Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…282283285287288…334

Comments

  • #8522
    FE1RL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3 ✭FE1RL


    Hi all!

    First time attempting these exams

    I’ve got some notes from fe1 manuals and the likes but I keep gravitating towards my 3rd level notes as I just find them more concise and easier to digest. (Equity mainly)

    Is this naive on my part? Are there fe1 manuals and such for a reason? Ie. College notes are not sufficient?

    Thanks and best of luck to everyone with exams left.


  • #8523
    jackwoodson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭jackwoodson


    FE1RL wrote: »
    Hi all!

    First time attempting these exams

    I’ve got some notes from fe1 manuals and the likes but I keep gravitating towards my 3rd level notes as I just find them more concise and easier to digest. (Equity mainly)

    Is this naive on my part? Are there fe1 manuals and such for a reason? Ie. College notes are not sufficient?

    Thanks and best of luck to everyone with exams left.

    In my opinion you need the manuals, a college exam and a fe1 exam are two entirely different things.


  • #8524
    EmmaO94
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    FE1RL wrote: »
    Hi all!

    First time attempting these exams

    I’ve got some notes from fe1 manuals and the likes but I keep gravitating towards my 3rd level notes as I just find them more concise and easier to digest. (Equity mainly)

    Is this naive on my part? Are there fe1 manuals and such for a reason? Ie. College notes are not sufficient?

    Thanks and best of luck to everyone with exams left.

    I sometimes revert to my college notes if a particular topic is tricky and I want to try and understand it in plain English, but in general I'd say (my college notes anyway) aren't exactly on the same wavelength as the fe1 course.

    I'd strongly recommend using the fe1 examiner reports as a starting point to see what cases you should be hitting and what points of law specially they want you to highlight! :)


  • #8525
    Lawlaw12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 134 ✭✭Lawlaw12


    FE1RL wrote: »
    Hi all!

    First time attempting these exams

    I’ve got some notes from fe1 manuals and the likes but I keep gravitating towards my 3rd level notes as I just find them more concise and easier to digest. (Equity mainly)

    Is this naive on my part? Are there fe1 manuals and such for a reason? Ie. College notes are not sufficient?

    Thanks and best of luck to everyone with exams left.

    Manuals are better as they're tailored towards these particular exams.
    Also a few of the examiners regularly criticise people for using outdated college notes, so if you're making your own notes just make sure you add in any recent cases


  • #8526
    SKLaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 162 ✭✭SKLaw


    arubamuuu wrote: »
    Contract

    Can anyone clarify what happens when there is an automatic email? For example in Oct 2018 Q1 with Paula buying the playstation online and getting the automatic email saying it was accepted. Is this proper acceptance or what cases/legislation say that it isn't?

    I’m not sure if my approach is right to this but I’m open to correction.

    I think it counts as acceptance since according to Thomas v BPE Solicitors and provisions under Electronic Commerce Act 2000, the email is taken as received if it has been sent during working hours (assuming she placed the order during office hours). You can also argue that since acceptance must be communicated then the principles in Entores can be applied. The automatic email could imply that a reasonable person would assume that their order has been received and accepted. There’s also The Brimnes case.

    Don’t get too bogged down on the offer and acceptance principles though. Talk about unilateral mistake too. I think the examiner report for it said that some students focused only on the offer and acceptance part of it.

    Hope that helps!


  • Advertisement
  • #8527
    shaunadennyham
    Closed Accounts Posts: 141 ✭✭shaunadennyham


    SKLaw wrote: »
    I’m not sure if my approach is right to this but I’m open to correction.

    I think it counts as acceptance since according to Thomas v BPE Solicitors and provisions under Electronic Commerce Act 2000, the email is taken as received if it has been sent during working hours (assuming she placed the order during office hours). You can also argue that since acceptance must be communicated then the principles in Entores can be applied. The automatic email could imply that a reasonable person would assume that their order has been received and accepted. There’s also The Brimnes case.

    Don’t get too bogged down on the offer and acceptance principles though. Talk about unilateral mistake too. I think the examiner report for it said that some students focused only on the offer and acceptance part of it.

    Hope that helps!

    Adding to this isn’t there something about if the offer was completely outrageously low it’s less likely to be upheld - the case about the printers being sold for a really low price due to misprint? I could be wrong


  • #8528
    illy.m
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 106 ✭✭illy.m


    Very stupid question here, but my brain is boiling already. What's the difference between mandatory interlocutory injunction and interlocutory injunction? How do you spot the difference in the exam?


  • #8529
    shaunadennyham
    Closed Accounts Posts: 141 ✭✭shaunadennyham


    illy.m wrote: »
    Very stupid question here, but my brain is boiling already. What's the difference between mandatory interlocutory injunction and interlocutory injunction? How do you spot the difference in the exam?

    Mandatory compels a party to do something, prohibitory prevents them from doing something - mandatory is just a type of interlocutory injunction :)


  • #8530
    SKLaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 162 ✭✭SKLaw


    shaunadennyham wrote: »
    Adding to this isn’t there something about if the offer was completely outrageously low it’s less likely to be upheld - the case about the printers being sold for a really low price due to misprint? I could be wrong

    Yep, that sounds right to me. I think the case was Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall where there was a mistake in the pricing and the court held it was very low and the price was fundamental to the contract. There was no meeting of the minds between the parties so there was no contract.


  • #8531
    nicolesd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭nicolesd


    anyone have concise notes on defences for SP? was going to leave them out but i probably shouldn't..or what's the most important ones?


  • Advertisement
  • #8532
    shaunadennyham
    Closed Accounts Posts: 141 ✭✭shaunadennyham


    nicolesd wrote: »
    anyone have concise notes on defences for SP? was going to leave them out but i probably shouldn't..or what's the most important ones?

