iamanengine wrote: » Institutions Sources General Principles Free Movement of Workers Free Movement of Goods Direct Effect/MS Liability Judicial Review Citizenship Equality That's what I have notes done for so far. Not sure if I should add more or if that is enough to cover me. You?
luimneachabu73 wrote: » Criminal In relation to problem questions, I'm having difficulties regarding when to use Murder / Manslaughter / Assault / Endangerment. If the facts state someone has died, I'm guessing you always discuss Murder and Manslaughter (I could be wrong here). And even if they don't die, but death was intended, murder is still discussed. Manslaughter can only be discussed if someone dies, I feel. Re Assault my take is if they don't die, this is when you talk about this? And re Endangerment, I really don't know. I know you'd use it if the facts show someone has done something idiotic such as throw an item from a bridge that strikes a vehicle, but that's about it. Could anyone shine light on when is the right time to use these? Thanks.
jus_me wrote: » What are people covering for tort? Any help appreciated
rightytighty wrote: » For tort, specifically re Duty of Care, are Good Samaritans/volunteers ever asked?
Lcork23 wrote: » Just need some guidence regarding the property exam do you think it would be ok to leave out Landlord and Tenant or am I making a stupid move?
Law1997 wrote: » What are people doing for contract? Finding it huge and overwhelming Maybe I’m overthinking
DFMCD190384 wrote: » I feel the same. Offer & Acceptance Consideration & estoppel Ex clauses and fundamental breach EU consumer law Damages Misrepresentation and insurance contracts Mistake Capacity Frustration For me, I find Offer, Acceptance and Considerstion the toughest. Any hints on what to really look at on these would be great.
rightytighty wrote: » Any mods, can we access the previous version of this thread? It’s not in first post and the earliest this one goes is the later stages of October exams
Jeremiah25 wrote: » Would I be correct in saying that the EU examiner changed in 2015? Did the subjects which appaear change drastically as a result? I have some stuff up as far as 2015 but questioning its usefulness now!!
iamanengine wrote: » I would add Terms as well, comes up most sittings, sometimes in more than 1 Q.https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057713228&page=233 There you go, that's been saved in my history forever :rolleyes:
Law1997 wrote: » Ok if anyone can shed a bit of advice on this I’d be so grateful. I have all my notes typed and printed, and have been learning for about a week - slowly. I’m so worried that I don’t have enough time to learn all in time for the exams. My first exam is Constitutional on the 6th. That’s tomorrow 3 weeks. Help
lsheehaneire wrote: » Hey all, hope study is going well ! Anyone get their letter of confirmation yet for the exam ??
Redhighking wrote: » You are in a very good position and have loads of time between now and the exam to learn the material.
supercreative wrote: » Yes, as far as I know the intern and extern switched places? Either way for purposes of predictability I wouldn't look back further than 2015 - if you read through the 2016-2019 papers and compare them to the ones before that you'll notice a big difference in what topics are asked etc.
Sineaddh wrote: » With tort.. when people say “all of negligence” what exactly does that include? I have causation,duty of care and standard of care.. Is hedley Byrne/negligent misstatement to be included too? What about professional negligence and pure economic loss? I’m struggling to link topics and know what to focus on/ where to start or end ;(
rightytighty wrote: » Sorry I said this a few posts up, I basically meant:- - DOC - Standard of Care - Causation - Res Ipsa - Pure Economic Loss/Neg Misstatement/Psych Damage
Jeremiah25 wrote: » Care to share those topics?
