JCx wrote: » Equity is meant to be one of the easier exams???? Why am I so overwhelmed then? Nothing's going right!
Legal125 wrote: » Easier in terms of the Qs only as in they repeat themselves - but I def felt that too. It's overwhelming in content. But it can so be done!!
Mileyt wrote: » I feel the same Jx especially when this only half the battle, then it's getting a corporate traineeship or paying 16,000 Euro yourself if in small firm Anybody out there doing eu law tomorrow???? If so, what you covering
JCx wrote: » I just have to flip the mentality back! I've spent the last two days wondering if this is really what I want to do. It's not a great rite of passage and its hard to see out the other side of qualification at times I think.
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 My manual has nothing re Pringle, McGowan, fried chicken cases so I'm afraid its too outdated.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?
MJW5 wrote: » Did they mention if expression, privacy, family or equality definitely need to be covered?
sunshine and showers wrote: » I've a note from independent on the Pringle decision, so would say it's one to know! They also tipped abortion as a possible question.
Mileyt wrote: » Hi all, could anyone tell me is it frowned upon tojust turn up for exam but not sit it obviously writing something if I know aanything. I think people refer to it as ghost exam do law society penalise you for it. I actually couldn't answer anything on today's paper due to unforeseen circumstance so just going to turn up sign and leave
dashdoll wrote: » Hi guys, Good luck to everyone sitting EU tomorrow. Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on Equity. Im thinking of covering the following but not sure if its enough: Specific Performance Rectification Undue Influence Estoppel 3 certainties Strong v Bird Purpose Trusts Trusteeship Tracing With regards to injunctions I know a question is virtually guaranteed but its such a vast area so I dont think its really worth spending all the time it would take to cover it all for one qs so thinking of just covering Mareva and Departure from Campus Oil principles as it hasnt come up in a few years. Any thoughts on this? Dont want to cut it too fine!
Bertie1986 wrote: » I'm not an expert by any means, but if you're cutting injunctions it might be worth looking at the 11 "topics for careful revision" from City Colleges. They don't mention rectification or estoppel, so it might be worth swopping those two for resulting and constructive trusts? Even if you don't you're covering quite a bit above and will probably be fine. I know grind schools don't always get it right so just a thought. INJUNCTIONS: Does anyone know what came up in the last sitting/ what may be likely in this sitting? Mareva??
dashdoll wrote: » Thanks for that. I did a revision course with Independent and the only topics they really tipped for the exam were Donatia Mortis Causa and possibly an essay on situations were the cts will depart from the Campus Oil principles! Who knows!
saor19 wrote: » Thanks for sharing those tips! Would you mind telling me what topic pringle is under? I think my brain is melting!
sunshine and showers wrote: » National sovereignty and findings of unconstitutionality, I should think. It was in a similar vein to Crotty, in asking if a referendum was needed for the European Bailout Fund and related ESM Treaty. Two case notes:http://humanrights.ie/international-lawinternational-human-rights/pringle-v-ireland/http://www.bloomsburyprofessionalonline.com/applib/newsitem/216/case-summary-pringle-v-government-of-ireland-and-others-
Midlecat wrote: » Also relevant re separation of powers the executive powers. SCT affirmed decision to refuse challenge to esm on grounds that the government had not abdicated its power as the executive organ of the state. So kond of contradicts crotty I think..
sunshine and showers wrote: » I don't think it contradicts Crotty. I think the difference is that Crotty concerned a treaty that involved giving up a degree of sovereignty, but Pringle didn't.
OJ4 wrote: » hey guys im studying injunctions atm and jst wondering should i leave out thw stuff on perpetual....does it ever come up...theres like 2.5 pages on it in the griffith manual thanks
Midlecat wrote: » Hey guys. Is it possible to not sit an exam which you are registered for? There is no issue with not signing in - just forfeiting the fee? The exam rules are silent. I want to know if it will affect me doing the remaining ones. I know you have to sign in for first four but what if you've passed first set...
Legal125 wrote: » I don't think there is. And if u got a doctors cert u could poss recoup the fee. But I'm not 100%.
Midlecat wrote: » Thanks Im not too bothered with the fee. Was nuts to think I could do Constitutional in two days from scratch-just don't want to travel up to sign in. I might email law socs to be sure.
