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

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

Would it be ok to leave out freedom movement of goods? covering a good few topics including comp law.

Also did comp law fmg come up in the last sitting ???

If you're covering competition and all of the other regulars, I'd say you should be fine. It will almost definitely come up as a Q but then again so will competition and I'm leaving it out :pac: the course to too big - can't possibly cover it all!

FMG came up as an essay in the context of an essay on Art 34+36 proportionality and protection of human health.

Competition came up in a problem in context of State Aid.

Can anybody explain how the Denkavit case comes into an analysis of Article 110 please?

scooby321 wrote: »

Equity

Has mandatory Perpetual injunctions ever come up? I'm assuming mandatory interlocutory has.

Also, aiming to cover:

1. Injunctions: QT & Interlocutory
2. SP & Rectification
3. Express: 3 Certainties & DMC
4. Purpose: Charitable, Cy Pres & Non-Charitable
5. Resulting: Re Osaba/ Suplus & Advancement
6. Constructive
7. Trusteeship
8. Satisfaction

This is my 3rd time sitting equity so any thoughts on the above would be much appreciated. Do not want to face it again in October

Hey!
I'm leaving out Injunctions, bar QT and Anton Pillar so can't help you with regards to them (I hate them so much). I'm also repeating it so i feel your pain
I'm covering

1. Purpose: Charitable, Cy Pres
2. SP & Rectification
3. Express: 3 Certainties & DMC and S v B also
4. Tracing
5. Resulting: Re Osaba/ Suplus & Advancement & Quistclose
6. Constructive
7. Trusteeship
8. Satisfaction
9. QT and AP
Also going to look over Estoppel just in case. Its similar to yours i just have a few extra because of my lack of injunctions. Hopefully we'll be ok with all that. Its so heavy. SOS
(ALSO, Am i crazy leaving out non-charitable?)

sbbyrne wrote: »

Hey!
I'm leaving out Injunctions, bar QT and Anton Pillar so can't help you with regards to them (I hate them so much). I'm also repeating it so i feel your pain
I'm covering

1. Purpose: Charitable, Cy Pres
2. SP & Rectification
3. Express: 3 Certainties & DMC and S v B also
4. Tracing
5. Resulting: Re Osaba/ Suplus & Advancement & Quistclose
6. Constructive
7. Trusteeship
8. Satisfaction
9. QT and AP
Also going to look over Estoppel just in case. Its similar to yours i just have a few extra because of my lack of injunctions. Hopefully we'll be ok with all that. Its so heavy. SOS
(ALSO, Am i crazy leaving out non-charitable?)

That is very similar, hopefully we will be covered this time! Someone posted the FE-1 pass rate and I saw it was 48% in October 2017 so it's freaked me out a bit have EU to cover also so that will cut me for time. If you don't have another exam I think a one-page run through of non-charitable would be handy to have just incase as it hasn't come up in a while and is quite short

scooby321 wrote: »

That is very similar, hopefully we will be covered this time! Someone posted the FE-1 pass rate and I saw it was 48% in October 2017 so it's freaked me out a bit have EU to cover also so that will cut me for time. If you don't have another exam I think a one-page run through of non-charitable would be handy to have just incase as it hasn't come up in a while and is quite short

Its an awful subject, my most hated so far. I don't have another one this sitting, this is my last one so i will run through it, thanks for the heads up!

Anyone else have 3 in a row next week ?

Pyggg wrote: »

Anyone else have 3 in a row next week ?

Me:( Equity, contract and EU. Going to be a sleep deprived haze. Although I did three in a row in Oct too and somehow managed to pass. Berocca and Coffee are my only tips.

Stressed out about EU law. Plan on having the following covered:

Institutions
Sources of EU Law
Application of EU Law (Supremacy, direct effect, principal of effectiveness and efficiency)
Preliminary Reference Procedure
Annulment Action
FMOG
FTPS
Citizenship
Equality

I am really hoping to cover Competition law but don’t think I will have the time.

MS liability I think is fairly short prob not whole question but could come up and kinda links in to others like direct effect....I think!

General principles is a good one too, I'm actually leaving out competition as well like its only ever 1 q and its so broad with mergers and state aid. I think state aid up last year so if your caught for time maybe just focus on mergers and compet? Not sure though cause I have not looked at all at competition covering all others than that. I wish he done away with the case note and just had an actual other topic you could answer

Insta92 wrote: »

Stressed out about EU law. Plan on having the following covered:

Institutions
Sources of EU Law
Application of EU Law (Supremacy, direct effect, principal of effectiveness and efficiency)
Preliminary Reference Procedure
Annulment Action
FMOG
FTPS
Citizenship
Equality

I am really hoping to cover Competition law but don’t think I will have the time.

do we all agree that the older mareva 'how have courts endeavoured to balance rights' has now morphed into the more common 'less restrictive approach' style essay question, or does it seem that they are separate inquiries?

Fe1hayes wrote: »

Can I ask Is the away from business premises (distance selling act) not repealed by 2013 act which cumulatived them altogether or is that another act ?

I was hoping this! Two different things in two different manuals but yes I think so

Can someone explain Initial/Subsequent failure with regards to Cy-Pres doctrine please? I keep getting the two confused, even though i dont think its that complicated!

Thanks!

(I know there was a post a few pages back but i can't seem to find it again!)

Contract - can anyone confirm/ correct this? So confused

Undue Influence:

Class 1 - actual - need to show relationship of trust and transaction of no personal benefit/ manifest disadvantage
Class 2A - presumed - e.g. doctor/ patient - just need to show relationship then evidential burden shifts and don't need to prove unfairness of the bargain
Class 2B - de facto - need to show relationship of trust/ confidence but once you do evidential burden shifts and you do need to prove unfairness of the bargain

Thanks!

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Contract - can anyone confirm/ correct this? So confused

Undue Influence:

Class 1 - actual - need to show relationship of trust and transaction of no personal benefit/ manifest disadvantage
Class 2A - presumed - e.g. doctor/ patient - just need to show relationship then evidential burden shifts and don't need to prove unfairness of the bargain
Class 2B - de facto - need to show relationship of trust/ confidence but once you do evidential burden shifts and you do need to prove unfairness of the bargain

Thanks!

Yeah that's how I'd see it, 2a and 2b have opposite burdens of proof ie there is no assumption in class 2b but in 2a there is a clear suspicion there... Class 1 there could also be straight up bullying etc so you don't necessarily need manifest disadvantage see CIBC Mortgages v Pitt.

Wonderstruck wrote: »

Initial failure something like a trust for the prevention of smallpox right now in 2019 when it has been cured, that fails as there is no such disease.

Subsquent failure something like a trust is 1950 set up to prevent small box, then when smallpox was cured in the 1970s what can one do with the money left? Go to court and the court can use Cy pres so that the money can be used for something else eg malaria prevention.

That's a great way of explaining it, i get it now, finally! Thank you so much that's really helpful!