nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Tom Young

This is the new FE1 Exam Thread

This is a link to the old one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055143169

This is a link to the next one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056907164

Sorry, I'm aware we are in the throws of FE1 season, but due to a server issue, a new thread was required. Old chats and posts below - Thanks!

Mod warning in post #1205: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88514663&postcount=1205

Mod warning in post #2555: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91819622&postcount=2555

Mod warning in post #2593: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92025688&postcount=2593

Moderator: The above warnings mean it is not ok to buy, sell or swap (trade) any exam materials in this thread. Exam grids are the only exception. You may request and exchange exam grids but at no point will money be allowed to change hands for them.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hazel774

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

Did they have any predictions on the course by chance?

None at all unfortunately, and every topic seems important for constitutional

shaunadennyham

fe1toomany wrote: »

Does anybody know if the Explanatory Document that came with the LCLRA 2009 can be used tomorrow?

No it’s not permitted - just the SA and 2009 act itself

fe1toomany

Does anybody know if the Explanatory Document that came with the LCLRA 2009 can be used tomorrow?

Jeremiah25

rickmatt wrote: »

Hi guys,

Anyone be able to send me the Constitutional Night before Notes from City Colleges, subscribed to their page amd all that but still haven't received the email

https://citycolleges.ie/night-before-notes-2020/?fbclid=IwAR3zQFrthcMPhznEChtUz5Z0nOHqyEe5J1DpibcBKT_khjudGi8odAruPYk

Jeremiah25

Hamerzan Sickles wrote: »

For Constitutional Law, is each Problem Question usually centred around one particular topic? Or does he ask several topics in one problem question.

He tends to mix a few topics into questions usually.

Jeremiah25

Hazel774 wrote: »

For constitutional, property rights, I only have unjust attack/ compensation... I did a prep course and they never mentioned anything about licenses or milk quotas etc.

Did they have any predictions on the course by chance?

jip000

legaleagle2010 wrote: »

Any hints/tips for property? Ive covered the following,

Adverse possession
succession
finding
family property
land registration
co-ownership

any advice would be much appreciated !

Same here, but I think adding easements would be a good idea. Im also giving some specific attention to s117 applications and admission of extrinsic evidence but thats just a feeling i have:) Best of luck to you!

Hazel774

fe12020oct wrote: »

CONSTITUTIONAL

for property is it worth learning planning permission/licenses/milk quotas etc or would i be ok with basic definition of property with unjust attack and common good/social justice/compensation and tie in with right to earn livelihood?? any advice appreciated

For constitutional, property rights, I only have unjust attack/ compensation... I did a prep course and they never mentioned anything about licenses or milk quotas etc.

ann1994

Can I ask what topics people are covering for EU and Equity?

legaleagle2010

Any hints/tips for property? Ive covered the following,

Adverse possession
succession
finding
family property
land registration
co-ownership

any advice would be much appreciated !

Hamerzan Sickles

For Constitutional Law, is each Problem Question usually centred around one particular topic? Or does he ask several topics in one problem question.

StabiloLaw

FE1Rookie wrote: »

So we can "log in" any time after 8.15am and no later than 9.30am. Does it matter if you log in a few minutes before 9.30am? Or has that affected some people being locked out or unable to view things because it's loading for ages?

Just wondering what experience people have had and what they recommend to do? Because I am not a morning person and 9.25am would suit me best instead of pacing around from 8.15am until the 10am start.

I logged in pretty much exactly at 9.30 and I didn't have any issues.

FE1Rookie

Also does anyone have the pass rates for subjects? I have one that is quite outdated and only goes as far as 2017

FE1Rookie

So we can "log in" any time after 8.15am and no later than 9.30am. Does it matter if you log in a few minutes before 9.30am? Or has that affected some people being locked out or unable to view things because it's loading for ages?

Just wondering what experience people have had and what they recommend to do? Because I am not a morning person and 9.25am would suit me best instead of pacing around from 8.15am until the 10am start.

Iso_123

bluerthanu wrote: »

I think that would only apply to an inter vivos alienation to a third party or if there were more than 3 tenants? If we’re going off of the original posters question, which, as I understand it, was 3 original JT’s but one of the JT’s acquires a further interest, then only two co-owners remain? My understanding is that you would then have a severance of TIC of 66% to the acquiring interest co-owner, and 33% to the remaining JT now TIC.

Thank you so much for this this is what I was trying to ask! I thought this was the case that where there were originally 3 JT's and one acquires a further interest this would act to sever the JT and the remaining 2 would now be TIC with each other. that's great thanks

fe12020oct

CONSTITUTIONAL

for property is it worth learning planning permission/licenses/milk quotas etc or would i be ok with basic definition of property with unjust attack and common good/social justice/compensation and tie in with right to earn livelihood?? any advice appreciated

EM95

I found it very hard to judge because of the scroll function and that it's not like a normal word document! I also found not being able to see the answers in front of me and flicking between them hard to judge! Have you showed your workspace or are we meant to I cleared it out but thought someone might drop in and ask but no?

bluerthanu

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

If there there were more than two JT, then only the severed tenant becomes a TIC, with the others continuing to be JT with regards to their share of the property (66% in the case of 3 original JT)
See Wright v Gibbons

Obviously if there are only two joint-tenants to start with and one severs then they must both become TIC since the non-severing party has no one to be JT with.

