vkfe1 wrote: » Fingers crossed for you this time - im sure you'll smash it.
Fe1user5555 wrote: » I came to the wrong outcome numerous times in various subjects in November and from looking at my scripts it doesn’t seem like I was deducted any marks!
fe1prep2021 wrote: » This might sound silly but does anybody find they have a lot of time to spare with these online exams when I would usually be running out of time during written exams? Or maybe I just don't know enough/am not writing enough... going out of my mind trying to guess did I do enough for each exam Ive sat now
Mc96 wrote: » In November I sat Equity, Contract and Property (passed them) and finished them all comfortably and felt I had a lot of time to sit and think out my answers. I've never sat a hand written FE1 to compare but in college hand written exams I used to be writing to the last second with barely a chance to think! The extra 30 mins and the fact we're typing gives extra time I've found
BBall2015 wrote: » Thank you so much, that's so reassuring to hear!! I gave the wrong outcome in the secret trusts q today in Equity and was then worried I'd lose half the marks and it'd bring me way below the 50!
flepetch wrote: » lads losing my head here for corporate borrowings is the case called Re JD Brian Limited or Re JD O'Brien limited? all my notes say different
Smiley283 wrote: » Would anyone be able to share Tort sample answers or even just the past exam papers from 2020? I can trade notes on any exam!
AA247 wrote: » Thanks for replying. Ok sorry still confused. So to cut it short the charge the applicant (Shaws) were looking to register late was created in 2003 or around that (not registered). Frank Bell validly registered a charge in 2013. Shaw's wanted the charge created in 2003 to be registered in priority to Frank's as it was created first and they argued he knew this etc. but court didn't agree to retrospectively register in priority of Frank's, but agreed to register from date of app which was 2014. Correct or not correct?
AA247 wrote: » Company Also if somebody could briefly explain conclusion in Cosslett's case please (Smith v Bridgend CoCo 2002). I don't get it, the examiner's case was dismissed but the floating charge was deemed void. How come then the Council weren't required to either pay rent or give the property back to the company in examinership? I seem to be reading these all wrong!
awsah wrote: » dont have sample answers for 2020 but here are the papers
fe1555 wrote: » Would anyone mind sharing what topics they are covering for tort? It is such a big course and I have property on tuesday so trying to balance my time without getting overwhelmed lol Also good luck to anyone sitting company tomorrow, it is a daunting subject but I personally found the examiner to be very fair!
54321zz wrote: » I think it's been said before but do people have an idea if receivership or examinership is more likely to come up tomorrow? If any. Don't have last paper so can't remember what was up last time. Thanks
NewFe1 wrote: » For the repetitive separate legal personality essay is it do a brief intro of salomon and then just go through the exceptions?
Fe123 wrote: » Can anyone tell me the most important part of restriction to learn. Drowning
