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

Katniss1998

FE1new wrote: »

Guys whats the take on getting case names wrong like Harrison instead of Harris? If not sure are you better not to chance it? Sorry the cases are all blurring together in my brain

I don't think that would be too bad but if unsure, then mention some of the facts of the case so that they know what you are talking about!

Law101

Contract

Is anyone not doing remedies such as damages, mitigating loses etc? I can't fit anymore in my brain. It's literally jumble at this stage -so I'm going to bed.

kayleee123

Law101 wrote: »

Contract

Is anyone not doing remedies such as damages, mitigating loses etc? I can't fit anymore in my brain. It's literally jumble at this stage -so I'm going to bed.

Jesus I would definitely try and have a quick read over it tomorrow morning if you can it might come in at the end of a PQ would be a handy few extra marks!

fe1fi20

anyone else overwhelmed by easements? think i'm going to leave it out - tips for mortgages please and what to focus on

Ais20

Would yous say penalty clause basic knowledge would suffice just incase it came up in a problem question, just because it came up as q8(b) in Nov 2020 so can’t imagine it coming up as a full essay again?

ruby1998

Can anyone clarify this for me - does the Marriage Act 2015 essentially mean that the protections under the Family Home Protection Act 1976 extend to same-sex couples who are married? - probably a stupid question

Law101

Ais20 wrote: »

Would yous say penalty clause basic knowledge would suffice just incase it came up in a problem question, just because it came up as q8(b) in Nov 2020 so can’t imagine it coming up as a full essay again?

Yeah I was thinking maybe mitigating losses or remoteness might come up as a essay

Katniss1998

ruby1998 wrote: »

Can anyone clarify this for me - does the Marriage Act 2015 essentially mean that the protections under the Family Home Protection Act 1976 extend to same-sex couples who are married? - probably a stupid question

Short answer is yes!

Law101

kayleee123 wrote: »

Jesus I would definitely try and have a quick read over it tomorrow morning if you can it might come in at the end of a PQ would be a handy few extra marks!

Dam it I didn’t want to hear that - but you’re right lol. I’ll have a look over :-)

AA21

Law101 wrote: »

Yeah I was thinking maybe mitigating losses or remoteness might come up as a essay

Oh wow really?

FE1new

So I've studied everything bar:

EU section for Consumer Protection
Illegal contracts and void contracts
Capacity
Discharge of a contract.

Do you think these can be left?

awsah

kayleee123 wrote: »

Jesus I would definitely try and have a quick read over it tomorrow morning if you can it might come in at the end of a PQ would be a handy few extra marks!

remidies has shown up every year I would definitely try and have a look over it to at least be able to add to a PQ if necessary

legallyginger

Is role of executor important for succession could anybody tell me? Two pages in my manual but don't want to learn unnecessarily

awsah

Law101 wrote: »

Yeah I was thinking maybe mitigating losses or remoteness might come up as a essay

ok I am starting to panic now as dont recall either of these topics in my notes, what chapter are they in!

Pnaic over, I went over it first thing this morning, clearly don't remember any of it now though!

Law101

AA21 wrote: »

Oh wow really?

I just there going through the past questions, some sort of damages essay comes up and penalties clauses were up in November. Just a thought.. hence I was panicking a bit there. I could be way off though.

AA21

awsah wrote: »

ok I am starting to panic now as dont recall either of these topics in my notes, what chapter are they in!

Remedies

Ais20

awsah wrote: »

ok I am starting to panic now as dont recall either of these topics in my notes, what chapter are they in!

They’re in the remedies part under damages:)

FE1new

awsah wrote: »

ok I am starting to panic now as dont recall either of these topics in my notes, what chapter are they in!

They are part of remedies, specifically damages. Remoteness is the Victoria Laundry case and Mitigating loss is where a person has to take reasonable steps Cullen v Horgan and Dundalk Racing v Hyland.

awsah

thanks everyone, sorry for the panic, I thought they were full chapters or something, my brain is tired!

P.O.POLLY

fe1fi20 wrote: »

anyone else overwhelmed by easements? think i'm going to leave it out - tips for mortgages please and what to focus on

Yes it's confusing but apparently easements by prescription is what everyone is guessing will come up. Law changing on that area in Nov 2021 so it's topical and similar idea to adverse poss. (People guessed similar topical topics in other exams which didn't come up) but it might be no harm to look at that part of easements in particular

awsah

FE1new wrote: »

They are part of remedies, specifically damages. Remoteness is the Victoria Laundry case and Mitigating loss is where a person has to take reasonable steps Cullen v Horgan and Dundalk Racing v Hyland.

would you mind telling me what the dundalk racing v hyland case says, it is not in my notes, I do have other cases though but this is obviously an irish case?

ruby1998

legallyginger wrote: »

Is role of executor important for succession could anybody tell me? Two pages in my manual but don't want to learn unnecessarily

Leaving it out personally can't see where it has come up but could be wrong!

FE1new

awsah wrote: »

would you mind telling me what the dundalk racing v hyland case says, it is not in my notes, I do have other cases though but this is obviously an irish case?

No problem. Here is what I have.

Dundalk Racing v Hyland 2017
The Court of Appeal has issued significant guidance on a plaintiff’s duty to mitigate his losses. A plaintiff who refuses a reasonable offer which would have the effect of avoiding unnecessary losses proceeds at considerable risk. This is especially so where the offer does not require him to forego rights claimed arising from the breach. Such a plaintiff may be refused damages he might otherwise be awarded. Significantly, however, the Court of Appeal also vacated the awards of damages. It did so because the bookmakers could have avoided the loss of profits they claimed. The principle applied is that a plaintiff cannot recover loss that could have been avoided had he acted reasonably. The plaintiff has a duty to take “all reasonable steps” to minimise his loss. What is reasonable in any case is a question of fact, though the standard by which the plaintiff is judged is not unduly harsh; the court should be pragmatic because it is the defendant, as wrongdoer, who put the plaintiff in that difficult position. So, for example, if the plaintiff has two reasonable ways of mitigating loss, the plaintiff is not unreasonable if it later transpires that the loss would have been less had he chosen the other option.
However, the obligation to mitigate loss may require the plaintiff to enter into a contract (even under protest) with the party who the plaintiff says was in breach of the earlier contract.

awsah

FE1new wrote: »

No problem. Here is what I have.

Dundalk Racing v Hyland 2017

thank you so much, it is really apprecaited!

Fe1user5555

Could anyone tell me the absolute must know areas for remedies? Running out of time thank you

nmurphy1441

legallyginger wrote: »

Is role of executor important for succession could anybody tell me? Two pages in my manual but don't want to learn unnecessarily

Won’t be doing it either! Only slightly unusual thing I’ve noticed was a beneficiary in a will attesting to it too!

FE1new

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Could anyone tell me the absolute must know areas for remedies? Running out of time thank you

Damages:
Hadly v Baxendle test
Expectation loss - what you expect the losses to be
Speculative loss - what you speculated the losses to be
Reliance loss - if you relied on the contract and expended money
Recitification loss - one party can't gain a benefit
Damages for emotional duress
Mitigating factors
Penal clause and liquidated damages

Recisssion is usually for Misrepresentation.

AA21

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Could anyone tell me the absolute must know areas for remedies? Running out of time thank you

Damages, mitigation of damages and remoteness

legallyginger

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Won’t be doing it either! Only slightly unusual thing I’ve noticed was a beneficiary in a will attesting to it too!

thanks! Find the topic so broad and not even learnt off yet, I'll skip what I can!

T2020

Would anyone happen to have condensed notes on Citizenship for EU?