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

FE!student · 02-10-2019 10:22am

Proctop_ wrote: »

What has he said about q5 on last sitting? Or would you have an idea of where I could find the answer regarding the retention of a blood sample and information given from the gards?

I think the blood sample issue relates to the right to bodily integrity - taken under a specific piece of legislation and therefore mandatory, no obligation on gardai to wait for a lawyer to come before taking a mandatory sample in a minimally invasive manner and without force - Gormley and White. Other cases - HSE v B and MX v HSE.

The issue of the Garda providing her information to the school - right to privacy - Digital Rights Ireland, Kennedy, Nolan.

If anyone thinks this is wrong let me know.

Hamerzan Sickles · 02-10-2019 10:22am

iamanengine wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is usually 2 Succession Q's or is that rarely?

It's usually 1; sometimes 2. If you get lucky, there'll be an essay on s.90 and a PQ on the SA1965 S.117. Or we might just get a PQ on the making/destroying of a will. I wouldn't bank on more than one however.

sbbyrne wrote: »

Guys, this is probably a really obvious q, but if a question re easements comes up would it be necessary to get into the details about the history of prescription and what the old law held etc?

You have to remember there isn't that much time in the exam - I would just have a paragraph where I briefly compare the old law versus what the new law brought in (focusing on s.33-37 of the Act).

Anyone else can feel free to correct me.

Edit: not hoping for a force majeure in order to procure more studying time, just wondering if anyone thinks there's a chance tomorrow or the next day's exams could be rescheduled given the weather warnings? I know they're not set for Dublin but sure the Law Society have to take into account weary travellers from countries in the south and the west...

Mr. JD · 02-10-2019 10:28am

Hey Constitutional folks,

Would it be mad to leave out fair procedures?

I'm trying to cut down atm and it seems like a bit of a pain.

Any thoughts would be welcome!!

Dancing Obsession · 02-10-2019 10:40am

iamanengine wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is usually 2 Succession Q's or is that rarely?

I'd say it's usually 2

Amanda226 · 02-10-2019 10:59am

Is there any topics in Constitutional that are guarantees like come up every year In some time way? Thanks!

Daly29 · 02-10-2019 11:10am

Mr. JD wrote: »

Hey Constitutional folks,

Would it be mad to leave out fair procedures?

I'm trying to cut down atm and it seems like a bit of a pain.

Any thoughts would be welcome!!

Partly came up last year as an essay, duty to give reasons. Maybe just have "Garvey v Ireland" - Garda Commissioner fired without any notice, warning, etc. Then you have a a few lines if it is a small part of a problem. Highly unlikely a full expansive essay on it again.

Daly29 · 02-10-2019 11:17am

Daly29 wrote: »

Would it be too much to ask for the Constitutional Examiner to do a few lines on each Q in the Reports? Some of the issues can be a bit tricky. Seems if others do it he could jot down remarks too for each Q.

Another complaint I have on this, seems a bit unfair in comparison to other subjects that there is no A or B Q. Then you have the Case Q, which unless I am wrong requires you to know in very good detail all significant Supreme Court decisions (obviously some seem to appear more than once). Leaving you with most likely just 5 to choose from 7 in a very unpredictable paper on a huge sylabus. Anyway, thats my morning rant. Time to cut off the Wifi and see if I can learn off by heart all the notes.

Supermax1988 · 02-10-2019 11:22am

Hamerzan Sickles wrote: »

Edit: not hoping for a force majeure in order to procure more studying time, just wondering if anyone thinks there's a chance tomorrow or the next day's exams could be rescheduled given the weather warnings? I know they're not set for Dublin but sure the Law Society have to take into account weary travellers from countries in the south and the west...

I’d say it’s unlikely to be honest. I would expect a Status Red weather warning would be the only thing that would get them to postpone.

Safe travels to anyone coming up from the most affected areas!

Daly29 · 02-10-2019 11:25am

Supermax1988 wrote: »

I’d say it’s unlikely to be honest. I would expect a Status Red weather warning would be the only thing that would get them to postpone.

Safe travels to anyone coming up from the most affected areas!

From dealing with them I would think they would only postpone if completely necessary. Not known for accommodating people I'm afraid.

