Legalseagull wrote: » Guys for anyone doing these exams for the first time can I make a suggestion...the most important this is to get 5 questions down! I'm repeating 2 exams because I fecked up my timing and only got 4 questions in each. A poor 5th would have got me the 50. It's a killer! To pass the exam you only need to get 50% in each question, but if you only do 4 questions you've got to get 60%+ in each (bad math?). I'm hoping not to make the same mistake this time around!
Legalseagull wrote: » Second that - the tutor in Independent suggested ignoring ROT's. Definitely worth learning the rest as a fixed/floating charge problem question would be dead simple. Even if you just knew how to recognise them, and then just the Woolcomber's case and Siebe Gorma, Spectrum and Keenan Bros for Book Debts. That's 4 cases, a quick read through, and possibly an extra question in the bank!
Christy_C wrote: » Well that was very tough ! Felt like walking out at the start of the exam when I first read the questions. Calmed down a bit then and re read the questions. Managed to answer 5 questions anyway so I'm just hoping beyond believe that I put down enough information to get the magic 50!!
XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: » I very nearly walked out too. Got one good question but the rest were disasters. It's like he knew what I studied and picked everything else!!
Christy_C wrote: » Yes, it felt like he purposely tried to catch me out and teach me a lesson haha! I did the questions on General Negligence, nuisance, limitation of damages, defective products. I was positive enough going in but jeez that quickly dissipated once I saw the exam questions! Era nothing we can do now only focus on the next exam!
Bertie1986 wrote: » Very tricky paper I thought. Did anyone attempt question 8 and if so what issues/area did you deal with? I wrote about trespass to the person and liability for actions of third parties but on reading it now I'm thinking employers liability should have been mentioned?? Thanks
MJW5 wrote: » What did everyone do for question 3? Was it Vicarious Liability or Employer's Liability?
Lawexe2012 wrote: » Vicarious and trespass to the person infliction of emotional suffering
MJW5 wrote: » Since when does he mix topics though?!
Lawexe2012 wrote: » Question 1 and 3 what do you guys think the topics were?
oraghabd wrote: » Vicarious liability? But there was no 3rd party. I only did trespass to the person - infliction...
Christy_C wrote: » For question one on focused on duty of care and standard of care. Question 3 as I said above causation, factual and legal.
FEar1 wrote: » Ditto that. Animals, trespass, vicarious all go amiss again! Felt like he didn't change a massive amount from topics in March sitting, did he? Managed to scrape together 5 questions anyway so feck it, onto Company! Thank god ye agree that ROT clauses unlikely again. Didn't like the look of it at all. Rest of corporate borrowing is fair enough to follow. What do people reckon for shares question? Share transfer maybe?
Lawexe2012 wrote: » For question one I focused on how parents and carers can be liable for acts of a child Sullivan v creed Curley v mannion?
bivo87 wrote: » so you think focus on fixed/floating charge and book debts? i don't have the last exam but not sure, but i cant see a question on ultra vires if its abolished in the new act? i'm doing corporate borrowing seperate legal personality advant/disad of incorporation/section 25 contracts ostensible authority restriction directors realisation of corporate assets share transfers and oppression meetings Leaving out fraudulent trading/liquitation/examinership/receiver and capital maintenance
