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

What do we reckon for company? Any predictions?

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

What do we reckon for company? Any predictions?

For some reason I looked at the 2010 company paper and it was impossible! Hardly any of the usual topics and only ca. 30% of people passed !

Reya10 wrote: »

King v Dubrey originally followed Vallee. Then Court of Appeal in King overturned it and said Vallee was wrongly decided. (King v Chiltern Dog rescue is the appeal of King v Dubrey)

So now it's clear courts must exercise 'considerable caution' in granting DMCs. Vallee was very broad as it upheld DMC that was made 4-5 months before death, and in King v Dubrey it was 4-6 months and the testator had not even been in bad health/dying of anythihg, she was just old.

Law has now backtracked- It now seems to be very unlikely that courts will uphold DMCs unless contemplated death is imminent (like in other cases before Vallee where DMCs were upheld it had only been days between gift and death) + other requirements as set out in Re Beaumont/Re Wasserberg

That's the UK position though, are you going to say that it would be persuasive for Irish courts? Or am I missing something?

CONTRACT - corporate borrowing - Struggling to understand the Unitherm decision... I understand Carroll but unitherm has very much confused me re the mixed funds of original price & mark up? Which in turn has confused me re aggregation clauses and all sums due clauses.... any help at all would be amazing please

greenery2 wrote: »

Struggling to understand the Unitherm decision... I understand Carroll but unitherm has very much confused me re the mixed funds of original price & mark up? Which in turn has confused me re aggregation clauses and all sums due clauses.... any help at all would be amazing please

Not for contract but in a company law context I have:

For Unitherm I just have that the standard Proceeds of Sale clause will not establish a fiduciary relationship between the seller and the purchaser so there is no equitable right to trace the proceeds. The standard POS clause states that the purchaser can resell the goods in the course of its own business and doesn’t say there is a relationship of principal-agent. The clause would have to state that a fiduciary relationship exists and greats a charge over the proceeds and that charge must be registered in order to be enforceable.

The COA overruled the HC (HC had found relationship of agent principal due to the contractual provision and how the parties had conducted their business)

Not sure if this helps

Flicked over my equity notes there and knew absolutely nothing!!

Going to take that as a sign that my brain is fried and needs sleep and hope that it comes back to me in a few hours...

rightytighty wrote: »

Are people covering disqualification as well as restriction?

I’m not! Do you know the last time in came up and in what context?

coalition wrote: »

I’m not! Do you know the last time in came up and in what context?

Think it came up on last paper so wasn’t going to cover it at all

For the La Moselle principles in restriction proceedings re the first test and Re Tralee Beef and Lamb and Mitek Holdings etc is anyone able to explain the decision with regards to whether the test was amplified with common law principles too? My notes aren't really clear what the end result was, thanks!

TORT - Negligent Misstatement

Am I right in thinking that the chapter on Pure Economic Loss isn't essential to learn if you're planning on doing a question on Negligent Misstatement?

Legaleagle37 wrote: »

How did equity go? What came up!

Estoppel/unconscionable
UI with focus on independent legal advice in Ireland and compare to other jurisdictions
Mareva or Antoin Piller
Charitable - problem
Trustees duties - problem
Secret/resulting - problem
Notes - unincorporated associations, purpose trust for non charitable purpose and can't remember the other one
Constructive trust

Jenosul wrote: »

If I spoke about proprietary estoppel have I failed the question can someone please tell me?

She's a pretty tough marker.. wouldn't worry too much just focus on the next one there's nothing you can do now and no point in worrying about something you can't change

Equity

Answer me honestly....

3 really solid answers, but could only answer one element of the note q, and was very iffy about the second half of q4 (wrote plenty on half secret trusts but the second half of question was out of my reach)

Would this be enough to scrape a pass?