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

Daryl Strawberry

Very worried about constitutional, just seems like so much potential for a nightmare paper

LawCQ91

HI guys, just had a look of some of the EU competition Q and I am badly stuck on these,
any help will be grateful! seriously worrying that I couldn't get my head around some of the questions

In relation to EU competition law

Q7(a) - April 2014

(ii)

can anyone tell me what is the position for the dentists?
I understand that if they are employees they are not liable under Art101.
but what is the position if they are members of this organisation?

Q8 Oct 12

i) does the introduction of new timetable in effect constitute as abuse under the 'refusal to supply' head?
But here it did not stop supplying?

ii) I actually have no idea how to go about this part?
can someone share their thoughts on this?

:'(

smeal

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Very worried about constitutional, just seems like so much potential for a nightmare paper

Couldn't agree with this more. When I was doing notes up and watching the lectures I was really into it and could really find myself grasping the ideologies behind each chapter but now that I'm trying to 'study' my notes the scope of it is just huuuuge.. Trying not to look at past papers too much though.. don't want to get bogged down trying to decipher all those cryptic problem questions! will just see what gets thrown to me on the day and hopefully something clicks!! that's the best you can do really!

smeal

Anyone else suddenly realising that they've pretty much needed to cover the entire criminal manual?! Questions overlap everywhere! Is there anything that can be left out?!

jenspondolik

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Very worried about constitutional, just seems like so much potential for a nightmare paper

I am the exact same, I have notes written and I am trying to look at them here and its just not going in. Im scared about this one-nothing learned and havent even looked at learning Tort or Company. I have EU manual read and no notes but six days to study after Const.

What's worrying me is I have a relatively recent manual and it has no important new cases just all the old ones, it has a paragraph on duty to give reasons, doesnt mention Pringle, Mallack etc and coupled with that it is all over the place in terms of its wording as if its been periodically copy and pasted over the years.

Ive notes done so the next week is literally trying to learn off Company Tort and Const.

I will be covering the below with 2 full days to do it and the night before as Ive to start the others;

SOP
JR
Findings of Unconst
Fair Procedures
Right to Livelihood
Right to Property
Freedom of Speech
Family
Equality
Art 38.1 Due Course

Im going to leave the rest, is the above possible?

j80ezgvc3p92xu

Im leaving out offences against the state, seems to never come up. I thought I would leave out perjury and contempt as well but I have seen it popping up in the exam papers.

Daryl Strawberry

Similar to the above, I'm working off 2013 manuals, so I'm failry sure I'm missing out on some mjaor case/topics that the examiner will deem particularly relevant this year

southcounty

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Very worried about constitutional, just seems like so much potential for a nightmare paper

Don't worry, October was a horrendous paper none if the banker topics came up like right to fair procedures etc so ye are due a nice paper. A lot of the small topics came up last year like freedom of expression and religion so ye are in a much better position. Also you don't need new cases for these exams, unless your going for 80% you just need to make a point and a case to back it up and you'll pass.

Arcturus2112

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Confused by Independent property manual. Are the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows and s6 of the Conveyancing Act 1881 abolished or still in force?

It talks about them like they're still in force, but De Londras is talking about their replacements. She doesn't have the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011 in this edition, though.

Wheeldon v Burrows is abolished under 2009 Act (s.40) and replaced by a more stringent test.

As for s.6 of 1881 Act, I think it continues in respect of full easements but quasi easements under s.6(2) are no longer recognised (s.71 of 2009 Act).

sunshine and showers

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

Wheeldon v Burrows is abolished under 2009 Act (s.40) and replaced by a more stringent test.

As for s.6 of 1881 Act, I think it continues in respect of full easements but quasi easements under s.6(2) are no longer recognised (s.71 of 2009 Act).

Thanks, that's what I thought. It's just the manual makes it sound like the new sections of the LCLRA are on hold until 2021 too.

Arcturus2112

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Thanks, that's what I thought. It's just the manual makes it sound like the new sections of the LCLRA are on hold until 2021 too.

You're right, there is something to that, but I said I wouldn't inflict it on myself!

TinkledPink

smeal wrote: »

Anyone else suddenly realising that they've pretty much needed to cover the entire criminal manual?! Questions overlap everywhere! Is there anything that can be left out?!

Nobody I know likes the last part about Procedure, Bail, the Courts etc. I'm not touching it so I've decided to just drop whatever it might come up with.

vickyplumx

TinkledPink wrote: »

Nobody I know likes the last part about Procedure, Bail, the Courts etc. I'm not touching it so I've decided to just drop whatever it might come up with.

Leaving out courts and bail but doing detention and arrest etc... also leaving out offences against the state but that's about it. there's a lot of overlap. any banker qs? Sexual offences? Homicide ...that about it?

May92

Could anyone tell me what the topics 'Findings of Unconstitutionality', and 'Principles of Judicial Review' are in constitutional?

The manual I'm working from doesn't mention them so I presume they're under a different title or something?

jenspondolik

May92 wrote: »

Could anyone tell me what the topics 'Findings of Unconstitutionality', and 'Principles of Judicial Review' are in constitutional?

The manual I'm working from doesn't mention them so I presume they're under a different title or something?

The findings of unconstitutionality is the effects of uncostitutionality mine deals mostly with effective dates and retrospectivity and severence.

Judicial review the main topics within it is locus standing, justicability and mootness your manual might have it separately.

To be honest mine isnt great it also has another CH called principles of fundamental rights and judicial review which deals with proportionality. It should probably be together to get an idea of the interplay between the lot.

