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!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

RandolphEsq

Equity tomorrow. What are people predicting/hoping for with injunctions. I would like some sort of essay on Campus Oil principles and deviation from them or an essay on Anton Piller, Marevas.

Find more posts tagged with

fe1 preparation

fe1's

Quick Links

Comments

dashdoll

So, I had something of a meltdown at 6 am this morning and decided I knew so little for Company and was so stressed out that I just gave up on it, stopped looking at my notes abd made a cup of tea, turned on the telly and said Id go in and just sign it and have it as a ghost subject. I have never done anything like this for an exam before.

I went in anyway and the paper was a very manageable paper...if you knew it. At least 2.5qs on directors. I attempted 5 questions...2 with bullet points and virtually no case law in any and left at 11. I know Iv obviousy failed it which Im ok with as I was so wound up this morning I still wouldnt have known the case law with another hour of study.

These are my first set of fe1s so obviously now I need to pass the other 3 that Im sitting. Im now terrified that I won't. I need to focus on my next 3 but I feel like I have a mental block or something like that with the exams and remembering case law.

Just feel like packing up and going home.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone that has been in a similar situation.

Hope everyone got on ok today.

vickyplumx

dashdoll wrote: »

So, I had something of a meltdown at 6 am this morning and decided I knew so little for Company and was so stressed out that I just gave up on it, stopped looking at my notes abd made a cup of tea, turned on the telly and said Id go in and just sign it and have it as a ghost subject. I have never done anything like this for an exam before.

I went in anyway and the paper was a very manageable paper...if you knew it. At least 2.5qs on directors. I attempted 5 questions...2 with bullet points and virtually no case law in any and left at 11. I know Iv obviousy failed it which Im ok with as I was so wound up this morning I still wouldnt have known the case law with another hour of study.

These are my first set of fe1s so obviously now I need to pass the other 3 that Im sitting. Im now terrified that I won't. I need to focus on my next 3 but I feel like I have a mental block or something like that with the exams and remembering case law.

Just feel like packing up and going home.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone that has been in a similar situation.

Hope everyone got on ok today.

Try and put it out of your head now. My first time too. Nearly had a meltdown in tort yesterday. Think I've failed it so just head down now for the next 3. Have you a bit of time between them?

LawCQ91

dashdoll wrote: »

So, I had something of a meltdown at 6 am this morning and decided I knew so little for Company and was so stressed out that I just gave up on it, stopped looking at my notes abd made a cup of tea, turned on the telly and said Id go in and just sign it and have it as a ghost subject. I have never done anything like this for an exam before.

I went in anyway and the paper was a very manageable paper...if you knew it. At least 2.5qs on directors. I attempted 5 questions...2 with bullet points and virtually no case law in any and left at 11. I know Iv obviousy failed it which Im ok with as I was so wound up this morning I still wouldnt have known the case law with another hour of study.

These are my first set of fe1s so obviously now I need to pass the other 3 that Im sitting. Im now terrified that I won't. I need to focus on my next 3 but I feel like I have a mental block or something like that with the exams and remembering case law.

Just feel like packing up and going home.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone that has been in a similar situation.

Hope everyone got on ok today.

Its normal to feel like this, those exams are hard, it's very physically and mentally draining.. Trust me, you are not the only one that feels like this..

I don't feel I am any good at giving advise.. I am bad at managing my emotions, since I started those exams I felt like i am constantly disappointed at myself, constant self doubt etc, I blamed myself for not working harder or started sooner etc . I usually a positive happy person! I just don't know why The FE1s just get better of me ! Anyways! That's a lot of rant , all I am saying is you are not the only one that feels like this, so please don't be too hard on yourself.

Just focus on your next three and think about what you can look forward to after the exams. You might surprise yourself.

as for case names just try and remember as much as you can

Mileyt

dashdoll wrote: »

So, I had something of a meltdown at 6 am this morning and decided I knew so little for Company and was so stressed out that I just gave up on it, stopped looking at my notes abd made a cup of tea, turned on the telly and said Id go in and just sign it and have it as a ghost subject. I have never done anything like this for an exam before.

I went in anyway and the paper was a very manageable paper...if you knew it. At least 2.5qs on directors. I attempted 5 questions...2 with bullet points and virtually no case law in any and left at 11. I know Iv obviousy failed it which Im ok with as I was so wound up this morning I still wouldnt have known the case law with another hour of study.

These are my first set of fe1s so obviously now I need to pass the other 3 that Im sitting. Im now terrified that I won't. I need to focus on my next 3 but I feel like I have a mental block or something like that with the exams and remembering case law.

Just feel like packing up and going home.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone that has been in a similar situation.

