lsheehaneire wrote: » You have to. It's no possible to cover every topic. It's advised to have 8 to 10 topics well learned.
Coulter97 wrote: » Do people actually leave out sections for the exam? It's bizarre to me. I'm anxious enough as it is - I can't imagine leaving out entire sections to revise!
lawgrad15 wrote: » I covered as much as I could for March so thankfully I don't have much new material to learn off. I am mainly doing past questions at the minute and making points of anything which seems difficult/don't understand. Agreed re: not learning yet - still have lots of time to learn notes off.
HappyKitten62 wrote: » Tort people from March - how are you structuring your study at the moment? I added in some chapters I didn’t have time for in March, and still feel like it’s too early to go learning all again.
lawd20 wrote: » Hi hope everyones study is going well. Would anybody have a copy of the March 2020 Tort paper or an updated Exam Grid? Any guesses for possible questions at all for August?
Coulter97 wrote: » Does anybody know where to get all the different legislative sources?
Iso_123 wrote: » hey can anyone who was going to sit the tort exam in March and who is now doing the August sitting let me know roughly how much studying you're doing? I have all the notes etc done because I was obviously ready to take it in March! Anyway I feel guilty for not studying loads since its next month but also don't want to overdo it because i have all the prep done from March!
Cait182 wrote: » I am doing 4 exams in October and am planning on Equity, Property, Constitutional and Criminal. If anyone has any recommendations on the best materials/manuals to buy any advice would be greatly appreciated!
LawStudent1234 wrote: » Anyone selling legislation for Eu (blackstones 2019-2020) sold out nearly everywhere or else delivery won’t get here on time. Would really appreciate it if someone would DM me if they aren’t using there’s anymore.
KMPT wrote: » Oh there you are. Still waiting on the past papers from last week. Edit: Received. Thanks a mill.
irishmisile wrote: » This may sound like a pretty obvious thing, but when mentioning cases in the exam, must one write the year of the decision after it? e.g. Hanrahan v Merck Share and Dohme (1988) , and , if the examiner doesn't mind leaving out the year, are we forgiven for writing the case in shorthand, e.g. Hanrahan v Merck ? I suppose it would be up to the examiner at the end of the day but are there any official or unofficial guidelines about this? first timer here btw