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

LJones18 · 11-03-2020 06:15PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Depends when the time starts running. I would say when he establishes requisite animus possendi the clock would start so when he changed th locks etc. For these questions I always think you are better to give reasons for why it could be and why it could not be AP. There's a case very similar but can't think of the name off the top of my head. The fact he has her permission is also a factor.

Edit: I think the facts in this are similar to a few cases actually

Thanks!

Yeah i'm wondering though does it count as permission as he has gone beyond what he was given permission to do? Stating both sides is probably a good idea!

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 06:49PM

iamanengine wrote: »

I have Tort on Monday as well

Might as well! I'm covering:

Institutions
Sources
General Principles
Direct Effect/MS Liability
Judicial Review
Citizenship
FMOG
FMOW
Equality

All are pretty much bankers except Sources and Equality. I'm not doing Competition which is a banker so trying to offset that a little bit by picking up sources and equality, think either of them are due a run

Company was manageable, despite my sleep deprived state

How often does MS liability come up with DE?

Don't really want to cover it as have nothing done on it..

Jeremiah25 · 11-03-2020 06:54PM

Infringement procedure worth covering for EU or nah?

iamanengine · 11-03-2020 06:57PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

How often does MS liability come up with DE?

Don't really want to cover it as have nothing done on it..

My grid tells me they have come up together in every sitting with this examiner, except for the last sitting where DE didn't come up and MS Liability came up on its own.

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

Infringement procedure worth covering for EU or nah?

Nah

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:12PM

iamanengine wrote: »

My grid tells me they have come up together in every sitting with this examiner, except for the last sitting where DE didn't come up and MS Liability came up on its own.

Nah

Guess I'll have a read so

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:17PM

iamanengine wrote: »

My grid tells me they have come up together in every sitting with this examiner, except for the last sitting where DE didn't come up and MS Liability came up on its own.

Nah

Anyone has any typed notes on MS liability would be really appreciated

iamanengine · 11-03-2020 07:18PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Anyone has any typed notes on MS liability would be really appreciated

PM me your email

channing90 · 11-03-2020 07:19PM

iamanengine wrote: »

My grid tells me they have come up together in every sitting with this examiner, except for the last sitting where DE didn't come up and MS Liability came up on its own.

Was Direct effect not q4 last sitting ?

iamanengine · 11-03-2020 07:21PM

channing90 wrote: »

Was Direct effect not q4 last sitting ?

Grid says Q4 was MS Liability, no DE, although they will always be connected. MS liability is where a MS has failed to properly implement something that has DE and as a result they are liable for damages

I would warn that I'm purely going off this grid I have, I haven't looked at exam papers so I can't confirm

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:28PM

iamanengine wrote: »

Grid says Q4 was MS Liability, no DE, although they will always be connected. MS liability is where a MS has failed to properly implement something that has DE and as a result they are liable for damages

I would warn that I'm purely going off this grid I have, I haven't looked at exam papers so I can't confirm

Last sitting MS liability was question 2.

See attached

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:29PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Last sitting MS liability was question 2.

See attached

Also Q4 attached

EAL2019 · 11-03-2020 07:33PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Last sitting MS liability was question 2.

See attached

That question is general principles. Looking at question 4 though there is definitely a direct effect element mixed in with MS liability!

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:38PM

EAL2019 wrote: »

That question is general principles. Looking at question 4 though there is definitely a direct effect element mixed in with MS liability!

Well Equivalency is in the MS liability chapter in my manual.. so not sure haha

luimneachabu73 · 11-03-2020 07:38PM

Property

Findings; what are the rights of a trespasser?

iamanengine · 11-03-2020 07:43PM

Oh dear, my notes have literally one paragraph on equivalency and effectiveness and does't appear to be in my manual at all, is there much to it?

CiaranS93 · 11-03-2020 07:50PM

iamanengine wrote: »

Oh dear, my notes have literally one paragraph on equivalency and effectiveness and does't appear to be in my manual at all, is there much to it?

No it's a tiny part. See attached.

iamanengine · 11-03-2020 07:52PM

CiaranS93 wrote: »

No it's a tiny part. See attached.

Not sure how you could possibly get a full answer on that.

Well hopefully it won't come up twice in a row anyway

channing90 · 11-03-2020 07:54PM

Eu
Anyone with access to a exam report for q4 on the last sitting to be certain what it requires

ahhhhhFE1s · 11-03-2020 08:12PM

luimneachabu73 wrote: »

Property

Findings; what are the rights of a trespasser?

• Trespassers have very limited rights. Parker v British Airways - one must be legally on the land to be entitled to an item. Hanna v Peel – soldier was not trespassing when he found brooch.
also think in Waverly Borough Council v Fletcher, digging below surface constitute trespass and was a consideration in denying them the find

ahhhhhFE1s · 11-03-2020 08:21PM

channing90 wrote: »

Eu
Anyone with access to a exam report for q4 on the last sitting to be certain what it requires

See attached equivalence and practical effect was part of general principles topic, have notes on it but doubt it will come up again exactly like that and Q4 was standard DE and MS liability question

mcgreee · 11-03-2020 08:29PM

Property

Adverse Possession: For successive squatters, is it fatal to their claim if they took over the land the day after the initial squatter left? I know there should be overlap but exactly how strict is the requirement?

nmurphy1441 · 11-03-2020 08:40PM

Anyone have anything else to say about contract?

ahhhhhFE1s · 11-03-2020 08:59PM

Property

Anyone any cases on intestate and hotchpot doctrine ? She mentions questions surrounding it are case law short in her reports but cannot for the life of me find any cases

Fe119 · 11-03-2020 09:11PM

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Anyone have anything else to say about contract?

Thought it was horrendous. Felt so well prepared and couldn't even make out the issues in the PQs with confidence.

Sineaddh · 11-03-2020 09:18PM

Fe119 wrote: »

Thought it was horrendous. Felt so well prepared and couldn't even make out the issues in the PQs with confidence.

Have to agree

LJones18 · 11-03-2020 09:26PM

S.18 of SOL stipulates that the second possessor cannot make use of the time built up even if it is immediately afterwards, there must be overlap.

nmurphy1441 · 11-03-2020 09:37PM

Fe119 wrote: »

Thought it was horrendous. Felt so well prepared and couldn't even make out the issues in the PQs with confidence.

You’re not alone!!!! Onwards and upwards!!!

nmurphy1441 · 11-03-2020 09:40PM

Sineaddh wrote: »

Have to agree

You’re not alone! Onwards and upwards!!!

Fe119 · 11-03-2020 10:05PM

What are people covering for Property?

I'm fed up and just doing:
Succession (hoping for 2 Qs)
Co-ownership
Easements (focus on prescription, necessity etc.)
Family Property

Could cover L&T but unsure it will come up again

Really don't want to do Licences

Fe119 · 11-03-2020 10:06PM

Fe119 wrote: »

What are people covering for Property?

I'm fed up and just doing:
Succession (hoping for 2 Qs)
Co-ownership
Easements (focus on prescription, necessity etc.)
Family Property

Could cover L&T but unsure it will come up again

Really don't want to do Licences

Of course Adverse P too!

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

Comments