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

sapphire309 wrote: »

Feel like I'm shouting into the void here, but can somebody please explain the difference between Humblot and Commission v Greece re: Art 110? The facts are almost the same, I don't see why the Court approved Commission v Greece but found Humblot to be discriminatory

Humblot breached Art 110 insofar as French cars at the time didn't have more than 16 cylinder engines, but many German cars did. The increase in cost was fivefold or something to that effect once an engine exceeded 16 cylinders in size, and so was found to be disproportionate.

However, a proportionate increase in taxation based objective considerations of cylinder size wouldn't have breached Article 110.

In Commission v Greece, the taxation was found to be proportionate and based on objective criteria. If you look at paragraphs 17 to 20 of that judgment, it sets out the differences between it and Humblot for the purposes of Art 110.

sapphire309 wrote: »

You're a star

Any time! Best of luck tomorrow!

Dliodoir2021 wrote: »

I’ve had food poisoning the last 5 days, mostly bed bound and only know fmg and direct effect well. Thought on my week off I’d learn the others (notes done but too sick to sit up). Should probably give it a shot anyway but feel like crap....

I answered 3.5 and passed last time u actually never know!!!

Did anyone do q5 in contract? What did you discuss? Just need some piece of mind

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I didn’t do it but I’d imagine is looking at express and implied terms and how they’re communicated in plain language. Have to mention the officious bystander test and the business efficiency test! That’s what I would have done!

It's not to do with implied terms. Investors compensation scheme vs west brom building society is the test for interpretation of contracts.

Well done all on surviving another sitting!!

LawStudent2018 wrote: »

It's not to do with implied terms. Investors compensation scheme vs west brom building society is the test for interpretation of contracts.

This is why I didn’t do the question 😂😂

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

This is why I didn’t do the question 😂😂

Damn I wrote about implied and express terms!

Hi, looking for some advice I'm thinking of sitting the FE1s, would it be worth my while doing an llm first? I'm working abroad at the moment and would have a chance to do an LMM in EU/international law, would it be worth while doing the LLM first and putting the FE1s off for an extra year

Hi all,

Would someone be able to pm me with some advice about prep courses for the fe1 exams. Hoping to do my first sitting in the Autumn, my undergrad is in business as opposed to law so any advice would be much appreciated from this perspective as I feel like I am in the monitory! Thanks

I presume i'm clutching at straws here but does anybody have any knowledge on whether the examiners look at the candidates examination profile as a whole when giving final results?
I sat my final three this year - confident i passed two and am on the fence with the final one. Would an examiner have the ability to know that if he gave me 50% instead of 48% it would get me over the edge?

Jimdtug1 wrote: »

I presume i'm clutching at straws here but does anybody have any knowledge on whether the examiners look at the candidates examination profile as a whole when giving final results?
I sat my final three this year - confident i passed two and am on the fence with the final one. Would an examiner have the ability to know that if he gave me 50% instead of 48% it would get me over the edge?

I'm not sure if you're clutching at straws, I'm 4/4 so far and I'm confident of 3/4 this sitting but I'm certain one of them will fall between 45 and 55.

In the info sheets they refer to the exam board deciding if you've passed or not and the whole manner in which it is written suggests that there's a final meeting around a big table where they look at the results overall (which is hopeful nonsense I suppose) but like yourself I'm hoping there's some overall ability to look at your grades - perhaps if you've gotten 60 plus in 7 and 48 in your last bad day exam (everyone has them) they give you the bare 50. I think it'll depend on the examiner you fail with though.

*First Sitting in October*

Is it a terrible idea to sit for 5 papers in first sitting? I plan to enroll for prep courses, and study full-time from June. Am I being over ambitious?

Disclaimer: I have law degree from foreign university, and I am new to Irish legal system.

ahona wrote:

Is it a terrible idea to sit for 5 papers in first sitting? I plan to enroll for prep courses, and study full-time from June. Am I being over ambitious?

ahona wrote:

Disclaimer: I have law degree from foreign university, and I am new to Irish legal system.

ahona wrote:

*First Sitting in October*

Do four @ 12 weeks of which maybe 8 weeks full time for first sitting. 4 months full time is way too much time to assign. Claim job seekers when you study full time. Everyone does it.

BasedHobbes wrote: »

Anyone else on edge waiting for their results? TC is due to start in May. Can’t believe this 6 week wait. Ridiculous.

Literally in the exact same boat, and after that Company exam I have a feeling I won’t be starting Would be so annoyed if one exam stops me but honestly try and enjoy the downtime before the madness starts!