Shan89

Hi does anyone have or know anyone with a student edition of the companies act available?

May92

jenspondolik wrote: »

The findings of unconstitutionality is the effects of uncostitutionality mine deals mostly with effective dates and retrospectivity and severence.

Judicial review the main topics within it is locus standing, justicability and mootness your manual might have it separately.

To be honest mine isnt great it also has another CH called principles of fundamental rights and judicial review which deals with proportionality. It should probably be together to get an idea of the interplay between the lot.

Oh ok thanks! I have Judicial Review covered then, but I havn't come across the effects of unconstitutionality in my manual at all...does it come up often?

jenspondolik

May92 wrote: »

Oh ok thanks! I have Judicial Review covered then, but I havn't come across the effects of unconstitutionality in my manual at all...does it come up often?

I think it was q4 last April if I recall but I stand to be corrected. Also I think in Q8 Oct 14 was retrospectivity and maybe some blasphemy

FEar1

Just about ready to start learning for my first exam which is Equity. I'm wondering whether a few others sitting it have any ideas of what's due. I'm guessing Specific Performance and Mareva injunctions look likely and 3 certainties and Trusteeship come up fairly regularly. I've also covered Constructive Trusts, Secret Trusts, Interlocutory Injunctions, Rectification, and Proprietary Estoppel.

Do people reckon there's anything else worth covering to be sure to be covered?

Daryl Strawberry

FEar1 wrote: »

Just about ready to start learning for my first exam which is Equity. I'm wondering whether a few others sitting it have any ideas of what's due. I'm guessing Specific Performance and Mareva injunctions look likely and 3 certainties and Trusteeship come up fairly regularly. I've also covered Constructive Trusts, Secret Trusts, Interlocutory Injunctions, Rectification, and Proprietary Estoppel.

Do people reckon there's anything else worth covering to be sure to be covered?

Great username!

maya_bb

Hi,

Regarding Constitutional:

Just wondering if anyone has an up-to-date summary of the decision in Callely v Moylan? Specifically regarding 1) Good Name 2) Fair Procedure and 3) Power of Ct to review Seanad.

Thanks!

missindigo123

In Tort, - the extent a statutory obligation gives rise to a tort action for breach of duty?

Should I say something along the lines of,
Tort law increasingly being codified in legislation - advantages for Plaintiff include don't have to prove reasonable foreseeability in negligence, dont have to prove fault etc.
Guidance principles: Is the action being taken in respect of the class of persons the statute was designed to protect / is the person part of the group of ppl the statute was designed to protect / special remedies adequate?

Or should I talk specifically about certain legislation such as the Occupiers Liability? So confused!!!

Dsalmon91

I am just wondering what is the procedure like for handing in legislative sources for the exam to be checked. For instance my first exam is Criminal which takes place next Tuesday and I am sitting Company law the following day, if i were to hand in my Companies Act on Tuesday morning to be checked over would that be enough time to get it back for the following day's exam?

sunshine and showers

Dsalmon91 wrote: »

I am just wondering what is the procedure like for handing in legislative sources for the exam to be checked. For instance my first exam is Criminal which takes place next Tuesday and I am sitting Company law the following day, if i were to hand in my Companies Act on Tuesday morning to be checked over would that be enough time to get it back for the following day's exam?

Yep, that's how it works. It'll be waiting on your desk for you. You can hand it in the morning of the exam if you're totally stuck, but it'll be after 10 before you get it back.

dashdoll

Looking at company at the moment. Can anyone help me out with this?

Im a little confused between questions relating to corporate authority and corporate capacity.

Am I right in saying that a qs on corporate authority involves discussing actual and ostebsible authority while something on corporate capacity means talking about the objects clause and ultra vires?

Thanks.

Arcturus2112

dashdoll wrote: »

Looking at company at the moment. Can anyone help me out with this?

Im a little confused between questions relating to corporate authority and corporate capacity.

Am I right in saying that a qs on corporate authority involves discussing actual and ostebsible authority while something on corporate capacity means talking about the objects clause and ultra vires?

Thanks.

Yes, that's my understanding of it. In the last sitting it was an essay question on capacity - I recall writing both actual/ostensible authority stuff as well as the objects clauses stuff. The former probably didn't do me any favours in terms of getting marks, though thankfully I was ok in the end.

genuinely55

dashdoll wrote: »

Looking at company at the moment. Can anyone help me out with this?

Im a little confused between questions relating to corporate authority and corporate capacity.

Am I right in saying that a qs on corporate authority involves discussing actual and ostebsible authority while something on corporate capacity means talking about the objects clause and ultra vires?

Thanks.

Yes your understanding is spot on

Unleashed

Hey, tort paper from September/August just gone, was the general consensus on que 8 that it was vicarious liability? And for the question regarding the horse, what were they looking for there? If anyone could clarify that would be class. :-)

maya_bb

Hey - I'm a bit confused looking at company, can anyone clarify the difference between agency and single economic entity when lifting the veil of incorporation? They just seem like the same thing to me. But I know the Fyffes case distinguished between the two - I just can't seem to grasp the distinction.

Thanks!

p.s. also, if anyone might be able to share past papers (and if poss sample answers, examiners reports) from 2014 or 2013 for company, tort, constitutional and EU I'd be forever grateful. I have loads from the previous years but they all stop at around 2011 and I'd like to double check that they haven't changed much/ that I can identify the issues in the recent papers. I'd be happy to share anything I can help with in return. Cheers!

jenspondolik

What's everyone covering for tort or does anyone have tips? Need to get most of it done today