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!) No trading

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

fe1prep2021

Dropin wrote: »

Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

Thats what I answered on anyway

EmmaO94

Dropin wrote: »

Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

That was my angle anyway!

Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?

fe1prep2021

EmmaO94 wrote: »

That was my angle anyway!

Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?

I said this also but only like three sentences about it

Fe123

**** that exam

mydogwentroof

I touched on that too. Also said s.4(1) offence mighe be vague. I was struggling in that Q tho

EmmaO94 wrote: »

That was my angle anyway!

Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?

Iconic10

will be back in oct for constitutional

Diamond_Hands

Looks like it went well.

mydogwentroof

Judicial independence. I actually only had one case but i took a stab anyway and discussed golf gate

Fe179user wrote: »

What was the first question about for constitutional?? I 100% just failed that exam

FE1Pleb

mydogwentroof wrote: »

I touched on that too. Also said s.4(1) offence mighe be vague. I was struggling in that Q tho

I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?

kayleee123

My answers looked so short in the little boxes and I literally wrote everything I could - really don't know how to feel after that, shocked there was no religion, AG, interpretation bleugh so glad its over

awsah

NewFe1 wrote: »

Was stuck for a question so gave the infectious disease one a punt, hoping he might mark it nicely because it was an odd one

I just did that on liberty?? What did you answer it on? Couldn't remember My liberty cases so I was comparing it to prison conditions ffs! Smh

FEONE

Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

awsah

FE1Pleb wrote: »

I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?

Ya I just said that there was nothing in the act about being a criminal offense so it was probably ultra vires the act for the garda to arrest and then assembly and proportionality. I said that as the question doesn't gove into on how many people it's hard to even say that he wants complying with the act, very weird question

NewFe1

FE1Pleb wrote: »

I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?

I was the same, I didn't see how freedom of expression was applicable.

bluerthanu

FEONE wrote: »

Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

no that was spot on i'd say, squarely within the application of McDonald v Bord na gCon was my thinking anyway

awsah

FEONE wrote: »

Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

No I think that's where I went with that too!

NewFe1

awsah wrote: »

I just did that on liberty?? What did you answer it on? Couldn't remember My liberty cases so I was comparing it to prison conditions ffs! Smh

I did it on liberty also

Lozg

I panicked when I first read the questions but I think it ended up being ok. Wasn’t a big fan of the essay questions, so ended up doing 3 problem questions, the ECHR question (my answer on this was extremely short), and the case note question.

The amount of prep I put into the Friends of the Environment case because of his lecture on Monday, almost laughing at myself now lol

awsah

Lozg wrote: »

I panicked when I first read the questions but I think it ended up being ok. Wasn’t a big fan of the essay questions, so ended up doing 3 problem questions, the ECHR question (my answer on this was extremely short), and the case note question.

The amount of prep I put into the Friends of the Environment case because of his lecture on Monday, almost laughing at myself now lol

Absolute same as that! I literally never want to hear the phrase friends of the Irish environment ever again in my life.

Honestly I'm not happy with my answers but I'm hoping that he seems to be a fair maker and I answered 5 questions that I will get over the line at 50%!

Dropin

NewFe1 wrote: »

I did this but couldn't really see how there was anything to do with freedom of expression there?

I don't think there was but I needed to fill that box so I referenced the grouping of assembly, association and expression in the together in constitution and took a punt. Felt it was a question that should have been easy, but yet I made it hard.

EmmaO94

FEONE wrote: »

Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

Oops I missed that!

Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?

Fe123

What did people write for the 1st question?

NewFe1

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Oops I missed that!

Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?

I also discussed right to silence and the case of DPP V M where they drew inferences from his unwillingness to add anything to his statement. Same happened with Chris.

EmmaO94

Trying to quell my nerves here - do ya generally pass Constitutional if you answer 5 qs with a decent amount of case law, having identified the issues?

If his seminar cases had have appeared I would have been flying - had snazzy quotes & articles ready to go. So just stressing now wondering if my fine but pretty bog standard answers will be enough?

Lawlz

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Oops I missed that!

Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?

I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental

EmmaO94

NewFe1 wrote: »

I also discussed right to silence and the case of DPP V M where they drew inferences from his unwillingness to add anything to his statement. Same happened with Chris.

Yesss same but couldn't remember the case name! I was like, in THAT case lol

Dropin

Case Note question was the hero I never thought it would be. I take back everything I ever said about them.

EmmaO94

Lawlz wrote: »

I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental

Oh damn well-spotted re livelihood! Totally missed that. Wouldn't have had time to write about it though even if I realised though haha very down to the wire with this one

Dropin

Lawlz wrote: »

I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental

Nice, I went Livelihood too and then was feeling myself so talked about his vet licence in light of Muldoon... no clue how applicable that was.

Fe179user

The first question I definitely answered wrong I started talking about SOP and Art 15, can’t believe I wasted so much time stressing about the seminar cases and didn’t focus on my original topics