Katiemckay60 wrote: » Anyone else so scared for constitutional? Like I have so much covered Cos I’m afraid of not being able to answer 5 qs but then I don’t feel like I’ll remember enough On any topic to write 5 good answers. Hoping examiner is an easy marker!!
Katiemckay60 wrote: » If a q came up on international agreement with with expenditure would you discuss distributive justice as well as international relations and Collins. I.e reilly, sinnot etc
EmmaO94 wrote: » Just noticed that I'm scheduled for the EU exam but I passed it in August! Anyone else experiencing this??
Lawlaw12 wrote: » Under right to life I have a good bit on refusal of medical treatment/ no right to die But only a couple of cases on the unborn.... would people discuss general right to life (Shaw case) in a Q on the unborn or exclusively discuss the unborn?
Fe1forthefun wrote: » I don't know why distributive justice would come into it. EU law cannot make any determinations with regarding taxation, social welfare etc so it wouldn't come up. Pringle case might be relevant here. The only expenditure that I can think of would be expenditure by Ireland as a state to conform with an international agreement and therefore it wouldn't be a distributive justice issue - does that make sense? Very tired and definitely going to be up all night.
shaunadennyham wrote: » What do we reckon? Rights of the unborn and constitutional interpretation are my bankers. Was a lot of property rights in March so am not focusing on them as much
Jeremiah25 wrote: » I did it in March and thought the paper was a stinker. Missed out by 2 marks so here's hoping tomorrow is a bit nicer, last exam too Keep reading the questions, you'll be able to find something for sure that you can incorporate!
Katiemckay60 wrote: » Thanks for that- I don’t think I really understand distributive justice that’s why I thought it would come into it haha thanks
Katiemckay60 wrote: » Can I ask why you’re predicting right of unborn? I don’t have much on it
Lawlaw12 wrote: » haha distributive justice just involves the distribution of the resources of the State, like housing etc., it's not for the courts to get involved with how the State allocates the resources it has - the state is balancing the interests of many parties when it distributes it's resources, so the court can't look at that Hope that makes sense lol, I'm actually leaving it out altogether anyway
Katiemckay60 wrote: » Does it include funds? Was thinking (as you said before) If international agreement involves charge on public funds then that would be distribution of public funds and court shouldn’t get involved ? Like obviously question would be on international relations like Gillihand,crotty, Pringle and then Collins- but just wondering would you throw that in- didn’t want to do if it was wrong If I’m still not making sense just ignore me haha
Fe1forthefun wrote: » No! The only time you need to think of distributive justice is if the right is a socio-economic right which the court won't get involved in. A good example of this is the O'Reilly case: travellers who wanted a modest standard of living in the form of the caravan. Ct wouldn't get involved because they are not going to tell state how to distribute money between the citizens. Just think of in terms of housing, education etc - relationship between citizens and the state, not international agreements!! If there is a charge on public funds in an international agreement that it not necessarily unconstitutional as long as it was laid before the Dail - google the Pringle case and everything should be clear!
Twinings2016 wrote: » Does anyone know if the Law Society will keep the online exams for next years sittings???
fe12020autumn wrote: » CONTRACT LEGISLATION: Hi there - can anyone please clarify what legislation we are allowed for Contract: - The SGA 1980 - The SGA 1893 - Are we allowed to bring in a copy of The SGA 1893 Revised Act? - this is the 1893 act that is quoted throughout the manual...
shaunadennyham wrote: » Well given the fact that nobody here has a crystal ball it’s impossible to say for sure. It will depend on whether we are on lockdown of level 3 or above come next spring.
Fe7 wrote: » Been following this thread for sometime and your comments can be quite argumentative and rude with other users.
Twinings2016 wrote: » haha, deadly. many thanks for your ratty feedback I have spoken with the law society many times and they drip-feed information, I was simply wondering if anyone out there may have been speaking with them and heard something to that effect.
shaunadennyham wrote: » Haha sorry didn’t mean to be ratty !! Given the fact that holding exams in person is cheaper and easier to run from an admin perspective I’d imagine they’ll go back to in person unless there’s another Dublin or national level 3 or above in the spring. If we’re level 2 or below we’ll all be back to the red cow
