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

Joanneom · 14-03-2019 03:58PM

Can anyone give any indication as to what may be predicated for EU?

Considering focusing on:-
Institutions
FMOG
FMOW
Citizenship,
Equality,
Direct Effect
MS Liability
General Principles (maybe minus fundamental rights)
Judicial Review

Just not sure if I'm covering enough as I've made the decision to leave out competition etc.

Thanks

lawless11 · 14-03-2019 04:02PM

user115 wrote: »

Anyone got their EU script back and saw how casenote question is marked in EU?

The report asks for alot of detail, wondering what kind detail gets a 12 or so in casenote? Or any mark at all

Got 11 with one case note pulled out of my fine a**

I mean i knew it was a case about freedom of movement of goods but I couldn't remember the precise facts so i applied the banana case to it, seems to have worked alright

had about less than a page for each.

I'd actually have the same question about Constitutional - anyone saw his/her script for the case note?

user115 · 14-03-2019 04:11PM

That is so great to hear!!

In the 2 that you knew well did you go into how that case developed EU law and cases lead on from it/up to it? If I'm lucky and I know cases that come up I think i could do a brief background on facts, area of law, the decision and the effect of it on that area but not sure I would remember cases linked

For anyone who's interested I think preliminary ref and merger are really likely to come up, really hoping for 2 questions on FMG also. Direct effect seems to come up without fail every year. Hoping EU is going to be fairly good paper, hope there are no weird Brexit questions though

lawless11 wrote: »

Got 11 with one case note pulled out of my fine a** I mean i knew it was a case about freedom of movement of goods but I couldn't remember the precise facts so i applied the banana case to it, seems to have worked alright had about less than a page for each.

I'd actually have the same question about Constitutional - anyone saw his/her script for the case note?

lawless11 · 14-03-2019 04:16PM

user115 wrote: »

That is so great to hear!!

In the 2 that you knew well did you go into how that case developed EU law and cases lead on from it/up to it? If I'm lucky and I know cases that come up I think i could do a brief background on facts, area of law, the decision and the effect of it on that area but not sure I would remember cases linked

For one I had just another case name that was decided differently (For Humblot) at the end, the other no just quick few lines about the facts, the issue, the court's decision (opening if there was one). Really not *that* detailed. But probably if you put more you'll achieve better

.

bigtophat13 · 14-03-2019 04:33PM

Does anyone know the difference between Leontjava and Laurentieu cases. Both in relation to delegated legislation and the aliens Act, they seem almost identical to me

Legal_Eagle_95 · 14-03-2019 05:11PM

EU

What are people actually covering in the Sources of Law chapter? Feels a bit all over the place and not sure what is actually relevant and frequently appears in the exams? Thanks

holliek · 14-03-2019 05:18PM

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Does anyone know the difference between Leontjava and Laurentieu cases. Both in relation to delegated legislation and the aliens Act, they seem almost identical to me

In my notes, I have written that Leontijava shows that they don't need to make a direct reference to the parent Act and just have that Laurentiu relates to the Aliens Act

kasey0123 · 14-03-2019 05:45PM

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Does anyone know the difference between Leontjava and Laurentieu cases. Both in relation to delegated legislation and the aliens Act, they seem almost identical to me

Leontjava was in relation to the alien order implemented by the minister that allowed an immigration officer to decide the duration of an Aliens stay in the country... this was outside the delegated authority in the aliens act and the courts saw it as making law, the ministers act were ultra vires. The other article in the order article 15 compelled an immigrant to produce birth cert/registration and the courts viewed this as within the delegated authority of the aliens act, they referred to the “ and other matters “ in the Aliens Act itself and held that compelling an alien to show proof of identity was not so far removed from the other provisions in the act so it was all good. There was Principle and policies basically.

Then larentiu they struck down s5 of the aliens act which gave the minister the power to grant a deportation order as unconstitutional, they held there was literally no guiding principles or policies in the act at all it simply said the minister had the authority to deport so they viewed it as giving too much power to the government... and they noted it was before City view press case so the Oireachtas weren’t aware of the P and P test at that time.
I think!

