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

BigSprogs

Fe179user wrote: »

Was this question not very similar to DPP v CC?

Aye but DPP v CC was about sexual abuse where courts are more open to delay. This was an assault case so i outlined all the case law on delay in normal cases and delay in sexual abuse cases. Also noted case law where it says delay is less excusable in summary prosecutions - so if the assault is being tried summarily its less excusable than if it was being tried on indictment (eg if he was being charged with assault causing harm)

vkfe1

bluerthanu wrote: »

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.

Yes very true. Need to keep Courts discretion in mind. I have the case under defenses as per S819(2) so It could be argued that if the director didn't satisfy one of the elements then they may have a defense to the order?
I personally don't think it will come up but it's such a lovely topic that im using it as a back-up. Praying for an Essay!

feliznavidab

Hi guys,

Constitutional wasn't great but time to put it behind me now - what are people doing for company?

sim1yoyo

I read you can wear headphones in the exam, I'd like to wear them cause the neighbours dog is a ratty little all day barker but the only ones I have are over the ear headphones. Does anyone know if these are allowed?

NewFe1

My brother walked in during the exam thinking it was over and started asking me how it went, slightly concerned about that

Paraeagle

fe12020oct wrote: »

equity

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

Three questions should be comprised of injunctions and 2 types of trust. So injunctions, purpose trusts, resulting trusts, express trusts (and secret trusts perhaps) should be the priority in terms of cramming.

After that, it’s anyone’s guess. In addition to the above, I’m going with specific performance, rectification, tracing, trustees. Leaving out rescission and estoppel altogether because I don’t have time and praying because both came up in November, one or both will be left out this time.

lsheehaneire

Constitution
Delegated legislation essay question- what angle did people take?

Lealaw

bluerthanu wrote: »

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.

I have seen the 5 point test by Shanley J referred to as they "necessarily overlap" so not absolute. As mentioned they are discretionary and dependent of the facts of each case.

Fe1user5555

NewFe1 wrote: »

My brother walked in during the exam thinking it was over and started asking me how it went, slightly concerned about that

Same happened to me !

FE1s2021

lsheehaneire wrote: »

Constitution
Delegated legislation essay question- what angle did people take?

I just went through the delegated cases and role the court played - Cityview press leontajava laurentiu etc

Al1501

Is anyone else really over property? There's a new examiner this year, so who's to say if the usual questions are going to come up?

Lealaw

vkfe1 wrote: »

Yes very true. Need to keep Courts discretion in mind. I have the case under defenses as per S819(2) so It could be argued that if the director didn't satisfy one of the elements then they may have a defense to the order?
I personally don't think it will come up but it's such a lovely topic that im using it as a back-up. Praying for an Essay!

Might be wrong here but I think it is a test to judge behaviour. I wouldn't really have it as a defence per se. The defences are listed under s.819 (2) (a-c) a)honestly and responsibly (La Moselle could be discussed under this but in itself I don't think it is a defence), b)cooperated and c)just and equitable.

We may be making the same argument but this is just the way I have it set out in my head.

FE1s2021

ruby1998 wrote: »

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

I took the same approach as you with these questions - just didn't throw in habeas corpus on the disease one but did add in proportionality and right to travel lol

Coopie

Constitutional
I think it very unfair that Eoin didn’t ask questions relating to his talk.

I was in hospital with high blood pressure cos of stress over exams and there I was watching the lecture and writing frantically! @lousy

Ais20

Al1501 wrote: »

Is anyone else really over property? There's a new examiner this year, so who's to say if the usual questions are going to come up?

Oh god I didn’t know that!! I have co-ownership, succession, easements with findings, adverse possession and family property done praying that has me covered

BigSprogs

lsheehaneire wrote: »

Constitution
Delegated legislation essay question- what angle did people take?

Took a scattergun approach myself. Went with 3 main headings:

1.) What the Courts do when the legislation gives too much power - cases like McDaid, McGowan, John Grace, Laurentiu etc where the Court were basically like "oi lads don't give away too much power!" Clearly that's the Court trying to preserve non-delegation doctrine.
2.) What the Courts do when the Minister acts ultra vires - cases like Harvey, Cooke and partially Leontjava where the Courts were like "okay it's the ministers fault!" so theyre keeping alive notion of democratic parliament by not overruling Oireachtas and striking out legislation, instead just blaming it on the Minister.
3.) Pliant applications of the non-delegation doctrine - cases like Bederev (and even Cityview) where on the face of it, it seemed like too much power was delegated but the Court was like aaaahhhh it's grand. Basically talked about how this is an issue and one could argue judiciary aren't doing enough to prevent too much power being delegated.