Hope everyone got on ok today.

Hi Dashdoll
I was in the exact same position. Went in saying il be signing it and leaving managed an attempt at 5. Was raging paper wash straightforward had I studied enough for it. My nxt exam is property on Thursday. What I'd suggest you do is take a two hour break refresh your mind. I'm going to bed!! Then going to study till tonight and get up at 7am and study withbreaks through the night but definitent give yourself a break. Property is much shorter and I think she is an ok marker too.

Midlecat

Mileyt wrote: »

Hi Dashdoll
I was in the exact same position. Went in saying il be signing it and leaving managed an attempt at 5. Was raging paper wash straightforward had I studied enough for it. My nxt exam is property on Thursday. What I'd suggest you do is take a two hour break refresh your mind. I'm going to bed!! Then going to study till tonight and get up at 7am and study withbreaks through the night but definitent give yourself a break. Property is much shorter and I think she is an ok marker too.

I'm the same. Bloody five marked off could do them all spent too long on first q again. Got three questions done in three hours though I could've done five. Bloody sickened at myself

laurenburne

so was question 7 disposition of company assets? Im so tired I dont know what just happend

kel.lynch

Can anybody let me know the distinction between Q8 and and Q3?? I did Q8 first then panicked when I saw Q3 that I has got myself all mixed up! I ended up throwing as much info on directors duties at both...

Midlecat

Mileyt wrote: »

Hi Dashdoll
I was in the exact same position. Went in saying il be signing it and leaving managed an attempt at 5. Was raging paper wash straightforward had I studied enough for it. My nxt exam is property on Thursday. What I'd suggest you do is take a two hour break refresh your mind. I'm going to bed!! Then going to study till tonight and get up at 7am and study withbreaks through the night but definitent give yourself a break. Property is much shorter and I think she is an ok marker too.

Property is definitely easier. Smaller and more predictable.

HeyTherePlease

kel.lynch wrote: »

Can anybody let me know the distinction between Q8 and and Q3?? I did Q8 first then panicked when I saw Q3 that I has got myself all mixed up! I ended up throwing as much info on directors duties at both...

Q3 was more about applying the common law duties to the facts, especially that of avoiding conflicts of interests.

Q8 was more along the realms of indentified directors not formally appointed and the consequences...

I answered both and there was a slight over lap but if you were specific enough in answering both questions there shouldn't be a problem!

Kildaregal

Quick q to anyone doing contract as I don't have the reports to check what she was looking for:
Q3 April 2014- would you say Grains ltd breached a condition of the contract? And transport ltd could seek damages of €2500 per day for the overdue days but not the higher hire few as the could not have been aware of this?
It's obviously not fundamental breach or repudiation breach..
I'm not sure about inserting the clause for a set amount if compo for breach in the future either if anyone knows? Thanks!

JCx

There's a reason I don't do postmortems.... Just realised I messed up question three... Whoops!

Bayley1

I nearly didn't make the exam, left greystones at 8am, crash on motorway only got to red cow at 9.20 - drive usually takes 30-40 mins

Paper was ok I thought. Disappointed there was nothing about shareholders though.

Spent too much time faffing around at beginning I ran out of time, last question was bullet points and 4th was bit of a rushed job too.

Riverp10

Very manageable paper for company I thought, apart from shareholders, everything was pretty par for the course

HeyTherePlease

JCx wrote: »

There's a reason I don't do postmortems.... Just realised I messed up question three... Whoops!

that's just my opinion, don't take it too seriously! There can be lots of different interpretations.

JCx

HeyTherePlease wrote: »

that's just my opinion, don't take it too seriously! There can be lots of different interpretations.

Well... I'm pretty sure writing about actual and ostensible authority and ultra vires from the perspective of corporate authority is wrong... Haha I started it... Felt a bit weird about it... Did another question and just went back and finished what I was saying anyway! Sure it'll give Courtney something refreshing to read amongst all the other q.3s!!

Riverp10

Youre getting confused between q2 and q3 - q3 was ultra vires, q2 was the directors duties one

Midlecat

Bayley1 wrote: »

I nearly didn't make the exam, left greystones at 8am, crash on motorway only got to red cow at 9.20 - drive usually takes 30-40 mins

Paper was ok I thought. Disappointed there was nothing about shareholders though.

Spent too much time faffing around at beginning I ran out of time, last question was bullet points and 4th was bit of a rushed job too.

Traffic was awful and Aircoach was late. I'm seriously worried about my habit of spending hour on first question I did that for criminal and passed with three qs and a bullet point and haven't learned from my mistakes. I just can't make myself move on.

On another note anyone got tips for contract. I havent touched it yet so any help appreciated.

