Pretty much the same!!! Thought it was one of my better answers along with the literal interpretation question! My case notes seemed very short though!
I talked about Calelly, Kerins and O’Brien and then just babbled on with my opinion that while it could be considered encroachment, it was necessary to protect rights of individuals and ensure an effective remedy is made available where Oireachtas has failed to provide one. All in all, a lot of waffle
More or less the same… threw in the Zalewski and Damache cases on top of Kerins and O Brien and only mentioned Kelly and Burke cases! Feel a bit better now!
I talked about separation of powers, fears of judicial encroachment on oireachtas' decisions, the recent cases of Kerins and O'Brien, overall argument was that judicial review was a core component rather than a threat of democracy - wbu?
I was thinking the same! What did you talk about?
I think you probably would be okay going on the assumption it will come up as a problem Q with SP. maybe just have a couple big ones to be save like Monaghan Co Co and Rooney
Was q2 similar to the encroachment question in the November question?
Thought it was a fair paper! Got 5 done but I’m worried about the length of my answers. Got lucky with literal interpretation question and case note. Question with Wilma was mainly unconstitutionally obtained evidence I think? Did the judicial review question/elected members question (question 2) and the property question with Paul and the leaking pipe! Anyone do question 2 and what did you say?
EQUITY
does anyone think there is a point in learning mutual mistake for rectification? or would unilateral be sufficient?
Was Q1 mainly Property ?
I wouldn’t worry I think once you get 5 answered you have a very hug chance if passing even if you think you messed up !!
Looked at her right to religion and fair procedures.
What is the marker like? Royally screwed up 1 and the case notes were a disaster for me
Right to Fair procedures - she is proposed to be dismissed so must be given all documentation relating to dismissal, affordes oppurtunity to make submissions and also to be given reasons why decisions were made
Todays exam
How did we find constitutional? Could anyone say what was relevant in Barbab
I feel like the topics are nearly all straightforward enough when broken down but unfortunately case law heavy.
Just nervous as to what the examiner is after noting the high fail rate
The Tort examiner whilst probably not as generous as criminal or EU, isn't far behind. I completely messed up a question and pretty much said the opposite of what the cases and legislation actually say and I still somehow got 9 marks from that Q and passed overall.
CONTRACT,
My best advice is to put consumer protection or EU regs wherever possible. Even if just to say they wouldn't be applicable.
Like criminal, there is a mix of topics for every Q. (I remember being exhausted after sitting it as it does command a lot of thought and attention).
My tip:- even if not directly asked. If you've shown a problem, give a solution to it! I.e. I tried to give a remedy where it was suitable to do so.
Lol same! I had answered the other trespass to person question so just introduced Wilkinson v Downton and another similar case and then went into nervous shock 😒
I passed tort with three quite good answers, one somewhere in the middle and one quite poor I suppose.
Hi all,
Hoping everyone's exams are going well.
I'm sitting what will hopefully be my last FE1 on Thursday and will admit I'm very stressed about Contract.
If anyone has a copy of the paper from last sitting, or even an up to date grid including last sitting for contract, I would really appreciate it.
I've notes that I can share for literally everything else (used to pass all other exams except contract and company).
I do similar but I noticed that once it was joint with secret trust. However, secret trust appeared last sitting, so I'm not preparing it.
That's great to hear! Like you, I answered the intentional tort Q on professional negligence as well as trespass to the person when I should have just focused on trespass! One of my other answers was also pretty short. Fingers crossed!!!
Quite fair apparently. One person on here said that they answered a question on the completely wrong topic in a previous sitting and still managed to pass. I'm in the same boat as you though, worried I'll fail as I answered the intentional infliction of emotional suffering question on nervous shock.
Anyone know what the marker for Tort is like? Having flashbacks to my exam and hoping I manage to scrape a pass!!!
Good luck this morning!!! Hopefully we’ll get a good one!!!
... DPP v Doherty [2019]
Me too it will be a miracle if I pass, there’s just way too much that can be asked that it’s hard to know anything in detail
Does anyone know if the Constitutional marker is fair, or what his pass rate is? Sitting Constitutional this morning and very nervous.
Thanks a mill guys
does anyone have tips/tricks to get their exam over the line? Noting that the pass rate is so low, what is it she's looking for?
...
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e36a8bb75623ca4f597e404ef5139191.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1c2638d40c8423fc1a2b2b1a2a01a3b9.svg)
