mydogwentroof wrote: » Was the question on delayed prosecution for assault altered by thr fact thatbhe had been convicted already??? Like most the cases i had were about pre-trial prohibition not appeal??
caius97 wrote: » Hope these are useful!
nmurphy1441 wrote: » I’d throw in trespass the person and damages personally!!!
Smiley283 wrote: » Hi there, would anyone be able to send me an up-to-date tort grid? And it would really help me out if you could share your notes on; vicarious liablity professional negligence? I have passed all the other fe-1 exams so can trade notes and sample answers!
nmurphy1441 wrote: » I noticed that too! I’m basing my choice between receivership and examinership on which didn’t come up most recently so that’s why I’m going with examinership. A crystallisation question would be nice too though!
awsah wrote: » Actually I just read that szabo held that the campus oil principles were not of application but that was because he felt there was something distasteful in balancing the convenience of the defendant being able to carry on his business against the alleged health risks to the plaintiffs He did hold that of he had applied the test he would have refused the injunction anyway as plantiffs had not established a serious issue to be tried
Lealaw wrote: » Surely something would be due up on corporate borrowing, it didn't appear in November. I have my fingers crossed for that. Also city colleges NBN said likely receivership but examinership is due a turn so one or other of them.
flepetch wrote: » has anybody ever paid for an exam and not sat it? do you get a refund and pay again for the next sitting or is it a deferral sort of situation? i'm really struggling mentally and dont think i can handle sitting tort next week along with the other exams i'm doing. would i be better off just sitting it and giving it a go than trying to get a refund from LS? i hear it can take months
fLawless123 wrote: » Is anybody else not able to see Equity and the other subjects on the calendar on Betterexaminations?
nmurphy1441 wrote: » My own personal predictions would be PQ on DD and PQ on Directors Loans, PQ on examinership and PQ on liquidation in some form. Essays then would be Ultra Vires, Reform of CA, Foss v Harbottle and SLP(holding companies & subsidiaries)! Long shot I know!!!
examsfe12021 wrote: » perfect thanks a mill !!!
awsah wrote: » campus oil is only used for interlocutory inunctions so depending on the question you could discuss campus Oil in the context of interlocutory quia timet only
ruby1998 wrote: » Anyone want to hazard a guess at company predictions? I don't think I can study tonight Constitutional has ruined me
Al1501 wrote: » I've just gone back over my exam grid and past papers. Mortgages usually comes up as either a problem or essay asking how a bank may enforce security. Neither it nor co-ownership were on the November paper,. Given how consistent the paper normally is topic wise, if the usual examiner is back, would I be mad to say that succession, adverse possession, co-ownership, and mortgages would probably cover someone for property?
examsfe12021 wrote: » could someone clarify for me in a quia timet question do we use the campus oil principles?? thank u !!!
jjjjjop wrote: » Thank you for this Would anyone have a notes on strong v bird? im in dire need haha
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
nmurphy1441 wrote: » If I’m right!!! Heard that on this a few days ago!!!
Al1501 wrote: » I found these articles on it helpful as well.https://www.irishlegal.com/article/georgina-wallace-let-there-be-lighthttps://www.childandchild.co.uk/legal-guides/party-walls-rights-of-light-and-boundary-disputes/rights-to-light-an-outline-guide/ And here's Dennings' full quote from Phipps and Pears: “Suppose you have a fine view from your house. You have enjoyed the view for many years. It adds greatly to the value of your house. But if your neighbour chooses to despoil it, by building up and blocking it, you have no redress. There is no such right known to the law as a right to a prospect or view.”
Mc96 wrote: » Question 8 - it's a long PQ about a farm and inheritance
jjjjjop wrote: » Oh god which q was it?? i have the paper thanks so much but didnt even notice it as a q, oh god im well and truely screwed
Mc96 wrote: » Estoppel came up as a problem question in November, I can send you the paper if that would be helpful