Bbol · 14-03-2019 05:50PM

Hey,

Just wondering if anyone has any advise/views on contract law? I’m sitting 5 and find it by far the hardest! ðŸ™ˆ

Smiley283 · 14-03-2019 05:50PM

Anyone have an up todate contract grid? (Or last October's exam paper/ report?)

bigtophat13 · 14-03-2019 06:02PM

holliek wrote: »

In my notes, I have written that Leontijava shows that they don't need to make a direct reference to the parent Act and just have that Laurentiu relates to the Aliens Act

kasey0123 wrote: »

Leontjava was in relation to the alien order implemented by the minister that allowed an immigration officer to decide the duration of an Aliens stay in the country... this was outside the delegated authority in the aliens act and the courts saw it as making law, the ministers act were ultra vires. The other article in the order article 15 compelled an immigrant to produce birth cert/registration and the courts viewed this as within the delegated authority of the aliens act, they referred to the “ and other matters “ in the Aliens Act itself and held that compelling an alien to show proof of identity was not so far removed from the other provisions in the act so it was all good. There was Principle and policies basically.

Then larentiu they struck down s5 of the aliens act which gave the minister the power to grant a deportation order as unconstitutional, they held there was literally no guiding principles or policies in the act at all it simply said the minister had the authority to deport so they viewed it as giving too much power to the government... and they noted it was before City view press case so the Oireachtas weren’t aware of the P and P test at that time.
I think!

Thanks guys, clears it up a lot! Of course they'd be similar names as well as cases to boot!

LawGirl3434 · 14-03-2019 06:48PM

What would people’s approach be for an essay/ problem Q on privacy? Most of my cases are around FOE, would this be normal?

sapphire309 · 14-03-2019 06:49PM

EU

Are double and qualified majority voting the same thing now, after 1 November 2014? In that the majority vote must be 65% of the population, and 55% of the Member States, (except where the Council votes on a proposal not coming from the Commission or the high representative and it needs 72% of Council members). Getting a bit confused by the terminology.

Ethan90 · 14-03-2019 06:50PM

Looking back at the constitutional past papers, can anyone tell me if there is anything unconstitutional about a retrospective tax or levy, except for it possibly being a disproportionate interference with property rights?

JCormac · 14-03-2019 07:01PM

Off the top of yer heads - If the conclusion of a question is wrong, would the examiner take a heap of marks off the question?

Basically, for the Co-ownership question (about the friends that got a property together before one friend became fond of the other friends wife) I said that the end result I said it'd be a Joint tenancy due to the commercial situation.

Realise now that it's literally the opposite conclusion

user115 · 14-03-2019 07:11PM

I think double came into effect after November 2014 and means that a proposal must be approved via QMV by 65% population and 55% MS, this enhances the votes democratic legitimately as it has been approved by maj of population i.e 65% with a turn out of 55% of MS.

They are the same thing its just that I think old QMV didn't have the 2 hurdles and now the 2 apply which make it more democratic and that is why they renamed it double QMV

sapphire309 wrote: »

EU

Are double and qualified majority voting the same thing now, after 1 November 2014? In that the majority vote must be 65% of the population, and 55% of the Member States, (except where the Council votes on a proposal not coming from the Commission or the high representative and it needs 72% of Council members). Getting a bit confused by the terminology.

user115 · 14-03-2019 07:14PM

Does this make sense to people who have covered preliminary ref in EU

A court of final instance can be the High Court only if the HC decides not to grant leave to appeal and that decision is not subject to review by any national court i.e. the Supreme Court. Otherwise decisions of HC are not ordinarily considered as decisions of court of final instance

kasey0123 · 14-03-2019 07:15PM

Does anyone have more cases on cabinet confidentiality.. all I have is Murphy v Dublin Corp, Ambiorix Ltd v Min for Environment and Ag v Hamilton.. could you bring privilege into this as well ? Obviously couldn’t write an answer with 3 cases

Fe1hayes · 14-03-2019 07:19PM

user115 wrote: »

I think double came into effect after November 2014 and means that a proposal must be approved via QMV by 65% population and 55% MS, this enhances the votes democratic legitimately as it has been approved by maj of population i.e 65% with a turn out of 55% of MS.