That's what I made of it anyways. Didn't get time to summarise it so I hope it makes sense to the examiner and he knows what I was trying to say. Mainly I was just trying to make sure I kept referring back to the question.

ktvaljean

Anyone else mention NVH and PC in the non delegation one

FE1s2021

FE1Nov20 wrote: »

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

Me too! Although didn't manage to write a lot for my second case note.

bluerthanu

Lealaw wrote: »

Might be wrong here but I think it is a test to judge behaviour. I wouldn't really have it as a defence per se. The defences are listed under s.819 (2) (a-c) a)honestly and responsibly (La Moselle could be discussed under this but in itself I don't think it is a defence), b)cooperated and c)just and equitable.

We may be making the same argument but this is just the way I have it set out in my head.

i think the Moselle factors are used to determine honesty and responsibility (essentially the main factor for restriction), so i guess technically they are defences. but as you say, i think we’re all saying the same thing. law = semantics!

nmurphy1441

Al1501 wrote: »

Is anyone else really over property? There's a new examiner this year, so who's to say if the usual questions are going to come up?

I thought the old examiner was back for this sitting no??? There was a different one last sitting I think because the usual one was on maternity leave???

Al1501

Ais20 wrote: »

Oh god I didn’t know that!! I have co-ownership, succession, easements with findings, adverse possession and family property done praying that has me covered

Sorry, that should say "really worried over property". March 2020 had tonnes of multichoice, but much more limited in November, so I really don't know. The former examiner had really similar questions every year

jjjjjop

Paraeagle wrote: »

Three questions should be comprised of injunctions and 2 types of trust. So injunctions, purpose trusts, resulting trusts, express trusts (and secret trusts perhaps) should be the priority in terms of cramming.

After that, it’s anyone’s guess. In addition to the above, I’m going with specific performance, rectification, tracing, trustees. Leaving out rescission and estoppel altogether because I don’t have time and praying because both came up in November, one or both will be left out this time.

I was going to leave out express trust seeing as there was 2 qs on it in the last paper, do you think this is a mistake ?

Murphs122

EQUITY

Would anyone have an essay on Tracing?

TIA

law987

lsheehaneire wrote: »

Constitution
Delegated legislation essay question- what angle did people take?

I overthought it the part saying unelected officials and didn't include much case law about ministers then because they're elected, and then started talking about civil servants and NPHET running the show haha idk what he wanted

CMUL

So what were the 8 questions that came up for constitutional?

Iconic10

has this been anyone’s second time sitting constitutional ? my first but think i’ll be doing it again come oct sigh

Lightup1

Equity

Are people revising Milroy v Lord ??

FE1new

feliznavidab wrote: »

Hi guys,

Constitutional wasn't great but time to put it behind me now - what are people doing for company?

I'm hoping with this one to cover:

SLP
Directors Duties - 228 and 158
Restriction - 819
Corporate Borrowing
Crystallisation
Examinership
Winding up and distribution of assets
Foss v Harbottle and 212

If I can glance at 5 major changes by CA and Ultre Vires but I doubt I will get the time.

law987

So what were the 8 questions that came up for constitutional?

Approx

Essays:
- Judicial Independence
- Non-Delegation Doctrine
- ECHR

Case Note:
- Re Haughey
- Kerins
- ?

Problems
- Fair Procedures / Workplace disciplinary hearing
- Assault Charge brought 40 years later, undue delay, lack of witnesses due to Gardaí negligence
- Protest about Covid Restrictions, freedom of assembly

lawgrad49

law987 wrote: »

I overthought it the part saying unelected officials and didn't include much case law about ministers then because they're elected, and then started talking about civil servants and NPHET running the show haha idk what he wanted

I agree I found that off-putting as ministers are democratically elected like. The only parts where I could really engage with the question were cases like McGowan or John Grace as they were labour court officials so not elected. But that was like 3/4 lines! I waffled on about the P&P test in general