Kcookies2015 wrote: » Equity - Tips from independent were 1 Q on Strong v bird - note Donatia mortis causa - note PQ on undue influence Charitable & non charitable trusts - due to lack of knowledge in last sitting on cypres doctrine - possible exact question again Anton pillar order Q due & briefly learn quia timet injunctions PQ on specific performance involving contracts for service Resulting trusts - quistclose look at Essay on trusteeship Possible PQ on tracing I feel I'm still leaving out something that's sure to come up... Any other ideas of what to cover? Steam running out here big time
bivo87 wrote: » i think also in Shaw because a women's life was at risk and he had already admitted to raping and murdering another women, the fact that they detained him for longer than the search warrant allowed. it fell into one of the three exceptions as outlined in DPP v O'Brien (if someones life is in peril). In Kenny it was held that the test was reformulated from O'Brien and it was "whether the violation of the constitutional right was deliberate and conscious". While that was the reasoning for the decisions at the time in Kenny and Shaw, what Tired man said is right, JC changed the test to be wether the Guards knew, were reckless or grossly negligent as to the possible breach of the accused constitutional right. as far as i am aware, it remains to be seen how the courts will interpret the test in JC...
corkres1989 wrote: » I was told Mareva over anton pillar. Does anyone think I'm mad just doing Mareva, anton and quia timet??
makemecrazy wrote: » What are people covering for Equity? I am doing Charitable Specific Performance Rectification Estoppel Marvea and QT injunctions only Undue Influence Presumption of Ad Strong v Bird Can anyone add another 1 or 2 please?
makemecrazy wrote: » no but why are you doing Anton can I ask? that is so rare? I was just going to do Quia Timet and Mareva since the mandatory one came up in last sitting it won't again?
kiwi33 wrote: » What is this JC case you speak of? I dont seem to have it
lawgal wrote: » Can anyone tell me the topical cases in anton piller? Have there been some new cases lately?
HappySlappy123 wrote: » If someone could clarify the status of the three different bequests in Q.3 on charitable trusts and the cypres doctrine I'd be very grateful, really struggling to get my head around it. €2m was to be used by the executor in such manner as he sees fit to promote the playing of football in rural communities. €1m was to be used by the executor to ensure the provision of playing fields in his hometown. €100k bequeathed to his executor for the purpose of organising a campaign to promote the introduction of legislation criminalising certain conduct on the playing pitch. All contributions of wisdom greatly appreciated!
fe1girl wrote: » DPP v JC is a case from 2015 that was part of the fallout from DPP v Damache and the constitutionality of s29 of the OASA 1939 (as amended in 1976). The case effectively reformulated the exclusionary rule as it was in DPP v Kenny. Basically, the court said that unless there are extraordinary circumstances, the courts have the discretion to admit unconstitutionally obtained evidence. So, if there is a mistake on a warrant (like in the Curtin case where the search warrant had the wrong street name on it), then it may be admitted as evidence. But where there is no warrant in existence at all, or there was mala fides in obtaining the unconstitutionally obtained evidence, then the evidence won't be admitted.
Kcookies2015 wrote: » Ok so my take is its relating to the "beneficial to the community" and the public benefit requirements - S3(2) 2009 act - must be for public benefit S3(7) 2009 act - factors deciding if for public benefit or not S3(11) - sets out list of charitable purposes that are for benefit of community - gifts for sporting or recreational use according to Tobin are not recognised under this section Recent case - national tourism development authority v Coughlan (2009) - golf courses recreational so no charitable status given Cypres Doctrine- applied only in relation to charitable trusts whereby it has become impossible or impractical to apply the trust property to the the charitable purposes specified by doner if courts allow jurisdiction they will apply the trust as near as possible to the purposes set out by doner. S47 Charities Act 1961 - broadens circumstances in which court may exercise jurisdiction
kiwi33 wrote: » Sweet holy **** oscar I can't believe I didn't have that case! Just to double check though i thought curtin case was were the date in the warrant had expired and AG v O'Brien was the one with the wrong address. It probably isnt that big of a deal I just want to make sure i have my facts straight .
lawgal wrote: » Does anyone know cases for specific performance of personal services? Have the other instances of SP but don't seen to have for this? Thanks
Itchy Lot wrote: » No, but that sounds interesting - is there somewhere with more information on it? I have a feeling that this isn't going to be the last time that I have to learn off these particular set of cases....
Mileyt wrote: » Constitution case governer of x prison v PmcD ..there is nothing on Google on this case can anyone pretty please advise where to find? Or details on the right to die case thanks so much in advance!
CKonetheonlyone wrote: » Check it out, I'm sure you can buy it online- there is a simple but amazing little book called 'How to Pass Exams' written by world memory champion Dominik O'Brien. I would highly recommend it!
Tyler Durdenn wrote: » For Contract law, how important is having the legislation, and which sections are relevant to which areas of the course? It would be great if anyone could shed some light on this!
Kcookies2015 wrote: » Ok so up all night reading equity waffle has somewhat paid off in what I think was a reasonable paper... Q1 - rectification / specific performance relating to mistake in contract regarding property sale PQ Q2 - Mareva Essay on balancing rights of plaintiff & defendant Q3 - trustees PQ Q4 - principles of tracing Essay Q5 - will leaving all to charity & property deeds handed to niece - advise charity in relation to entitlement to property given to niece (I answered donatio mortis causa) but could be wrong due to lack of sleep Q6 - note on : doctrine of election, ecceptional categories non charitable purpose trusts will be enforced , strong v bird - Answer 2 Q7 - A - joint accounts B- presumption of advancement father to child Q8 - Cy-pres Doctrine - discuss when it is invoked