HeyTherePlease

Riverp10 wrote: »

Youre getting confused between q2 and q3 - q3 was ultra vires, q2 was the directors duties one

my bad, sleep deprived!! sorry for worrying you!

makemecrazy

What did people conclude with question 7 today around the liquidator? Also how did people approach question 5 I didn't know anything about section 99 so I just wrote about the differences between floating and fixed charged do ye think that's worth any mark at all ?!;-/

Riverp10

makemecrazy wrote: »

What did people conclude with question 7 today around the liquidator? Also how did people approach question 5 I didn't know anything about section 99 so I just wrote about the differences between floating and fixed charged do ye think that's worth any mark at all ?!;-/

I wouldn't say so unfortunately. The question was specifically about retention of title clauses so fixed/floating charges weren't really applicable to a large extent

Cant help on q7, completely ignored it

laurenburne

question 7 was disposition of company assets.... I hope, fraudulent preferences and dispositions post winding up...also floating charges and connected person I think...not one of better questions

Bayley1

laurenburne wrote: »

question 7 was disposition of company assets.... I hope, fraudulent preferences and dispositions post winding up...also floating charges and connected person I think...not one of better questions

God I hope that's what it was

livelovelaugh

Just looking at contract papers here and my brain is numb!

In March 2012, Q8 was to discuss the relationship between consideration and undue influence. Where's the nexus?! I apologise in advance for what's likely to be a ridiculous question! If someone could give me a few lines about it, I would be really grateful!

Hope you're all powering on!

charliebabbitt

Hi,
Just wondering what the story is with a witness to a will being under 18. Is this allowed? Mentioned in April examiners reports as reference to "young people" Thanks

sunshine and showers

charliebabbitt wrote: »

Hi,
Just wondering what the story is with a witness to a will being under 18. Is this allowed? Mentioned in April examiners reports as reference to "young people" Thanks

It's part of the capacity requirements under Section 77 of the Succession Act, 1965 that a witness has to be 18, or if they're under 18 then married in order to be valid.

77.—(1) To be valid a will shall be made by a person who—

(a) has attained the age of eighteen years or is or has been married

vickyplumx

sunshine and showers wrote: »

It's part of the capacity requirements under Section 77 of the Succession Act, 1965 that a witness has to be 18, or if they're under 18 then married in order to be valid.

77.—(1) To be valid a will shall be made by a person who—

(a) has attained the age of eighteen years or is or has been married

I thought section 77 related to the testator only. ..... This part of the question troubled me too . Asked a solicitor and he Said that he doesn't think there is an age req for witnesses but that in practice it's advisable to use someone over 18. We could be wrong though and if anyone can point to a section I'd be grateful !

dashdoll

Hi guys,

Wondering if City/Independent tipped anything in particular for Property or anything that is unlikely this sitting?

Thanks.

sunshine and showers

vickyplumx wrote: »

I thought section 77 related to the testator only. ..... This part of the question troubled me too . Asked a solicitor and he Said that he doesn't think there is an age req for witnesses but that in practice it's advisable to use someone over 18. We could be wrong though and if anyone can point to a section I'd be grateful !

My mistake!got mixed up because there's an over 18 age requirement in England.

Edit:

I'm looking at the examiner's report for the April 2012 paper (question 2, that features "young people" as witnesses) and it says: There was also specific reference to the witnesses who should be over 18. I can't find the law to back that up, though and I've seen elsewhere online that the only requirement for a witness is that they are not blind.

CRM1

sunshine and showers wrote: »

My mistake!got mixed up because there's an over 18 age requirement in England.

Edit:

I'm looking at the examiner's report for the April 2012 paper (question 2, that features "young people" as witnesses) and it says: There was also specific reference to the witnesses who should be over 18. I can't find the law to back that up, though and I've seen elsewhere online that the only requirement for a witness is that they are not blind.

Don't get too caught up with it. I would have always assumed that a witness must be 18 or over based upon capacity. Capacity to enter a contract must be 18 so to be a witness to a legal transaction would more than likely be inferred to be also of legal capacity that is 18. Besides the converse of such if witness happens to be under 18 and does appear in a problem question, it can be argued that as a minor - legal capacity etc. unlikely but may be used to support a rebuttal of the presumption of due execution. Hope that helps.

CRM1

Bayley1 wrote: »

God I hope that's what it was

I did this question on this basis also. Disposition of assets after petition of winding up has occurred. Fraudulent preferential payments - re Fredericks inns. I thought it was a nice paper. I was expecting one like Aprils but all in all not too bad. I got four hopefully okay questions and a dodgey 5 th on the above. Here's hoping I've done enough. onto the next one!!