Aoibhin511 wrote: » I've been giving this more thought, they definitely just called it a dumb name, it can't be a mock exam because what would they examine? Which of the 8 subjects do they examine? If they asked a q on a subject I hadn't covered and I was a non-law grad i would be just sat there staring at the screen unable to even attempt it, or worst case scenario it would completely freak me out and i would go into panick mode. I think it must just a dry run of the set up, can everyone log in ok, can the platform handle x amount of people etc
Lallers96 wrote: » Is anyone else ****ting it over this sudden mock exam and the fact that we know absolutely nothing about what time it's at, what we will be tested on, how long it will be etc? I don't think I can get the day off work so I'll have to hope that this can be done on my lunch break or something. It's in less than 5 days like and no information given.
FE1new wrote: » Hi All Would anyone have Criminal notes they are willing to swap? I have EU notes and sample answers and Equity and Property sample answers. I haven't studied Criminal since 1st year and have zero notes prepared With the exams in 2 weeks I'm panicking
Dliodoir2021 wrote: » Thanks for the reply. I'd actually cut it but will re-add now! I also had this which caused confusion: - “Why would Barrington J not simply have decided the case on the second limb of §205 (now §212), as Courtney suggests he could have done?” - “Although the learned judge grounded his jurisdiction to make an order bc the affairs of the co were being conducted in disregard of the interests of the ordinary shareholders, Courtney feels it is remarkable that Barrington J tagged onto his view the observation that to implement the resolutions would be oppressive: sufficient jurisdiction existed for the court to make an Order under §212 on the finding that the affairs of the co were being conducted in disregard of the ordinary shareholders interests.” [Courtney 3rd edn at 11.031]"
Iso_123 wrote: » The points i have for this case are that one act is sufficient for a finding of oppression and also this is the main case on 212(1)(b) ie acting in disregard to a members interest. I have down that it was found that they had acted in disregard to the interests of the minority shareholders (open to correction on this?) I haven't read the judgment just have this from my notes/manual
Dliodoir2021 wrote: » RE WILLIAMS TULLAMORE I can't figure out whether the judge granted §212 (ex 205) or not? He seems to have said it was oppression but didn't.....arghhh idk! Any ideas? Would it be bad to just exclude it from my notes?
sunnylegal wrote: » Thanks a mill for these. If I studied all of these would I pass?
FE1new wrote: » Injunctions (Mareva came up in March but I'm leaving it in with all the others). Express Trusts (3 certainties, DMC and Strong v Bird - usually in 2 of 3) Charitable Trusts and Cy Pres Resulting Trusts (PoA, Joint A/C) Recission (including undue influence) Estoppel Trustees Tracing Specific Performance I hope I'll get 5Qs out of that and that i will remember it for the exam.
sunnylegal wrote: » Anyone have a list of Equity topics they are studying?
jus_me wrote: » Interested in predictions for constitutional too!!!
MrT_98 wrote: » Guys I'm just wondering, are Bayer orders on the syllabus for Equity FE1?
Aoibhin511 wrote: » Yeah, but the website says if you didn't get it the two reasons are that you're not registered or you email address is wrong. Which is not the case for for me and the previous poster, and possibly many others
maggie95 wrote: » This would have been a far less stressful way to have dealt with this entire situation: - Take a shot every time the Law Society hangs up on you - Take a shot every time the Law Society transfers your call to at least two different people - Take a gulp every time the Law Society gives you information but it's incredibly vague and leaves you with even more questions - Take a shot every time the Law Society's FE1 helpline rings out - Down your drink for every time you've found out something from Boards before the Law Society had the decency to email or update website but instead update one person over phone - Take a shot every time each of your exams is postponed - Just take a massive drink every time you regret starting these bloody exams - Also one which is particularly relevant for today, cheers and down your drink when the Law Society give a date to provide more information but unsurprisingly do not
Samuma wrote: » I still couldn't get through to the number. They said they would provide all details today and they still haven't done that. They need to let us know what's going on. Wonder is it time for 1850 715 815? Don't suppose anyone is very good at guessing and can predict what will be on the Constitution paper??? Or what topics you're going to chance leaving out? In theory, how many cases should we be using for essay questions (working on the assumption that I use the right cases for the right topics in the first place!!). I welcome advice or feedback from anyone who has passed it in the past
JayFE1 wrote: » Yeah, sounds good to me. I posted the other day about equity and PoA & Joint A/Cs and Constructive Trusts were topics that skipped my mind. I would do PoA and Joint A/Cs if you’re considering an extra topic. Secrets Trusts is a fascinating topic alright and it’s something I was on for Uni but not in the FE1s. I’m not saying it doesn’t come up but IMO there’s more value in spending the time elsewhere. You’ve probably already done your notes and learning it off now though. Strong v Bird is something I’d be on too but IIRC it’s asked as a 10 marker 2 outta 3 style question so IMO if you’re going to commit to it then look at the past papers and see what topics usually come up with it - The only one I can remember off the top of my head is satisfaction but there will be others. On Marevas, it’s something that was highly likely for March considering the previous two sittings and the popularity of it. It did come up but that’s not to say it won’t come up for you next month. Out of the three injunction topics, it has the highest probable value although that is reduced now by Marchs appearance. Just something to consider if you don’t want an extra topic but to maximise the chances of an existing one appearing. Best of luck for the exam pal!
FE1_2020_ wrote: » What are people covering for Equity ? I have the following covered but feel like its not enough: - Trustees 'Duties' - Charitable Trusts & Cy-Pres - Quia timet & Mandatory Interlocutory injunctions (Mareva omitted - appeared last March) - Estoppel - Undue Influence - Specific Performance - Rectification - Secret Trusts - Strong v Bird - DMC I am considering adding in Joint accounts & presumption of advancement but not sure. I feel like the above could be enough to hopefully pull five q's from the 8 on the day.
Lozg wrote: » Can I ask which topics came up in the online tort paper please?
