I’m still hoping somebody can make it available on this soon…
From what I remember…
Case Note
Zalewski Case
Property & Locus standi
Non Delegation Doctrine
Freedom of Expression/Assembly
Right to life/refuse medical treatment/capacity/personal rights
Cant remember the last two!!!
Does anybody recall the questions on the constitutional law paper?
I'm sure everyone got the email anyways but "provisionally" week of 16th May for results!
I did the same and only sat two, felt swamped for the last 3 weeks before the papers. I'm sitting 3 in October and I'm staring in the 3rd week of July this time.
Can anybody that sat constitutional in person send me on a copy of the exam please?
When will everyone start to prep for the autumn sittings? I only started in January to sit 4 in March and I felt really short on time. What’s a good timeframe to do another 4? :)
Be doing well to have them by the June bank holiday weekend I’d say!!!
Any word on when results will be out?
Thanks. I thought it was one of the more ambiguous questions of recent years. Likewise, I needed the reassurance.
I know a guy that passed with four questions so hopefully luck will prevail.
Thanks for the assurance haha really need it
I think you’ll get something for it alright. Realistically if you got the locus standi part of the question correct and talked about non delegation correctly, you could get 8+ plus I think personally!
Thanks for that. The first thing I thought of was principles and policies which is disappointing. Does anybody know how the marking scheme for constitutional law operates? Are you likely to get no marks, or will the marker be generous and give marks for writing on a relevant but adjacent topic?
It had a part to play in it but property rights ultimately would have given the correct answer! Their profits were the property and the 25% would have been an excessive levy resulting in an unjust attack on property their property rights given it was on just once small section of society…
Was the non-delegation doctrine really the wrong answer for the climate change q?
I’d imagine you’d get some marks for talking about non delegation too! It was relevant to the question I think along with property rights and an unjust attack on them… don’t be too worried! Just think of it as one aspect you didn’t talk about!
Oh fu**.
I answered it as non delegation, thought it looked similar to Cityview v ANCO. I got five questions down well, guess it’s 4 now.
Ffs. Praying I pass with what I got.
That they didn't have any based on CIF v DCC and FIE and Mohan didn't help them.
What did you say about their locus standi???
yeah.
The profits are considered as property so?
There was no delegation on this question. That was dealt with in the other question of NECI and McGowan essay. This was property rights.
Ok paper!!!! Case notes were lovely! Zalewski question was good, EPA one was ok except for the excessive levy which threw me a bit. Freedom of expression and association was nice too and ended up doing the question involving Paul which was ok and a bit rushed on my part! So here’s hoping 🤞🏻
It was an okay paper I thought?? I think for constitutional, as long as you can answer 5 and make it as relevant as possible to the question, you’re golden. And I honestly wasn’t expecting to be able to so that 😂 So happy days.
Congrats to all- pints for dinner 🍻
What was the question on the personal injury claim? I answered with fair procedure & locus standi, but I've a feeling that was wrong :(
You gave me a heart attack there!
Apologies, yes I mean non-delegation of art 15
I was thinking the same and trying to figure it out but didn’t mention anything about it been excessive. If you figure it out, let me know if you don’t mind!
Omg I did no delegation for that question
On constitutional exam, for question 3, the Climate Act 2022 Levy, am I correct in assuming it was SOP under article 15 and possibility of the levy amounting to penalty/liability if execissve?
I used, SOP Art 15 - some aspects of judicial power - presumption of constitutionality and locus standi. Would that be correct in peoples view - or should due process have been discussed?
