nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Tom Young

This is the new FE1 Exam Thread

This is a link to the old one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055143169

This is a link to the next one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056907164

Sorry, I'm aware we are in the throws of FE1 season, but due to a server issue, a new thread was required. Old chats and posts below - Thanks!

Mod warning in post #1205: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88514663&postcount=1205

Mod warning in post #2555: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91819622&postcount=2555

Mod warning in post #2593: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92025688&postcount=2593

Moderator: The above warnings mean it is not ok to buy, sell or swap (trade) any exam materials in this thread. Exam grids are the only exception. You may request and exchange exam grids but at no point will money be allowed to change hands for them.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Molly347

Property (Succession)

Does anyone know the outcome of In bonis McCullagh where he wrote cancelled on the back of the will? I cant seem to find the result online - was the will revoked?

EmmaO94

For Criminal, what offences did people put down for Q2, the Adam & Emma problem q?

rightytighty

EmmaO94 wrote: »

For Criminal, what offences did people put down for Q2, the Adam & Emma problem q?

Potential Criminal Damage for forcible entry, assault for his hand on her mouth, burglary for trespass w/ intent to commit crime, s5 NFOATP Threat to kill, assault causing harm for striking her face, rape, aggravated sexual assault for threat with knife to remove clothes, rape under s3 for oral rape, false imprisonment s15 NFOATP

the baby bull elephant

rightytighty wrote: »

I thought it was ok, I got 5 handy enough. For Liam the drug user in Q5, was it an insanity defence? Intoxication not open as his intention not disputed?

Is it not intoxication is available due to murder being a crime of specific intent?

EmmaO94

rightytighty wrote: »

Potential Criminal Damage for forcible entry, assault for his hand on her mouth, burglary for trespass w/ intent to commit crime, s5 NFOATP Threat to kill, assault causing harm for striking her face, rape, aggravated sexual assault for threat with knife to remove clothes, rape under s3 for oral rape, false imprisonment s15 NFOATP

Phew okay I put nearly all of those down too! A lot going on in that q

lawstudentirl

Criminal paper didn’t go well for me at all... but time to focus on the rest I suppose!

nmurphy1441

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Phew okay I put nearly all of those down too! A lot going on in that q

I put down aggravated burglary if it can be proved he entered with the knife on him!

Lovestolisten

the baby bull elephant wrote: »

Is it not intoxication is available due to murder being a crime of specific intent?

Majewski I think is the big one in specific and basic intent, using intoxication as a possible defence

EmmaO94

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I put down aggravated burglary if it can be proved he entered with the knife on him!

Ah that's smart, didn't think of that!!

Also what did people discuss for Part A of Q1, ie Kevin shooting and killing Elaine 'by accident'?

I'm just so paranoid I've barked up the wrong tree with some q's :eek:

Lovestolisten

Lovestolisten wrote: »

Majewski I think is the big one in specific and basic intent, using intoxication as a possible defence

If he’s charged with Murder under section 4 he can run with Intoxication, Manslaughter no intoxication because recklessness is an element of the crime.. unless his intoxication was not self induced (spiked etc..)

rightytighty

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I put down aggravated burglary if it can be proved he entered with the knife on him!

Ah yes same, not looking good for Adam!

What did people have for question 4? I didn’t even have time for the fourth part as I had to start my fifth question.. I had the below:

1) unlawful use of computer, deception, theft, false accounting

2) possession of a syringe, assault with a syringe, would-be robbery but arrival of gardai made it attempt

3) criminal damage, public disorder, threatening behaviour, burglary (??? Trespasser once asked to leave and committed criminal damage thereafter)

Lovestolisten

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Ah that's smart, didn't think of that!!

Also what did people discuss for Part A of Q1, ie Kevin shooting and killing Elaine 'by accident'?

I'm just so paranoid I've barked up the wrong tree with some q's :eek:

Criminal negligent/ Criminal and Dangerous act manslaughter

ihatethesea

I had three good answers two bad for criminal- any chance of passing ??

user115

What is a basic layout on an answer on judicial review? what topics would you cover?

