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

laurenburne

I seriously feel like the walls are closing in on me....haven't even looked at sexual offences, complicity, incohate offences, criminal damage, The defences..... I feel like I know NOTHING!!! so sad

Midlecat

Hope criminal turns out OK. Has anyone got any directions on constitution I just getting stuck in from scratch today..:(

vickyplumx

Equity. Question 6 April 2014. What topic does this question relate to? Can't pinpoint it

add727

vickyplumx wrote: »

Equity. Question 6 April 2014. What topic does this question relate to? Can't pinpoint it

Strong v Bird? I'm not sure though...

Midlecat

vickyplumx wrote: »

Equity. Question 6 April 2014. What topic does this question relate to? Can't pinpoint it

Exam report says part a was application of strong v bird and part b caused difficulty as students not aware that Patrick could be appointed administrator in the circumstances outlined in part b and thus some case law has recognised the rule applies equally in some circumstances

vickyplumx

Thanks so much ! I thought strong v bird but then confused myself !

dashdoll

These exams are killing me.

For some reason, Im having a total meltdown the night before each one. Couldnt sleep at all last night and was too anxious to even read my notes. Then went in today and was beating myself up....fml.

laurenburne

what did people think of the criminal paper? not feeling great after it.... forgot forgery and got a bit overwhelmed trying to cover everything in the complicity prob q

Midlecat

dashdoll wrote: »

These exams are killing me.

For some reason, Im having a total meltdown the night before each one. Couldnt sleep at all last night and was too anxious to even read my notes. Then went in today and was beating myself up....fml.

At the risk of sounding patronising they probably went better than you think. I know I failed this time only because I didnt put the work in and went abroad two weeks before the exams. I know in comparison to last time how bad these went and last time was v bad- this is your first sitting, they were always going to be horrible so don't beat yourself up.

When you finish your last one, go out and treat yourself. I did that in March I got my hair done to cheer me up, its not the end of the world they are exams, which unlike college you can do again without it messing up you final grade, albeit it's expensive.

I had a meltdown last week and didn't do a contract question I could do as I just couldn't face it, something in all my life I've never done. These exams have been built up to something massive and if we adhere to the hype it will consume us, they are exams and we can do them again

I realised that over the weekend.

What is your next one?

kel.lynch

What were people's thoughts on the question with the 4 guys robbing Lawrence's house and their liability?

laurenburne

kel.lynch wrote: »

What were people's thoughts on the question with the 4 guys robbing Lawrence's house and their liability?

conspiracy, common design, accessorial liability under s.7 of the 2007 act, burglary s.12, possibly aggravated burglary s.13, assault, murder, causation, false imprisonment.... There was A LOT in that question

kel.lynch

laurenburne wrote: »

conspiracy, common design, accessorial liability under s.7 of the 2007 act, burglary s.12, possibly aggravated burglary s.13, assault, murder, causation, false imprisonment.... There was A LOT in that question

Missed a couple of issues there but happy enough I think. Mentioned secondary participation for the guy that chickened out too...

Jarndyce

laurenburne wrote: »

conspiracy, common design, accessorial liability under s.7 of the 2007 act, burglary s.12, possibly aggravated burglary s.13, assault, murder, causation, false imprisonment.... There was A LOT in that question

All of the above except for the addition of theft and possibly robbery, as well as the addition of manslaughter in place of murder, which I don't think could have been a runner?

HeyTherePlease

Jarndyce wrote: »

All of the above except for the addition of theft and possibly robbery, as well as the addition of manslaughter in place of murder, which I don't think could have been a runner?

I also mentioned that Shane could be liable under the Road Traffic Acts as he drove away at 'high speed'

71fe1

HeyTherePlease wrote: »

I also mentioned that Shane could be liable under the Road Traffic Acts as he drove away at 'high speed'

Aw can't believe I forgot that! Had the rest an all!!

Mileyt

Who's doing what for EU law, disaster . Is the law study card revision enough to study at least ud know a bit about everything if even only a bit

Bayley1

I'm not really sure how that went. I answered 5 but they were a bit wishy washy. Only ones I'm sure of was Conspiracy one and sexual offences. My other three were a bit all over the place.