I think that would only apply to an inter vivos alienation to a third party or if there were more than 3 tenants? If we’re going off of the original posters question, which, as I understand it, was 3 original JT’s but one of the JT’s acquires a further interest, then only two co-owners remain? My understanding is that you would then have a severance of TIC of 66% to the acquiring interest co-owner, and 33% to the remaining JT now TIC.

shaunadennyham

ann1994 wrote: »

Hi, does anyone else who has done exams this week feel their typed answers look short? I found it very hard to judge with no word count or pages to gauge if I have enough typed.

I found that too and also found it took longer to type because you’re constantly editing what you’re saying in real time? Whereas when you’re writing you get a nice flow going

ann1994

Hi, does anyone else who has done exams this week feel their typed answers look short? I found it very hard to judge with no word count or pages to gauge if I have enough typed.

EmmaO94

Would anyone possibly have an up to date Equity grid they could send me?

Aoibhin511

orlaghs wrote: »

I think the remaining JT become TIC because the unity of interest is destroyed! That's my understanding of it anyways

If there there were more than two JT, then only the severed tenant becomes a TIC, with the others continuing to be JT with regards to their share of the property (66% in the case of 3 original JT)
See Wright v Gibbons

Obviously if there are only two joint-tenants to start with and one severs then they must both become TIC since the non-severing party has no one to be JT with.

Iso_123

orlaghs wrote: »

I think the remaining JT become TIC because the unity of interest is destroyed! That's my understanding of it anyways

This is what I thought but was second guessing myself! thanks so much

orlaghs

Iso_123 wrote: »

Thanks for this! but if there was only 3 to begin with and 1 acquires another's interest so now there's only 2 left.. does this change anything? will the 2 remaining be tenants in common now because some of the unities are gone? or will the 2 remaining still be joint tenants?

I think the remaining JT become TIC because the unity of interest is destroyed! That's my understanding of it anyways

jcarroll9

The criminal exam is available until 3 pm, does that mean we can start later than 10am?? Was this how they did it yesterday?

Iso_123

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

In that situation where you have 3 co-owners and one acquires an extra interest, that person is a TIC in relation to the other 2, but the other two still have are still JT to each other. Same goes if person 1 sell to someone else, the new buyer is a TIC but the others remain JT in relation to each other.

Thanks for this! but if there was only 3 to begin with and 1 acquires another's interest so now there's only 2 left.. does this change anything? will the 2 remaining be tenants in common now because some of the unities are gone? or will the 2 remaining still be joint tenants?

Aoibhin511

Iso_123 wrote: »

property question on co ownership

I was wondering if someone could help me out with a question on severance of a joint tenancy because i've completely confused myself.. Where one joint tenant acquires another one of the joint tenants interest (lets say there were 3 joint tenants to begin with but now that one has acquired another's interest there are only 2 left) - does this sever the joint tenancy and now the remaining 2 are tenants in common? or are they still joint tenants?

I'm confused because my manual seems to contradict itself or I might just be reading it wrong..

In that situation where you have 3 co-owners and one acquires an extra interest, that person is a TIC in relation to the other 2, but the other two still have are still JT to each other. Same goes if person 1 sell to someone else, the new buyer is a TIC but the others remain JT in relation to each other.

Iso_123

property question on co ownership

I was wondering if someone could help me out with a question on severance of a joint tenancy because i've completely confused myself.. Where one joint tenant acquires another one of the joint tenants interest (lets say there were 3 joint tenants to begin with but now that one has acquired another's interest there are only 2 left) - does this sever the joint tenancy and now the remaining 2 are tenants in common? or are they still joint tenants?

I'm confused because my manual seems to contradict itself or I might just be reading it wrong..

ellachapman96

stav wrote: »

Can anyone confirm what the legislation checks are like at the beginning of the exam? Are you asked to flick through them and show your workspace?
I'm using a laptop with a webcam attached, so showing my workspace might be hard. I'm stressing that I won't do it effectively and don't want to get flagged for no reason! Thanks a million in advance for your help

Literally nothing happens, its just like the mock exam. I just held up the companies act at the start to show the camera what I was looking at but I just chose to do that. Nothing tells you to show your environment/legislation!

stav

Can anyone confirm what the legislation checks are like at the beginning of the exam? Are you asked to flick through them and show your workspace?
I'm using a laptop with a webcam attached, so showing my workspace might be hard. I'm stressing that I won't do it effectively and don't want to get flagged for no reason! Thanks a million in advance for your help