sorchauna wrote: » I understand where you are coming from with the masters and too much detail. I was the same! But since most the paper is problem questions, the easiest way to approach these exams is remember your asked to advise a client. Who is a lay person. Therefore they don't need to much detail (also in the sense that you imagine they would not understand the complexity of the area), just the sections of legislation that affect them if there is one, the cases that are in their favour, any grey areas that might go against them and in the end your conclusion and if you think have a case or have a defence. Its 35mins per question. Yes you will know so much more than you will ever get the chance to write down but get the important parts in and your fine.
sorchauna wrote: » Separation of powers, fundamental rights, due process, livelihood and property, fair procedure are a must. Then work your way until you run out of time. The institutions in some form can come up but that's three chapters to cover. Constitutional interpretation quick enough to learn and can be an a nice question but I don't think it comes up as often. Things like equality and proportionality are good ones to know as they can be used in a few areas. Then you have lessor ones people cover like freedom of expression, religion, good name and free speech.
Amre17 wrote: » Hi all.. Are there any areas in constitutional that you could possibly leave out / What areas do people consider to be essential?
chops018 wrote: » Haha, I think everyone in the room had the same collective feeling of "WTF is this paper!?". I don't know how I passed it!
CRM1 wrote: » Hi eggbert0707. I am in the exact same position as you, in saying that I completely agree with everything that chops018 has said. I think my approach was way too detailed for what is needed and I think I have my masters to blame for that. The answers can't be too theoretical as we just don't have the time. So I'm starting from scratch again with a new approach basically what has been said above. Brief summaries, caselaw and "get it drilled into the brain". I haven't taken a course maybe it would have helped in my approach. But don't think that the previous five weeks have been wasted, view it as putting down a good base. I'm sitting five in Oct, Tort, Constitutional, Property, Equity and Contract. In saying that I have had a complete block the last two days, but new approach today!!
sorchauna wrote: » I did it last sitting and it was the one I dreaded most, when in fact I sat worse papers (I'll never forget that EU paper last sitting).
chops018 wrote: » I wouldn't leave anything out lads. That can be very dangerous. Well, leave very little out anyway. The topics that rarely come up and maybe one or two that didn't come up last sitting. Anyway, I found when doing Const that if you have a decent knowledge of all the rights i.e. the enumerated, enumerated, personal rights etc. Then you are in a good position. Along with that be able to see if there is a balance struck with the right being affected and the state's right to limit that person's right. Know proportionality inside out. Also I found separation of powers can be brought into a lot more questions than you think. The other topics you will see how and what way they are asked, from what I remember there is only really 3 or 4 pure types of questions on SOP, and the first few topics are handy enough too. It's really just having a decent knowledge of all the rights and knowing how to tackle them in a problem question. Finally don't be afraid to use the actual Constitution and it's sections where needed. It can gain you a few marks here and there, especially if you're stuck. Edit: EC is a tough, and odd, examiner. His paper last sitting was relatively 'easy' (to me anyway) compared to his other papers. He likes up to date stuff, and generally goes with what is topical. Be wary of that. Have an idea of his top ten cases from this year. They usually feature in some shape or form.
noseriously wrote: » Hey, I'm sitting Company for the first time this Oct, just wondering if there's any point buying the Companies Acts? I've always brought in whatever legislation was allowed for the others but I'm wondering if it's actually worth it, I'm already broke from exam fees!
Lawstudent007 wrote: » Constitution is a lot and I don't think I will cover everything in depth. Might only focus on the most important topics and read over the not so relevant stuff!
rocksch2 wrote: » Does anyone have an up to date Constitutional or EU Grids? I have Grids for all 8 but they only go up to 2010. Also have passed the other 6 so could answer questions/give advice in return?
CRM1 wrote: » How is everyone finding Tort and Constitutional??
eggbert0707 wrote: » Thanks for the quick response Chops018. I'm going to try make some short summaries of just case names and such now. Hopefully that won't take me up to exam time! As regards the past exam questions, it seems like the manuals very much tailor themselves according to past questions e.g. including semi-obscure cases from which the facts of the exam question are taken. Then, to me, it seems that almost everything in the manuals is very much necessary. I'm just finding it quite difficult to separate the REAL need-to-know stuff from the rest. Is it possible to leave out such cases and still retain a mediocre standard of answer by just outlining general principles and pivotal cases and applying them to the question even if your finished argument is kind of half-baked without the judges reasoning from the 'identical facts case'? Sorry for going on and bothering you. Thanks again for the help.
chops018 wrote: » I wrote this a while back on this thread, so I'll put it up again. I never understand why anyone make so much notes of the manuals. Anyway.. Have a look at the past questions on the topics, you will see there is only so many different types they ask (well, usually anyway). Personally I wouldn't cut out any topic, or if I did it would be very few and it would only be the ones from the grid which rarely or never come up. Try cut it down by looking at the usual areas they focus on in the different topics by looking at the sample answers or past questions, instead of cutting out whole topics. Yeah, read over your notes or manual, make quick 5 min summaries at the end - no more than 2 or 3 pages in my opinion, with just the main cases and principals or points of law. Go over a few sample answers or look at past questions if you don't have sample answers, don't sit down and write out 6 pages of an answer by yourself, or pages upon pages of notes which is basically copying the manual or book.... yes, while it is productive, it is very time consuming. Surely 2 hours per topic then move on. You can always go back to a topic, and you will be surprised what you remembered when you go back to it. Coming up to the exams then try skim through and just remember important things like case names, points of law and legislation. Jot down very short and quick notes, test yourself if you have time - in that see what case names etc you remember from a topic. There is absolutely no need to be going off summing up a chapter in the manual or a set of notes, it is too time consuming basically re-writing topics, or trying to write out your own 5/6 page answer. As I said you will remember the main parts of a topic from 2 or 3 reads or the gist at least , it is just the case names etc that you need to get get drilled into the brain.
Milkypops wrote: » can anyone what kinda question came up under the topic of directors in the march sitting of company (ie q on types of directors, common law/equitable duties, ) cheers
eggbert0707 wrote: » Hi all, I plan on sitting Criminal, Contract, Equity and Constitutional in October. At this point Constitutional is really just a formality so I'm concentrating on the first three. Although I've been making notes from manuals for the past 5 weeks or so I'm still completely at a loss as to how to approach the study. I would very much appreciate it if someone could send me some sample answers just to get an idea of the kind of detail required for the exams. After spending so much time making notes I've realised that now even my notes are too bulky for any meaningful study. Can't help but think I've been wasting my time. Thanks.
C2012 wrote: » Hey, ya i sent mine off the week beforehand and got a letter confirming they received my application and that they'd send out another letter two weeks before exams...If you paid by cheque, it might help to check if it was lodged yet in the bank:)
