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; } } }

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

Dropin

Fe179user wrote: »

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

I think SOP was applicable. It would be a gov body dictating to the judiciary so you would get marks there I think.

FE1Nov20

Dropin wrote: »

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

Honestly same! Only for it I really would've been struggling for 5th Q

AA247

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?

Thought this was one of my better questions and I didn’t know about article 37.1 and Law Soc case fml

jus_me

Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

Iconic10

literally none of the topics i expected to appear came up and the small amount chapters i left out did. it really threw me when i saw no family, equality, religion, interpretation AG or anything that was in his seminar

Fe123

jus_me wrote: »

Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

Yep and I only prepared 2 cases for it lol

awsah

jus_me wrote: »

Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

yup but it was probably my worst question!

MonikaCh84

On Equity undue influence
Can someone explain how Clarke J in Ulster v Roche & Buttimer did not fully agree with decision in Etrige? was it on the steps the banks need to take?

Fe1user5555

My computer crashed randomly in the exam (my ****ty computer’s fault not better examinations). I logged straight back in but do I need to email the law society to tell them this?

jus_me

awsah wrote: »

yup but it was probably my worst question!

What did you address as the issues I literally winged it

LawStudent999

Thought a few questions were fair but struggled with the Vet question. Took the angle of questioning the power of the committee in line with the law society solicitors case and M v. Medical. Other than that I thought the paper was fair but missing a few expected topics

BigSprogs

jus_me wrote: »

Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

Lawlawblahblah

Did everyone get 3.5 hours for the exam?

FE1Hopefully1

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

Same

ruby1998

BigSprogs wrote: »

Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

Same here! I kept reading that Q thinking there must be some other issue in this, but went with delay and duty to seek out and preserve and the role of the trial judge in these areas

ruby1998

I did association assembly and included expression because it referred to media attention so the duty of the press to report on matters in the public interest, then said it may be a vague offence, and then property rights because of the fee involved

For the vet I said A37, then A34 and Gilchrist bc there was something about a redacted name, fair procedures and livelihood.

The disease case did Cityview, liberty, the S v HSE case and Enhorn, then for some reason threw in about habeas corpus and how this would not be open to her bc of the really high threshold in recent cases and her detention was not unlawful

I can't remember what else I even did now haha melted

NewFe1

BigSprogs wrote: »

Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

I did the exact same

awsah

BigSprogs wrote: »

Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

That's what I did also,new test in the CC case came in handy

iana2017

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 referred to the mental health cases and prevention detention...ðŸ€·*♀️ðŸ€ž

Lawwww2020

How did people answer q7 on non-delegation? Thought the other essays were difficult!

awsah

Lawlawblahblah wrote: »

Did everyone get 3.5 hours for the exam?

Ya I had no issues with the exam software, I actually think I got an extra min, I looked at the clock toward the end and it was red and said like 00.36 so I had a quick scan through one of my questions

FEONE

Lawwww2020 wrote: »

How did people answer q7 on non-delegation? Thought the other essays were difficult!

I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it

Lawwww2020

FEONE wrote: »

I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it

Phew thanks! Yeah me too just went through all those cases on the legislature

EmmaO94

iana2017 wrote: »

I referred to the mental health cases and prevention detention...&#55356;&#56375;*♀️&#55356;&#56350;

I did that too and talked about detention for the 'common good' which I said was applicable to the q, eeek

Fe179user

jus_me wrote: »

Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

Was this question not very similar to DPP v CC?

lawgrad49

Went into that paper with the plan of doing all three essays and oh how that changed! Think the problem questions were fair and you could pick out the issues okay but judicial immunity and ECHR is so left field, given all the other topics he omitted.

Very surprised he omitted Friends of the Irish Environment or even an essay on derived rights.

That paper probably just emphasises how broad a course it really is.

vkfe1

Company

Restriction --- La Moselle Clothing is this an absolute test whereby the director must satisfy all elements to be subject to a restriction order? Or just 1 of the elements?

FE1Nov20

FEONE wrote: »

I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it

Same here I said the minister power to enact the regulations was unconstitutional and breach of Art 15.2.1 but I don’t know if that’s right

fe12020oct

equity

just finished constitutional, any advice on what topics to cram for equity? super stressed

bluerthanu

vkfe1 wrote: »

Company

Restriction --- La Moselle Clothing is this an absolute test whereby the director must satisfy all elements to be subject to a restriction order? Or just 1 of the elements?

well, they’re just factors to be taken into account, so i guess neither? as in, a court would probably want to satisfy more than one. it’s at the discretion of the judge so wouldn’t need to satisfy them all.