Daryl Strawberry

laurenburne wrote: »

conspiracy, common design, accessorial liability under s.7 of the 2007 act, burglary s.12, possibly aggravated burglary s.13, assault, murder, causation, false imprisonment.... There was A LOT in that question

How did you have time to mention all of that?? I spent too long outlining common deisgn and novus actus i think. Only wrote a few lines on each of their liability at the end

Daryl Strawberry

Also, would not recommend glancing at sample answers after, so rough!

kel.lynch

HeyTherePlease wrote: »

I also mentioned that Shane could be liable under the Road Traffic Acts as he drove away at 'high speed'

That's awesome - totally didn't think of that. You might get a mention in the examiner reports!!

kel.lynch

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Also, would not recommend glancing at sample answers after, so rough!

Are these sample answers for the exams this week?? Not sure if I want to know where I can see these....

Daryl Strawberry

kel.lynch wrote: »

Are these sample answers for the exams this week?? Not sure if I want to know where I can see these....

No, sample answers from similar questions in past years

kel.lynch

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

No, sample answers from similar questions in past years

I think it would be best for me to avoid those!! Onwards to EU I go....!

Midlecat

Am I right in thinking last papers in constitutional have had nothing on protection of life in pregnancy bill/act or anything re savita case?

Similarly nothing re Marie fleming?

My manual has nothing re Pringle, McGowan, fried chicken cases so I'm afraid its too outdated. Anyone passed before on just manual?

Legal125

Midlecat wrote: »

Am I right in thinking last papers in constitutional have had nothing on protection of life in pregnancy bill/act or anything re savita case?

Similarly nothing re Marie fleming?

My manual has nothing re Pringle, McGowan, fried chicken cases so I'm afraid its too outdated. Anyone passed before on just manual?

You are right there was no q on them so it may be due but equally the areas aren't that large so maybe that's why they haven't been up and he prob knows people are preempting them.

Savita case jut raise the abortion issue and led to the act wasn't really imp from a constitutional case perspective.

Not sure on manual. I'm using it and own notes and hoping for an ok paper! Best of luck!!!

Midlecat

Legal125 wrote: »

You are right there was no q on them so it may be due but equally the areas aren't that large so maybe that's why they haven't been up and he prob knows people are preempting them.

Savita case jut raise the abortion issue and led to the act wasn't really imp from a constitutional case perspective.

Not sure on manual. I'm using it and own notes and hoping for an ok paper! Best of luck!!!

Thanks a mil. I'm just starting today last minute decision to do it so no harm in chancing it I might get lucky. Best of luck to you too!!

Legal125

Midlecat wrote: »

Thanks a mil. I'm just starting today last minute decision to do it so no harm in chancing it I might get lucky. Best of luck to you too!!

Yeah if u cover a few bulk areas u never know sure.
I'm trying not to let it overwhelm me.
Just have to keep the faith. Thanks!

JCx

Equity is meant to be one of the easier exams???? Why am I so overwhelmed then? Nothing's going right!

Midlecat

JCx wrote: »

Equity is meant to be one of the easier exams???? Why am I so overwhelmed then? Nothing's going right!

Stick with it I think its nicer than contract. Its one of the ones that feels awful but I think issues are easier to identify in exam situation on the day. A lot you have probably done for contract already so definitely cover those again. Undue influence estoppel and remedies should be quick enough. Injuctions is guaranteed so def cover that though its so massive.

JCx

Midlecat wrote: »

Stick with it I think its nicer than contract. Its one of the ones that feels awful but I think issues are easier to identify in exam situation on the day. A lot you have probably done for contract already so definitely cover those again. Undue influence estoppel and remedies should be quick enough. Injuctions is guaranteed so def cover that though its so massive.

I've rectification, recission, proprietary estoppel, trustees and tracing done..... Injunctions and any of the trusts have me in a spin. It's the sheer volume I think. Is anyone focusing on certain trusts only?