Breacnua

ihatethesea wrote: »

I had three good answers two bad for criminal- any chance of passing ??

yes, keep the faith

rightytighty

the baby bull elephant wrote: »

Is it not intoxication is available due to murder being a crime of specific intent?

Yeah it is but I said that because he didn’t dispute intending to kill it wouldn’t be viable, not even sure that’s correct it’s just what I said

I think (hope) once you make a point with relevant law and back it up you should be fine??? Hopefully!!

iamanengine

user115 wrote: »

What is a basic layout on an answer on judicial review? what topics would you cover?

Judicial review is Locus Standi, Effects of Unconstitutionality, Justiciability, Mootness etc I think, I've only covered the first two

Supermax1988

ihatethesea wrote: »

I had three good answers two bad for criminal- any chance of passing ??

Yeah. He is a very fair marker. I had pretty much the same when I sat Criminal. Once you get five answers down you always have a chance.

Bex20

Any one have any predictions for Company?

Starting to panic I don't have enough done.

lawgrad15

the baby bull elephant wrote: »

Is it not intoxication is available due to murder being a crime of specific intent?

I said intoxication - yes murder being specific intent.
It was similar in ways to Celyn Eadon case which was decided before Christmas.

user115

iamanengine wrote: »

Judicial review is Locus Standi, Effects of Unconstitutionality, Justiciability, Mootness etc I think, I've only covered the first two

I don't have time to do it so just gonna cover first 3, justiciavility you will have covered under SOP so you should be grand for it, really really hoping it will be a nice exam.

nmurphy1441

rightytighty wrote: »

Ah yes same, not looking good for Adam!

What did people have for question 4? I didn’t even have time for the fourth part as I had to start my fifth question.. I had the below:

1) unlawful use of computer, deception, theft, false accounting

2) possession of a syringe, assault with a syringe, would-be robbery but arrival of gardai made it attempt

3) criminal damage, public disorder, threatening behaviour, burglary (??? Trespasser once asked to leave and committed criminal damage thereafter)

1) Same but didn’t say false accounting

2) Same but said it was a robbery as he got possession of the wallet

3) Just put criminal damage for this one

4) incitement to commit rape

user115

Bex20 wrote: »

Any one have any predictions for Company?

Starting to panic I don't have enough done.

Company from what I remember always:

2 q on directors duties (def 1 for sure anyway)

1 q on charges

1 q on limited liability or some of that intro stuff

1 q on shareholders in some form either their protection or share transfer, protection up last time so maybe share transfer but 100% on that, see yourself, company is actually fine once you know core topics above

I could be wrong but I don't think examinership or receivership was up last time so know both very well id say highly like may be up but def check last sitting paper, that's just all from memory

Supermax1988

ihatethesea wrote: »

I had three good answers two bad for criminal- any chance of passing ??

Yeah. He is a very fair marker. I had pretty much the same when I sat Criminal. Once you get five answers down you always have a chance.

TCPIP

Anyone sit the exam in Neptune? How was it handled?

bobbyness

Hi All. First time using this forum. If anyone has up to date exam grids for fe1s (Preferably need contract and tort for upcoming exam)

Anyone who has any and would be willing to share with me, send me a PM - It'd be much appreciated! (And if you have contract or tort this time round I'll get you a pre-exam coffee!)

Thanks for any help!

rightytighty

TCPIP wrote: »

Anyone sit the exam in Neptune? How was it handled?

Much more chill than red cow, doesn’t feel like half as big a deal and there’s nowhere near as much panic etc

eLawGirl

TCPIP wrote: »

Anyone sit the exam in Neptune? How was it handled?

Very well, lovely invigilators, only issue was the hall was freezing

nmurphy1441

Anyone on here attempt Q8 on the criminal paper?

Hamerzan Sickles

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Ah that's smart, didn't think of that!!

Also what did people discuss for Part A of Q1, ie Kevin shooting and killing Elaine 'by accident'?

I'm just so paranoid I've barked up the wrong tree with some q's :eek:

I said novus actus interveniens, with Elaine as the victim possibly breaking the chain of causation for the criminal act [attempted suicide]. But it was a toss up between that and unlawful and dangerous manslaughter, I just didn't think any of the cases were of the same applicability there.