!

LLBeatle

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I think they did this before, that the NBNs were posted well into the exams or even after they were finished!

Oh no.

Pickpocket

Are secret trusts worth a punt do you think?

Pickpocket

I'm not sure about night before notes, but I'll be looking for a morning after pill if I pass these fcukin things.

monroe89

Pickpocket wrote: »

Are secret trusts worth a punt do you think?

I'd say secret trusts are due a run on the paper so no harm in covering them, tipped from two of the colleges... and it's an alright little topic.

Gunslinger92

Pickpocket wrote: »

Are secret trusts worth a punt do you think?

Most definitely

Pickpocket

monroe89 wrote: »

I'd say secret trusts are due a run on the paper so no harm in covering them, tipped from two of the colleges... and it's an alright little topic.

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Most definitely

Cheers!

Any tips about Quisclose Trusts? Obviously it's a part of Resulting Trusts but I notice that the exam grids have it listed separately. There's nothing to it so I'll probably just squeeze it in just in case.

Lindyloo 1

Pickpocket wrote: »

Cheers!

Any tips about Quisclose Trusts? Obviously it's a part of Resulting Trusts but I notice that the exam grids have it listed separately. There's nothing to it so I'll probably just squeeze it in just in case.

I'd agree about secret trusts and reckon could be risky to leave out any of resulting trusts as it was very strange they didn't appear in any form last time.

Fe1 2017

Hi could anyone help me with the following please:

For EU

With regard to judicial review if the problem question is based on a
regulation does the person have to show direct and individual concern
or just direct? I understand that A263(4) states that in relation to a
regulatory act you only have to show direct concern, however I am
slightly confused.

Thanks so much

Robbie25808

John, a bachelor, died suddenly last week. He died testate. John does not have any children, and is survived by three brothers. He was closest to Patrick, his youngest brother. Approximately six months ago, John told Patrick that he wished to transfer his leasehold interest in his shop to Patrick there and then, as he, John, wished to take life at an easier pace and enjoy himself while he was still in good health. John made it clear to Patrick that it was a gift which was to take effect immediately and was not to be postponed until his death. John did not, however, take any steps to complete the gift and no lease was executed in order to give effect thereto.

The shop remained open and the staff previously employed by John ran the business until his death. Patrick did not take any part in running the shop before John's death and incurred no expenses in relation to same. John appointed Patrick as executor in his will. He devised his leasehold interest to his three brothers equally.

Answer (a) and (b):
(a) Patrick asks you to clarify whether he may take the leasehold interest in the shop himself or whether he is obliged to share that interest with his two other brothers equally.

and

b) Indicate, giving reasons for your answer, whether your advices would be different if John's will was invalid and he therefore died intestate. Note that John's parents have pre-deceased him and his three brothers are his next of kin.

Any idea what to write for the second part? I think in Re James he said the same rule in strong v bird applies of they are a adminstrator but thats all i have for that? I could only write about a line or 2 without having to repeat everything i would write in the first question.
Any suggestions?

Lindyloo 1

Yeah, it's Re James. Perhaps talk about Re Gonin too. Less marks going for part b.

Robbie25808

Lindyloo 1 wrote: »

Any idea what to write for the second part? I think in Re James he said the same rule in strong v bird applies of they are a adminstrator but thats all i have for that? I could only write about a line or 2 without having to repeat everything i would write in the first question.
Any suggestions?

Yeah, it's Re James. Perhaps talk about Re Gonin too. Less marks going for part b.[/quote]
Perfect cheers again. Might just have to skip that question if it comes up.