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

RCFE15

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Does anyone want to help me prioritise my list for today. I know that I'm not going to get it all done so I'm trying to organise it by importance instead of my current system of least amount of pages in the manual!

I already have Finding, Succession, Adverse Possession and Registration done so these are what's left for me:
Co-Ownership
Heriditaments
Family Property
Licences
Mortgages
Tenancies

Or if you reckon I should do a different topic instead I can take suggestions! :-)

When you mention finding, do you mean finding treasure trove.my manual is 2010/2011...I hope property law hasn't changed that much?

jenspondolik

EU is a mess of mumbo jumbo in my head. Starting goods now and I can't separate anything in my head. EU was one of my best subjects but its been a ages since I did it I'd say it'll be a repeat.

MissM89

jenspondolik wrote: »

EU is a mess of mumbo jumbo in my head. Starting goods now and I can't separate anything in my head. EU was one of my best subjects but its been a ages since I did it I'd say it'll be a repeat.

I was just about to ask if anyone else is finding EU to be an absolute impassable monster of a subject - there is just so much to every part of it. I have been at it for almost 5 whole days now and I am more confused than ever - how am I going to pass this exam?!:(

maya_bb

MissM89 wrote: »

I was just about to ask if anyone else is finding EU to be an absolute impassable monster of a subject - there is just so much to every part of it. I have been at it for almost 5 whole days now and I am more confused than ever - how am I going to pass this exam?!:(

I feel exactly the same way - it's like I'm looking at it for the very first time and nothing seems to be going in. Not to mention how long each chapter is taking me! AAAh

Do you or jespondlik have recent past papers/ sample answers for it? I think I need to look at the questions to try and unjumble it all in my head.

XxMCRxBabyxX

RCFE15 wrote: »

When you mention finding, do you mean finding treasure trove.my manual is 2010/2011...I hope property law hasn't changed that much?

Yea that's what I mean. My manual had treasure trove as a part of the bigger subject of finding

jenspondolik

maya_bb wrote: »

I feel exactly the same way - it's like I'm looking at it for the very first time and nothing seems to be going in. Not to mention how long each chapter is taking me! AAAh

Do you or jespondlik have recent past papers/ sample answers for it? I think I need to look at the questions to try and unjumble it all in my head.

No just old ones 2010. Ive looked at one or two and they confuse things even more badly written and repeating paragraphs coupled with inserting negatives accidentally where they shouldn't be etc so I'm not even going near any prep school qs I'll be lucky to get basics done.

What I'm going to do tomorrow in hotel is use my old Carolan EU book (pre lisbon) to clear it up in my head for the freedoms my manual is beyond shocking.

At this stage I'll be lucky to have

Institutions
Sources
Principles
Impact and ms liability
Judicial review
Freedoms ex capital
Citizenship.
Going to try cover Pringle Microsoft and zambrano cases morning of maybe.

Leaving the rest and ca cest la

I'm only at stage where its read once so will be 'learning' tomorriw

Legaleagle1991

One thing I can't get my head around is being a joint tenant at law but a TIC in equity. In such cases I take it that survivorship doesn't apply. I don't understand the implication of this really. Any help would be appreciated.

maya_bb

jenspondolik wrote: »

No just old ones 2010. Ive looked at one or two and they confuse things even more badly written and repeating paragraphs coupled with inserting negatives accidentally where they shouldn't be etc so I'm not even going near any prep school qs I'll be lucky to get basics done.

What I'm going to do tomorrow in hotel is use my old Carolan EU book (pre lisbon) to clear it up in my head for the freedoms my manual is beyond shocking.

At this stage I'll be lucky to have

Institutions
Sources
Principles
Impact and ms liability
Judicial review
Freedoms ex capital
Citizenship.
Going to try cover Pringle Microsoft and zambrano cases morning of maybe.

Leaving the rest and ca cest la

I'm only at stage where its read once so will be 'learning' tomorriw

Okay thanks anyway, sometimes the sample answers aren't great anyway like you said. Ditto with the manuals. That's pretty much my list too except with the addition of equality.

Francophone90

I'm leaving out licences - there were two full questions on it in the last paper.

Given its a relatively small course I'm hoping that topics which didn't appear last time will crop up i.e. family and co-ownership

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Does anyone want to help me prioritise my list for today. I know that I'm not going to get it all done so I'm trying to organise it by importance instead of my current system of least amount of pages in the manual!

I already have Finding, Succession, Adverse Possession and Registration done so these are what's left for me:
Co-Ownership
Heriditaments
Family Property
Licences
Mortgages
Tenancies

Or if you reckon I should do a different topic instead I can take suggestions! :-)

Bayley1

Tomorrow is my last of five but you'd think I was finished already, ive no motivation.

jenspondolik

Argh indistinctly applicable meqrs

:(:(:(

genuinely55

I don't suppose the kind soul who posted a few days ago about the EU case note question and how often each case has appeared over the years could repost? I can't find it. Thanks a mill

sunshine and showers

genuinely55 wrote: »

I don't suppose the kind soul who posted a few days ago about the EU case note question and how often each case has appeared over the years could repost? I can't find it. Thanks a mill

Here you go.

EthanSS

Guys, could anyone here help me get my head around Prescription in Easements. If somebody could summarize it succinctly in 3 0r 4 sentences that would be absolutely fantastic.

I sat Property last time and did 4 good question. My 5th (Easements) was hugely ropey and i ended up getting 47. I would hate for history to repeat itself tomorrow so any help with Prescription would be massively appreciated.

Thanks.

dashdoll

Would anyone be able to explain the findings and difference between Re Urqhart and Keegab v Dwyer?

My notes are really crap on s111. I know its quite simple but I cant get my head around it.

