jus_me wrote: » Would anyone have a brief explanation of the friends Case mentioned in the thread for constitutional? Just to get an idea !! Last min cramming as I haven’t had time to cover it
catonafence wrote: » Katniss1998 wrote: » So I was thinking of covering the following for EU, am I covered? Competition Law- Art 101, 102, 107 (not doing mergers or 106 because they came up recently) FMOG both Art 34-36 and Art 30 and Art 110 Institutions- Hoping it is a banker General Principles + Sources of EU law as back up Judicial Review- essay on individual concern test Direct Effect, Indirect effect and MS liability Am I cutting it a bit close?" I can only speak for EU - I am doing the same list as you, except I'm trying to complete FMOW and Citizenship instead of Art 101/102. I think you are better offhaving covered Art 101/102 as its a banker. You seem well covered. i have same list as first poster
Katniss1998 wrote: » So I was thinking of covering the following for EU, am I covered? Competition Law- Art 101, 102, 107 (not doing mergers or 106 because they came up recently) FMOG both Art 34-36 and Art 30 and Art 110 Institutions- Hoping it is a banker General Principles + Sources of EU law as back up Judicial Review- essay on individual concern test Direct Effect, Indirect effect and MS liability Am I cutting it a bit close?" I can only speak for EU - I am doing the same list as you, except I'm trying to complete FMOW and Citizenship instead of Art 101/102. I think you are better offhaving covered Art 101/102 as its a banker. You seem well covered.
kayleee123 wrote: » Send me your email I did a page on it earlier today can send you a picture of it
EmmaO94 wrote: » Wishing everyone the best tomorrow morning :-) This thread has helped me massively with Constitutional - not just re the substantive issues on the course but also with all the moral support. Really really rooting for you guys, let's hope we smash it tomorrow.
ihatethesea wrote: » You too Emma! You were really kind to share the seminar slides with everyone!! Really appreciated it!
ullaw22 wrote: » PROPERTY Conscious that tomorrow is Constitutional day but could anyone lend a hand in answering this Q? Thought I had a handle on easements but this has me stumped. Obviously apply Ellenborough Park and Latimer then maybe try bring in Wong v Beaumont. I have Scott v Goulding and Gaw v CIE too but doesn't really answer it. All thoughts and comments welcome/In 1970, Peter built a house on a site adjacent to Ken’s land. Since the driveway of this house was liable to serious flooding, Peter asked Ken in 1971 if he could pass through Ken’s field as his normal way of access to the main roadway. Ken said that he had no problem with that. Peter has continued to use this alternative access route ever since, although there was one period of six months in 2001 when he tried an alternative way over a field belonging to another neighbour. However, that proved unsatisfactory and Peter reverted to crossing Ken’s field. In January 1993, Peter built an extension to his house, consisting of a new kitchen with one large window overlooking Ken’s field. The field contains some beautiful old oak trees, which was why Peter positioned the window where he did. This year, Ken has sold the field to a developer whose plans for development include the erection of a ten foot high boundary wall. The wall will not only cut off Peter’s access to the road via the field, but it will considerably reduce the amount of light received through the kitchen window destroying the view in the process. Advise Peter.
LeagleEagle747 wrote: » I found timing was definitely an issue, especially where I realised with 9 minutes of the exam left that I had answered a question incorrectly and had to redo it. My main issue is I feel my answers are too short, I don't like that it's just a text box, doesn't give me a good indicator as to how much I've written...
johnnash2020 wrote: » If anyone is worried about criminal, please know he marks about 10% higher than the others do. Statistically, it's one of the two easiest exams to pass (alongside property) x
Fe1user5555 wrote: » Is anyone planning on logging in a bit late
EmmaO94 wrote: » On my BE homepage it says 0 exams ready to be taken now but if I scroll down, Constitutional is there as 'upcoming' & in my calendar - is this just because it's not 8.30am yet? Sorry I can't remember if this was how it was in November!!
Murphs122 wrote: » Mine is the same, but you can still see the exam if you click into in the calendar?