Proctop_ · 02-10-2019 11:33am

FE!student wrote: »

I think the blood sample issue relates to the right to bodily integrity - taken under a specific piece of legislation and therefore mandatory, no obligation on gardai to wait for a lawyer to come before taking a mandatory sample in a minimally invasive manner and without force - Gormley and White. Other cases - HSE v B and MX v HSE.

The issue of the Garda providing her information to the school - right to privacy - Digital Rights Ireland, Kennedy, Nolan.

If anyone thinks this is wrong let me know.

Thanks so much I was thinking bodily integrity but wasn’t 100% you’ve put me in the right direction anyway! Thanks a mill!!

Daly29 · 02-10-2019 11:35am

Amanda226 wrote: »

Is there any topics in Constitutional that are guarantees like come up every year In some time way? Thanks!

Learning off just now. Will take a deeper dive in exam papers later. From first looking:

Freedom of Expression is a common Problem Q. Hoping for that. They are usually OK or balancing it with privacy maybe/ the media.

Constitutional Interpretation comes up every second sitting for a while. It's due.

President or Attorney General could be due, or Art 26 procedure/process as part of a problem Q.

Total guess but maybe something linking with Dail Privilege and Seperation of Powers and the 2019 Kerins case. That case got a bit of attention but probably too fresh to ask a full Q on.

That's my two cents. I'm lightly covering quite a bit so hopefully I have a chance to bluff with some one case for a point. Wouldn't be confident on any topic coming up for sure.

JCreaghy · 02-10-2019 11:47am

In respect to co-owners, is severance under the 2009 act retrospective or do we need to discuss the old system and new system? Or can we just discuss the requirements under the 2009 Act.

lawDani · 02-10-2019 11:57am

Sineaddh wrote: »

CRIMINAL

Help appreciated! ;(

What should I be focusing on?
I have notes made out since last sitting but have to cram them over the weeken and am panicking none of it will come back to me!

I have notes for elements and characteristics of a crime, murder/manslaughter, sexual offenses, non fatal offenses, theft and fraud offenses and defenses!

Am I leaving out anything crucial??

Please help!

I’m doing this as well as doli incapax and minors protection

lawDani · 02-10-2019 11:58am

lawDani wrote: »

I’m doing this as well as doli incapax and minors protection

Not doing offences against state

iamanengine · 02-10-2019 12:25pm

Property

Anyone know the topics that came up last sitting?

sbbyrne · 02-10-2019 12:44pm

iamanengine wrote: »

Property

Anyone know the topics that came up last sitting?

Q1 Finding disputes
Q2 CoOwnership
Q3 Limits on Testamentary freedom
Q4 Family Home
Q5 Mortgages
Q6 Adverse Possession
Q7 Making a Valid Will
Q8 Rights of Res/Estoppel licenses/Equity in land law - noteq

I think it was a nice paper, makes me nervous for tomorrows...

iamanengine · 02-10-2019 12:48pm

sbbyrne wrote: »

Q1 Finding disputes
Q2 CoOwnership
Q3 Limits on Testamentary freedom
Q4 Family Home
Q5 Mortgages
Q6 Adverse Possession
Q7 Making a Valid Will
Q8 Rights of Res/Estoppel licenses/Equity in land law - noteq

I think it was a nice paper, makes me nervous for tomorrows...

That's an ideal paper. Makes me think Easements and Registration will be up this time. Hopefully we still get a Finding Q and 2 Succession Qs!

Hamerzan Sickles · 02-10-2019 12:48pm

JCreaghy wrote: »

In respect to co-owners, is severance under the 2009 act retrospective or do we need to discuss the old system and new system? Or can we just discuss the requirements under the 2009 Act.

I would just be discussing s.30 2009 Act myself but am of course open to correction.

channing90 · 02-10-2019 12:56pm

Company
Could someone please tell me which directors duties question was it ? Was it fiduciary or the other duties that maybe owed or could you put down both ?

SwD · 02-10-2019 1:07pm

channing90 wrote: »

Company
Could someone please tell me which directors duties question was it ? Was it fiduciary or the other duties that maybe owed or could you put down both ?

It appeared to be both.

channing90 · 02-10-2019 1:10pm

SwD wrote: »

It appeared to be both.

I couldn’t pick one ðŸ™ˆ I wrote fiduciary with a page and a half on the others, it freaked me out

LawGirl3434 · 02-10-2019 1:22pm

channing90 wrote: »

SwD wrote: »

It appeared to be both.