    7 defences to SP - mutuality, hardship, illegality/public policy, mistake, misrepresentation, delay and impossibility/frustration


  • #8533
    nicolesd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭nicolesd


    Does anyone have any tips on how to spot mandatory injunctions in a problem? and if it was a problem would you have to go through all the cases from the 3 different lines of caselaw (campus oil, strong case, risk of injustice) or how would be best to answer it ?


  • #8534
    ellachapman96
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23 ✭ellachapman96


    I know constitutional is very hard to call but what are people thinking of leaving out?


  • #8535
    gmh44
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1 ✭gmh44


    Hi, does anyone have the 2020 constit law gird to share please. Any suggestions on which to leave out, out of methods of interruption, amending the constitution or effects of findings unconst. Thanks!


  • #8536
    CoconutHeadMia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 62 ✭✭CoconutHeadMia


    Constitutional

    I was thinking of covering the following, does anybody have anything to add or leave out?

    Family & Education
    Freedom of Expression with liberty/assosication
    Property rights with inviolability of the dwelling
    Equality
    Personal rights
    Limiting and Balacning Rights
    Due Course
    Executive SOP with International relations
    President AG
    Locus Standi


  • #8537
    fe12020oct
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 65 ✭✭fe12020oct


    equity

    anybody have concise notes on cy pres???


  • #8538
    Iso_123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 235 ✭✭Iso_123


    For constitutional - for a general SOP question do you think its ok to focus on one aspect of SOP like the non delegation doctrine or non justiciability or do you think he is looking for a more general discussion on it? It's just such a big area I was planning on just picking 1 or 2 aspects of it for an essay? any suggestions welcome!


  • #8539
    fe1fi20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 142 ✭✭fe1fi20


    Equity

    Are the following okay?
    - specific performance
    - rectification
    - quia timet injunctions
    - mandatory interlocutory injunctions
    - DMC
    - strong v bird
    - three certainties
    - charitable trusts
    - cy pres
    - trustee
    - resulting trusts

    Not going to focus too much on the last two but have enough knowledge to write something down


  • #8540
    tommytimber
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭tommytimber


    fe1fi20 wrote: »
    Equity

    Are the following okay?
    - specific performance
    - rectification
    - quia timet injunctions
    - mandatory interlocutory injunctions
    - DMC
    - strong v bird
    - three certainties
    - charitable trusts
    - cy pres
    - trustee
    - resulting trusts

    Not going to focus too much on the last two but have enough knowledge to write something down

    I'm thinking the same except I'll leave out resulting trusts. Is it crazy if I leave out specific performance too?


  • #8541
    Fe123
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Fe123


    I only have time to do one more , estoppel or mistake for contract. Any suggestions :(


  • Advertisement
  • #8542
    JHalpin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17 ✭JHalpin


    tommytimber wrote: »
    I'm thinking the same except I'll leave out resulting trusts. Is it crazy if I leave out specific performance too?


    Hiya! I would really recommend focusing on Trusteeship. Its a very popular topic and comes up nearly every year!


  • #8543
    Supermax1988
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 189 ✭✭Supermax1988


    Fe123 wrote: »
    I only have time to do one more , estoppel or mistake for contract. Any suggestions :(

    Definitely Mistake


  • #8544
    Fe123
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Fe123


    Supermax1988 wrote: »
    Definitely Mistake

    Thank you!


  • #8545
    Lozg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46 ✭Lozg


    tommytimber wrote: »
    I'm thinking the same except I'll leave out resulting trusts. Is it crazy if I leave out specific performance too?

    Resulting trusts is quite a frequent topic and hasn’t came up in the last two years so it’s definitely due an appearance I would think!


  • #8546
    Fe1nov
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24 ✭Fe1nov


    hi does anyone know if there are regular topics to come up for the essay q's on contract?
    and does anyone have the march 2020 paper please


  • #8547
    nicolesd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭nicolesd


    i Have the below topics covered but wondering if i any leave any out or is there any others i should be covering its alot to try remember?

    Qt injunction/mandatory/mareva
    undue influence
    estoppel
    DMC
    3 certainties
    Charitable
    Cy-pres
    Stong v bird/ satisfaction
    Tracing
    SP-Ct's for service
    Trusteeship
    Rectification plus 3/4 brief SP defences


  • #8548
    DUMSURFER
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 83 ✭✭DUMSURFER


    Hey everybody doing Contract,

    Does anyone have an up-to-date grid, exam papers and exam reports for Contract that I could beg for? The last time mine were up-to-date, Obama was in office!

    Although they were helpful to a point, they're not very helpful beyond this point and particularly preparing for what comes up on Thursday. Would be forever grateful if anyone could help me out and can swap basically anything anyone needs :)


  • #8549
    Lawlaw12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 134 ✭✭Lawlaw12


    gmh44 wrote: »
    Hi, does anyone have the 2020 constit law gird to share please. Any suggestions on which to leave out, out of methods of interruption, amending the constitution or effects of findings unconst. Thanks!

    Interpretation could be due a run and it's short enough
    There's usually a q on either interpretation / president / AG - and they weren't on the last 2 sittings so are a possibility this time


  • #8550
    FE1Nov20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 49 ✭FE1Nov20


    Equity

    Could someone please clarify whether campus oil principles also apply to quia timet injunctions? My understanding is that they do apply with the additional proof required of actual and real danger - is this correct?


  • Advertisement
  • #8551
    baloo21
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34 ✭baloo21


    FE1Nov20 wrote: »
    Equity

    Could someone please clarify whether campus oil principles also apply to quia timet injunctions? My understanding is that they do apply with the additional proof required of actual and real danger - is this correct?

    That's my understanding too!


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement