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

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:

Yeah like obviously none of us are lecturers, we are only saying what we know. I remember I didn't know an 18 year old could witness a will qnd I was like no way (still makes 0 sense to me they can - sorry guys). >.<;

I have honestly seen your questions here, and while studying another subject, got the textbook off the library shelf and checked the answers. I do it in the hope that they'll be some good karma for me in the future. I've literally passed all 8 and I'm still chilling here. I've definitely met people IRL who would rip pages out of law books to sabotage others but I post here in good faith none of you guys would do that. I was gonna say we should meet for pints / non alcoholic substitutions again but then I was like oh wait..........

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)

Same here, was very happy with what I'd covered going in (think I counted I had 20 topics in total and could rhyme off relevant case law) but a few of them problem questions just threw me! Found myself rushing and waffling through answers because I spent so long trying to work out what the question was asking for. Ah well, it's all a learning experience!

I think EU will be more straightforward in terms of identifying the questions anyway. Hoping for similar topics myself!

Am i right in saying that preliminary reference and infringement procedure has never come up under this examiner?

iamanengine wrote: »

Prelim reference came up in March 2019, that's the only time. Infringement hasn't I don't think. Supremacy hasn't either

Ah completely missed that, thank you!

htnor wrote: »

What q was prelim reference in March 2019? Must be losing it just can’t seem to see it &#55357;&#56834;

I don't actually have access to the paper itself but my grid says Q3

iamanengine wrote: »

I don't actually have access to the paper itself but my grid says Q3

Hmm I would say q3 was just about standing am i missing something??

QUESTION THREE March 19

When Advocate General Jacobs stated in paragraph 103 of his own Opinion on Case C-50/2000, UPA v Council, that:
“[…] and individual should be regarded as individually concerned within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC by a Community measure where, by reason of his particular circumstances, the measure has, or is liable to have, a substantial adverse effect on his interests”
he was clearly articulating that there was a lack of effective judicial protection for non-privileged applicants who sought a judicial review of acts of the European Union’s institutions.
Explain briefly the concerns that Advocate General was addressing here. Also, make an assessment of whether these concerns have been fully addressed by the changes that were made to Article 230 EC by the Lisbon Treaty and now contained in Article 263 TFEU and/or any developments that may have come from the related case law of the Union Judicature on this matter, and in particular the case-law interpreting the new post-Lisbon fourth paragraph to Article 263 TFEU.

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

Yeah dm me your email

Thank you SO SO much, I really appreciate it.

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

Hmm I would say q3 was just about standing am i missing something??

QUESTION THREE March 19

When Advocate General Jacobs stated in paragraph 103 of his own Opinion on Case C-50/2000, UPA v Council, that:
“[…] and individual should be regarded as individually concerned within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC by a Community measure where, by reason of his particular circumstances, the measure has, or is liable to have, a substantial adverse effect on his interests”
he was clearly articulating that there was a lack of effective judicial protection for non-privileged applicants who sought a judicial review of acts of the European Union’s institutions.
Explain briefly the concerns that Advocate General was addressing here. Also, make an assessment of whether these concerns have been fully addressed by the changes that were made to Article 230 EC by the Lisbon Treaty and now contained in Article 263 TFEU and/or any developments that may have come from the related case law of the Union Judicature on this matter, and in particular the case-law interpreting the new post-Lisbon fourth paragraph to Article 263 TFEU.

Yeah you’re right Q3 according to examiner report was on Art 263 and effective judicial protection and locus standi.

I was getting freaked there thinking my grid was wrong and as prelim reference hasn’t come up in years! I feel like it’s one of the most notable EU topics tho I don’t get why it’s not more of a popular q.

Does anybody have a condensed summary/notes on the changes Lisbon has made to Institutions that are crammable?

I don't have a whole lot on EU that I can swap but can swap what I have & will owe you a pint our paths cross in Blackhall

When looking at direct effect problem questions .... is indirect effect only to be addressed with failure to correctly transpose the directive ? Direct effect would only need to be addressed if it was just failure to implement on time?

JCormac wrote: »

Does anybody have a condensed summary/notes on the changes Lisbon has made to Institutions that are crammable?

I don't have a whole lot on EU that I can swap but can swap what I have & will owe you a pint our paths cross in Blackhall

? I think that Lisbon literally implemented the TEU and the TFEU so on a technicality anything that is found in either of those in relation to Lisbon is a change made to the Institutions.

JCormac wrote: »

Does anybody have a condensed summary/notes on the changes Lisbon has made to Institutions that are crammable?

I don't have a whole lot on EU that I can swap but can swap what I have & will owe you a pint our paths cross in Blackhall

Main changes - QMV, Charter of fundamental rights, ordinary legislative procedure, increased role of ms parliaments, introduced new test for regulatory acts re judicial review, introduced procedure to leave the EU

I don’t have any specific notes for Lisbon more they are spread out over various topics

Does anyone have 'Free Movement of Workers' notes for EU that I could beg for?

Can send any and all other notes, sample answers etc to the unbelievably kind people who help out!

iamanengine wrote: »

When was the last time equivalence and effectiveness came up? I realllllly don't want to cover it

October 19 and March 17