My understanding is that in Re Urqhart it was held that there needs to be a positive act or election to avail of the LRS if there is a gift in a will but it doesnt specify if its in satisfaction of the LRS.

Keegan v Dwyer- LRS is protected by law and automatically vests in the surviving spouse..no action needed to trigger the release.

Is this wrong?

XxMCRxBabyxX

In KvD there was no gift to give so the wife was legally entitled to her legal right share and could inherit it whereas in Urquhart the husband had been given a gift but it depended on him surviving a month after the wife. Because he was unable to choose between the gift or his share (y'know, being in a coma and all) he had to take the gift and so didn't get anything in the end because he didn't fulfill the requirements of the gift.

I think that's it anyway. Make any sense?

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't read your post properly before answering. Yea, what you have there seems to be the basic principles of the cases.

Arcturus2112

dashdoll wrote: »

Would anyone be able to explain the findings and difference between Re Urqhart and Keegab v Dwyer?

My notes are really crap on s111. I know its quite simple but I cant get my head around it.

My understanding is that in Re Urqhart it was held that there needs to be a positive act or election to avail of the LRS if there is a gift in a will but it doesnt specify if its in satisfaction of the LRS.

Keegan v Dwyer- LRS is protected by law and automatically vests in the surviving spouse..no action needed to trigger the release.

Is this wrong?

My understanding is that the legal right share vests automatically, Dwyer v Keegan (it did not matter that she was in a coma). Effect of s. 114 is that where a gift is made in the will to surviving spouse it will be deemed to have been intended in satisfaction of legal right share - if it is stated that it is to be in addition to the LRS, surviving spouse receives both. In the case of the former, the surviving spouse has a right of election under s.115 to choose the gift or the LRS. Re Urquhart is authority for the point that if the surviving spouse does not exercise the right of election (remains passive) he/she will receive the gift under the will, even if this is relatively insignificant in value.

lawbear

EthanSS wrote: »

Guys, could anyone here help me get my head around Prescription in Easements. If somebody could summarize it succinctly in 3 0r 4 sentences that would be absolutely fantastic.

I sat Property last time and did 4 good question. My 5th (Easements) was hugely ropey and i ended up getting 47. I would hate for history to repeat itself tomorrow so any help with Prescription would be massively appreciated.

Thanks.

Hey from what I can remember of prescription it is a right to an easement that you acquire from long user… I used to think of it like adverse possession for easements.

lawbear

out of curiosity has anyone ever passed a paper by answering just 4 questions or 3decent questions and 2dodge?

FEar1

Legaleagle1991 wrote: »

One thing I can't get my head around is being a joint tenant at law but a TIC in equity. In such cases I take it that survivorship doesn't apply. I don't understand the implication of this really. Any help would be appreciated.

Basically, if one co-owner dies when they are JTs at law but TICS in equity, the survivor takes the whole interest in the property at law BUT in equity he holds the deceased co-owner's share on trust for the deceased co-owners successors. So, right of survivorship is pretty much gone in effect yeah!

Hope that helps, its only the way I understand it anyway.

FEar1

EthanSS wrote: »

Guys, could anyone here help me get my head around Prescription in Easements. If somebody could summarize it succinctly in 3 0r 4 sentences that would be absolutely fantastic.

I sat Property last time and did 4 good question. My 5th (Easements) was hugely ropey and i ended up getting 47. I would hate for history to repeat itself tomorrow so any help with Prescription would be massively appreciated.

Thanks.

All the old law is basically gone now and its all under the Land Law and COnveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 I think. S35 or thereabouts as far as I know? I think the only points of relevance are a grant of easement is presumed where:
-easement held "as of right" and "without interruption" for period of 12 years, 30 years if State property or 60 years if foreshore. Same requisite periods as adverse possession.

"As of right" = use and enjoyment of easement without force, secrecy or written consent
"without interruption" = no interference with or cessation of use and enjoyment of easement for continuous period of 1 year or more

Hope that helps!

FEar1

FEar1 wrote: »

All the old law is basically gone now and its all under the Land Law and COnveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 I think. S35 or thereabouts as far as I know? I think the only points of relevance are a grant of easement is presumed where:
-easement held "as of right" and "without interruption" for period of 12 years, 30 years if State property or 60 years if foreshore. Same requisite periods as adverse possession.

"As of right" = use and enjoyment of easement without force, secrecy or written consent
"without interruption" = no interference with or cessation of use and enjoyment of easement for continuous period of 1 year or more

Hope that helps!

Sorry *any consent, not just written.

Exhausted.

Claregal11

Is it necessary to know donatio morta cause? trying to cut down to the bare minimum at this stage!

EthanSS

FEar1, so fo I not need to know the old law then and the old Prescription Act etc? Cheers.

sunshine and showers

Is it possible to leave out mortgages and landlord/tenant law if I have *almost* everything else done?

FeDespair

EU Question...

If you were gambling people which of the Institutions would you do?

XxMCRxBabyxX

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Is it possible to leave out mortgages and landlord/tenant law if I have *almost* everything else done?

I'm leaving them both out and hoping for the best. They're far too big

dashdoll

My god I am so tired and have soooo much to do..looking like an all nighter.

Been on a go slow the last few days. All I want to do is crawl into bed but I cant! Just one more night!

EthanSS

I feel your pain Dashdoll. These exams require so much night-before cramming!! I've loads to do as well. hate that I've so much left to do. I NEVER EVER learn my lesson.

FeDespair

If these exams have taught me anything it's this...

The ones im really "prepared" for have gone absolutely t!ts up. Last one is EU which I can honestly say as of right now I know nothing about. And I dont really even care anymore!

Friday evening im going to buy a magazine...I havent read anything apart from these books since January!