amyeee wrote: » I reckon the March 14 question about the brick wall just requires a discussion of the elements of negligence e.g. duty of care, breach of the standard of care, causation. The stove and dolphin questions are headwreckers though, would love some clarity on these.
jenspondolik wrote: » I find the less I know the better I do cos I'm calmer in exam on account of the hopelessness
S12b wrote: » 1) essay on proportionality 2) that sovereignty essay on Pringle and Crotty 3) the article 45 essay 4) Fleming v Ireland, Maher v Minister for Agri, Murphy v AG, TD v Min for Education 5) to be honest, I'm still not 100% sure....seems to be an essay on deference 6) problem q on referendum law 7) problem q on right to fair procedure 8) really not sure....can anyone clarify....something to do with being charged under legislation that has been abolished and the governments response
jenspondolik wrote: » Lol I'm having a cup of tea now. Then getting stuck into negligence I don't know where to start three topics read only. I find the less I know the better I do cos I'm calmer in exam on account of the hopelessness
jenspondolik wrote: » And my grid says products liability for the stove seriously where to start. I'm not going near anymore exam papers
sunshine and showers wrote: » The stove question and brick wall question are both general negligence questions, no? For both you talk about duty of care; breach of duty and appropriate standard of care; causation and remoteness of damages. They're really broad in allowing you to answer the question pretty much however you want talking about the principles of negligence!
FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: » Hey could anyone tell me is it far to walk from the ibis to the redcow, I'm not from dublin and don't want to chance driving incase I take a wrong turn or get caught in traffic!
Arcturus2112 wrote: » Allow 20mins I would say. It's not that far really, just a little awkward in that you are crossing a couple of bridges. Also, forecast says rain for the morning, so I would suggest bringing an umbrella. Being soaked wet in the exam hall would be a particularly bad buzz..
FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: » Cheers for that! Hopefully my phone will take me right there! I have no umbrella, ahhhh!
Daryl Strawberry wrote: » Yet again, what a horrible paper that was..
missindigo123 wrote: » I think the dolphin case is public authority liability - you are asked to advise the council as to whether they owe any liability.. So just general negligence principles: Suing them because the platform wasn't organised very well - they owed a DOC - breached it, yes they noticed 1. Duty of care - yes, PA owes a DOC here because there is no public policy reasons not to recognise the DOC in this situation - PA are acting in relation to their everyday operational powers and not their discretionary decision making / statute powers (planning permission etc - public policy concerns and SOP prevent court getting involved etc - Beatty V Rent Tribunal) which make it harder to establish a DOC. 2. Standard of care owed - noticed the dolphin getting worse. So consider, probability, gravity, cost and social utility 3. Causation - they enticed the dolphin to come and stay, constructed the platform, even when animal became agitated, they didnt take any measures to increase safety. Reasonably foreseeable that damage would result here. 4. Damage - hand bitten
amyeee wrote: » Yeah, cheers, once I actually sat down to do this it appeared handy enough. I just hope I spot the general negligence question tomorrow (if there is one...) Another thing - anyone know if solicitors/barristers negligence comes up often? So tempted to stick to just medical...
missindigo123 wrote: » I don't have professional negligence done other than a sketch knowledge but I'm pretty sure that it's solicitors and barristers never really come up!! It's nearly always medical! I think!!
mirm wrote: » Q6 I did fraudulent/reckless trading wit a bit of failure to keep proper books and records and mentioned the loan to the director, I never mentioned restriction! Now I don't feel so positive
sunshine and showers wrote: » Could anyone give me a rundown of an answer to q.2 April 2014? The one with the tree. Is it infliction of emotional distress or trespass?
jenspondolik wrote: » You can just follow the sheep I'll be one of them.
sunshine and showers wrote: » Lol, Tort. Nope. Liability for fire, seriously?
Daryl Strawberry wrote: » Just lost my bag with my copy of the constitution in it Anyone know anywhere that sells them? everywhere I've tried has no copies because of the upcoming referendum
FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: » What a friggin joke! I've seriously lost heart after that exam! Liability for fire, wtf???? Can something say what the 8 topics were I dunno even know if I answered half of them on the correct topic, seriously considering of just packing it in and forgetting constitutional
missindigo123 wrote: » Horrible ugh!!! I think I got a question on negligence misstatement causation and no idea about the others!
