Aoibhin511 wrote: » Am i right in saying that preliminary reference and infringement procedure has never come up under this examiner?
JCormac wrote: » Exactly the same. Was reciting every case and statute perfectly before the exam, pure Rainman style. In the exam I think I remembered a sixth of what I studied. Be lucky if I was scraping 5 cases a question. Just the luck of the draw on the day I guess. Lots of people are probably in the same boat, so wouldn't stress too much. Hoping for questions in the follow areas: General Principles (Essay) Direct effect & Member State liability Judicial Review (Essay) FMG (Art 34 or Art 30 & 110) FMW (and maybe Citizenship)
Healyjhow wrote: » Don’t even want to post mortem that paper I really feeling I was grasping at straws ... all my case law knowledge just disintegrated and got stuck with two essay questions I couldn’t even re read cause I had the fear of my life hahahah anyone want to share what their studying for EU so I can attempt to redeem myself ?
Hamerzan Sickles wrote: » For what it's worth, I've passed like three exams basing my revision the night before the exam solely on iamanengine's predictions so boards has been a pretty massive help to me. I think the person we are referencing about might be trying to do a bit of inverse marketing by deterring people from browsing here for information. :rolleyes:
iamanengine wrote: » Lol, I just checked insta and seen the video Think she is so wrong, this thread has been a massive help to me personally and to suggest people intentionally put up incorrect information is really unfair. I always do my best to help others and feel I've been treated similarly. It's a nice community on here and people genuinely look out for each other, in my experience. Y'all are great x
Wonderstruck wrote: » That's pretty amazing three sittings before you graduate!!! I began them 2 years after graduating!
iamanengine wrote: » No real predictions, just cover the usual suspects - Institutions Direct Effect/MS Liability General Principles Citizenship Goods Workers Judicial Review Competition
IgoPAP wrote: » Does it apply retrospectively or only going forward? I'll have done 3 sittings before I graduate
MrAlex123 wrote: » It wasn't included in any of the TC applications I completed either. But it is an express clause in my TC! Defo not something to stress over, but certainly something to be cognisant of going forward
EmmaO94 wrote: » To be honest I've never heard this before! I have a TC at a top 10 firm and number of sittings wasn't discussed at all - nor was it mentioned in any other TC applications I filled in, incl top tier firms (and I did a LOT!) I don't think it's something worth stressing over really in the grand scheme of things, from anecdotal evidence it's not something that's commonly brought up :-)
[Deleted User] wrote: » What! I’ve never heard that! Very harsh especially now they’ve gotten rid of the magic 3 rule I thought that would take the pressure off!
MrAlex123 wrote: » Word of caution for any FE1 'first timers'-- a few of the top firms only accept trainees who complete all FE1s within a certain number of sittings (e.g. 3). Worth bearing in mind when planning your topics for October as today is likely to count as 1/3 of your sittings! Wish someone had told me this when I started
Lallers96 wrote: » We got "called out" by a well known advisor on the FE1s haha, full on called regular posters on boards.ie spoofers
Lallers96 wrote: » We as in regular posters on boards.ie and by called out I mean, called spoofers and that reading and following threads on boards.ie is a bad idea, and regular posters do not have your best interests at heart, especially people sitting the same exam as you. The well known advisor is someone on instagram, and has done very well in the FE1s in the past. If you don't know off the bat who it is from that then I don't think you know of them, in which case it's pointless information. Nothing wrong with what she said, I just found it funny really and I disagree with it
nmurphy1441 wrote: » Predictions???
MrAlex123 wrote: » Excuse my brevity, but who is 'we', what do you mean 'called out', what/who is a 'well known advisor on the FE1s"? Thanks
JCormac wrote: » I feel like a lot of those questions had multiple possible routes you could have taken. Like Nervous Shock or Wilkinson or Employer Liability for the question on yer one in the office. Or the tort of Nuisance or Negligence for the guy who couldn't stop smoking. Maybe it was just me that said Negligence. Oof[/QUOTE I said negligence as well. I ran through nuisance and said might not apply as not a substantial period of time as had moved in a few weeks ago and, started throwing them on the green, better chance of recovery under negligence
Louis Litt wrote: » Anyone know what kind of a marker they are for Tort? any stories of ppl coming out with the pass after a couple of poor questons
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1c2638d40c8423fc1a2b2b1a2a01a3b9.svg)