They are the same thing its just that I think old QMV didn't have the 2 hurdles and now the 2 apply which make it more democratic and that is why they renamed it double QMV

I think it's also more democratic because if 4 ms reject they can block it where as before they couldn't.

SwD · 14-03-2019 07:26PM

I'm looking for someone who has undertaken the Griffith Prep Course this term to drop me a DM for discussion. Thanks

Sineaddh · 14-03-2019 07:36PM

What are the best topics for EU? It’s absolutely huge so dreading it

Also my blackstone treaties are 2016 - 2017.. is this ok? Would there be a big difference in newer versions?

laurar2019 · 14-03-2019 07:51PM

property finding q did you have to explain below and above the land?

SwD · 14-03-2019 07:52PM

laurar2019 wrote: »

property finding q did you have to explain below and above the land?

I thought given the circumstances it was uncovered it was worth mentioning both. Further, by virtue of it being an 'antique watch' it was worth mentioning the doctrine of treasure trove and Webb v Ireland.

sapphire309 · 14-03-2019 08:05PM

Sineaddh wrote: »

What are the best topics for EU? It’s absolutely huge so dreading it

Also my blackstone treaties are 2016 - 2017.. is this ok? Would there be a big difference in newer versions?

My friend used the 2014 version last sitting and was fine with it.

I'm planning on covering:

Sources (i.e. regulations, directives and decisions), Gen Principles, Institutions, Judicial Review, Direct Effect, Supremacy of EU Law, State Liability, FMG, Workers, Establishment, Citizenship, Equality. Have seen a few people recommend covering Preliminary Reference so will hopefully cover it too.

Had planned to cover Competition Law but it's too big and I don't have time.

nimcdona · 14-03-2019 08:25PM

Any topics in particular to focus on for equity?

laurar2019 · 14-03-2019 08:26PM

what can you leave out for contract

bigtophat13 · 14-03-2019 08:45PM

kasey0123 wrote: »

Leontjava was in relation to the alien order implemented by the minister that allowed an immigration officer to decide the duration of an Aliens stay in the country... this was outside the delegated authority in the aliens act and the courts saw it as making law, the ministers act were ultra vires. The other article in the order article 15 compelled an immigrant to produce birth cert/registration and the courts viewed this as within the delegated authority of the aliens act, they referred to the “ and other matters “ in the Aliens Act itself and held that compelling an alien to show proof of identity was not so far removed from the other provisions in the act so it was all good. There was Principle and policies basically.

Then larentiu they struck down s5 of the aliens act which gave the minister the power to grant a deportation order as unconstitutional, they held there was literally no guiding principles or policies in the act at all it simply said the minister had the authority to deport so they viewed it as giving too much power to the government... and they noted it was before City view press case so the Oireachtas weren’t aware of the P and P test at that time.
I think!

Hey, I've confused myself again. Laurentiu they said s5 was out of the question and outside the principles and policies test. A couple years later was leontjava and the order there was made pursuant to s5 and they ruled on it again and said the order was UV. How was it still in consideration? Was it not dead and gone?

Joanneom · 14-03-2019 08:45PM

nimcdona wrote: »

Any topics in particular to focus on for equity?

You'd be in a good position if you covered all trusts and injunctions, as I believe there is three trusts questions and one injunctions question, at least there was last sitting. Specific Performance, Rectification, Three Certainties, Trustees and DMC might be a good call too.

nimcdona · 14-03-2019 08:52PM

Joanneom wrote: »

You'd be in a good position if you covered all trusts and injunctions, as I believe there is three trusts questions and one injunctions question, at least there was last sitting. Specific Performance, Rectification, Three Certainties, Trustees and DMC might be a good call too.

Thank you

Smiley283 · 14-03-2019 09:26PM

Doing contract next week and I had planned to borrow my friends consumer legislation but they said they can't find it! Would anyone be in a position that i could buy it off on Tuesday afternoon/Wednesday in the red cow?

If not, would I be screwed if I don't bother doing consumer protection?

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

Comments