htnor wrote: » Question: does the external examiner review answers in the first correction or only on appeal??
PuffleHuffLyra wrote: » Anyone have any advice on question 5 of the spring 2018 EU paper? Bradley is an Australian TCN living in France with an expired residence permit & a Dutch wife but the couple have since separated (they were together for 1 year). No kids. He previously held a valid residence permit but this has expired & his application for renewal has been refused. Not even sure where to start given his status as a TCN and separated from his wife. Would you just argue that he may be able to stay on grounds of being a family member of an EU worker if they don't divorce? Any help at all would be much appreciated. I'm quite nervous now after looking at the exam papers.
20082014 wrote: » EU Does anyone know the 3 principles form the innuit case from Judicial Review topic - all I have for this case is that it clarified what a regulatory act is as there was a lot of confusion post Lisbon?
iamanengine wrote: » What date do results come out? Gunna have to book that day off work for sure!
JohnsKite wrote: » what do ye fine people think was the least popular question on today's contract paper?
Daly29 wrote: » Around November 30th, there are therabouts. I dread opening that. 3 very marginal, 1 fail so far. If I can turn tomorrow to 4 marginals I'll be very happy. So many hours done. A rake of fails would be hard to swallow after all this.
Breacnua wrote: » Maybe they are, I don’t know. Someone mentioned it on here few weeks ago. The only way it’s going is because they must be getting hammered for it and have to make changes. It’s going to be a long 6 weeks.
Daly29 wrote: » My first two papers last sitting I felt went really bad. I knew I got issues wrong in my Tort and my Company was terrible. Ended passing (on appeal). Worse case scenario you it will stand to you next time. Think of all the hours already done and a few left, that's what I am trying to do. Some guy in the LUAS told me that they are doing away with the magic 3 next year, anyone else hear that?
EmmaO94 wrote: » Feel like the magic 3 have slipped away from me now unfortunately, so feeling very apathetic towards EU tomorrow. Anyone have any wisdom on how to stay motivated?
SwD wrote: » My main focus was mistake on the basis he thought it was a petition. I think there could be two plausible answers here depending on the approach.
Daly29 wrote: » It was a small part of the Q in fairness, the offer/acceptance part... I wrote "not what I signed up to" in kind of fancy handwriting to try to make it look a bit Latin :-) answer was basically saying the deal should never have happened regardless because the bank should have called him in or got him legal advice so kept banging on that.
niamh1612 wrote: » God I talked about unfair terms! For q 1 didn't even think of offer! I had unilateral mistake for the old guy BUT FOR THE LIFE OF ME couldn't think of the term non est factum. Good luck the end is near!!
Daly29 wrote: » Suppose at a stretch you could say there was offer/acceptance to be looked at re the no signature and emailed agreement in Q1.... Was happy until I somehow noticed that I read the limitation clause as not affecting statutory obligation. Ugh, saw covered statutory warranty and made an obvious mistake. Hope he goes easy on that mistake. Only had undue influence for the old dude and the guarantee. Said the bank should have red flagged it because of the manifest disadvantage, thought that wasn't the worst approach. Anyway , one more to go.
niamh1612 wrote: » Am I right in saying the only element of offer and acceptance was auction without reserve? Really strange paper, my last out of the magic three and almost definitely failed, answered 3 good and then half of two questions. Very disappointing.