I couldn’t pick one ðŸ™ˆ I wrote fiduciary with a page and a half on the others, it freaked me out

Personally I thought he wanted shareholders, creditors, employees but I threw in a page on good faith proper purpose and care skill and diligence to be sure

hope that was ok!

niamh1612 · 02-10-2019 1:30pm

iamanengine wrote: »

That's an ideal paper. Makes me think Easements and Registration will be up this time. Hopefully we still get a Finding Q and 2 Succession Qs!

2 Succession, A.P, CoOwnership, Finding... am I delusional on banking on that paper....

JCormac · 02-10-2019 1:40pm

channing90 wrote: »

I couldn’t pick one &#55357;&#56904; I wrote fiduciary with a page and a half on the others, it freaked me out

Damn. I fully thought it was just the other parties that he wanted, Eg. Shareholders, Creditors, Employees.

Makes sense that it would be fiduciary duties too.

Well, that was my best question I thought - definitely failed

iamanengine · 02-10-2019 1:44pm

niamh1612 wrote: »

2 Succession, A.P, CoOwnership, Finding... am I delusional on banking on that paper....

I think there's a decent chance! Got my hands on a grid and looks like they come up almost every sitting.

I'd def have 1/2 topics more just in case tho

Supermax1988 · 02-10-2019 1:58pm

niamh1612 wrote: »

2 Succession, A.P, CoOwnership, Finding... am I delusional on banking on that paper....

That's largely what I have + Family Property and Easements.
I'd say try have a look over Easements if you can in light of the fact that it didn't come up last time.

channing90 · 02-10-2019 2:02pm

JCormac wrote: »

Damn. I fully thought it was just the other parties that he wanted, Eg. Shareholders, Creditors, Employees.

Makes sense that it would be fiduciary duties too.

Well, that was my best question I thought - definitely failed

I am convinced both are right. Anyone else who answered it ?

LawGirl3434 · 02-10-2019 2:06pm

channing90 wrote: »

JCormac wrote: »

Damn. I fully thought it was just the other parties that he wanted, Eg. Shareholders, Creditors, Employees.

Makes sense that it would be fiduciary duties too.

Well, that was my best question I thought - definitely failed

I am convinced both are right. Anyone else who answered it ?

I think both are right too. I personally answered on creditors employees and shareholders but threw in a page on fiduciary for good measure. In 2016 he asked this question (now it was worded differently) but he said it was only on employees creditors and shareholders and anyone who answered on common law fiduciary exclusively did not get the marks. The fact he used the work exclusively and the fact the wording of this was more ambiguous than the 2016 (autumn I think) suggests to me he would have taken both, or one. Also the fact so many answered it differently suggests me might realize himself was poorly worded

LawGirl3434 · 02-10-2019 2:06pm

channing90 wrote: »

JCormac wrote: »

Damn. I fully thought it was just the other parties that he wanted, Eg. Shareholders, Creditors, Employees.

Makes sense that it would be fiduciary duties too.

Well, that was my best question I thought - definitely failed

I am convinced both are right. Anyone else who answered it ?

I think both are right too. I personally answered on creditors employees and shareholders but threw in a page on fiduciary for good measure. In 2016 he asked this question (now it was worded differently) but he said it was only on employees creditors and shareholders and anyone who answered on common law fiduciary exclusively did not get the marks. The fact he used the work exclusively and the fact the wording of this was more ambiguous than the 2016 (autumn I think) suggests to me he would have taken both, or one. Also the fact so many answered it differently suggests me might realize himself was poorly worded

LawGirl3434 · 02-10-2019 2:06pm

channing90 wrote: »

JCormac wrote: »

Damn. I fully thought it was just the other parties that he wanted, Eg. Shareholders, Creditors, Employees.

Makes sense that it would be fiduciary duties too.

Well, that was my best question I thought - definitely failed

I am convinced both are right. Anyone else who answered it ?

I think both are right too. I personally answered on creditors employees and shareholders but threw in a page on fiduciary for good measure. In 2016 he asked this question (now it was worded differently) but he said it was only on employees creditors and shareholders and anyone who answered on common law fiduciary exclusively did not get the marks. The fact he used the work exclusively and the fact the wording of this was more ambiguous than the 2016 (autumn I think) suggests to me he would have taken both, or one. Also the fact so many answered it differently suggests me might realize himself was poorly worded

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

Comments