Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

1156157159161162200

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 23 Amanda226


    Does penalty clauses ever come up in problem questions or is it usually as essay? Thanks


  • Registered Users Posts: 32 laurar2019


    what are the qs that arise from remdies in Contract law in general ? :) help a gal out x-0


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    laurar2019 wrote: »
    what are the qs that arise from remdies in Contract law in general ? :) help a gal out x-0

    This is stressing me too! I saw people saying an essay on specific performance but can’t see it in any of the papers back to 2015 and have like no notes on it! I feel damages is the only one I’ve seen come up - remoteness types etc


  • Registered Users Posts: 354 ✭✭Wonderstruck


    This is stressing me too! I saw people saying an essay on specific performance but can’t see it in any of the papers back to 2015 and have like no notes on it! I feel damages is the only one I’ve seen come up - remoteness types etc

    SP as an essay came up in April 2014 (the essay was whem is it an appropriate remedy)


  • Registered Users Posts: 8 ErinLP44


    Equity- specific performance is predicted to come up on the paper seemingly. Does anyone have any recent cases on specific performance that are essential to include also I am getting very confused with he distinction between contracts for services and contracts of services. Anyone care to explain??


  • Registered Users Posts: 36 Charles OCK


    ErinLP44 wrote: »
    Equity- specific performance is predicted to come up on the paper seemingly. Does anyone have any recent cases on specific performance that are essential to include also I am getting very confused with he distinction between contracts for services and contracts of services. Anyone care to explain??

    I dont have any recent cases other than the ones provided in my manual.

    Do you know if contracts requiring supervision fall under the provision of personal services or are they a separate concept?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8 ErinLP44


    this is what I am confused about

    according to my notes I would say that contracts requiring supervision come into this category
    mine say:

    contracts for service- are those that require constant supervision
    contracts of service - typical employment contracts (ie compelling someone to work for you if specific performance is granted)

    and both of these presumably fall under the title of personal services. Im just a bit confused about which cases fall under each category and how to distinguish between the two. for example - the co-op v argyll stores case that involved an obligation to trade- is this a contract FOR services or OF (ie would it be one requiring supervision?)


  • Registered Users Posts: 8 ErinLP44


    I dont have any recent cases other than the ones provided in my manual.

    Do you know if contracts requiring supervision fall under the provision of personal services or are they a separate concept?

    this is what I am confused about

    according to my notes I would say that contracts requiring supervision come into this category
    mine say:

    contracts for service- are those that require constant supervision
    contracts of service - typical employment contracts (ie compelling someone to work for you if specific performance is granted)

    and both of these presumably fall under the title of personal services. Im just a bit confused about which cases fall under each category and how to distinguish between the two. for example - the co-op v argyll stores case that involved an obligation to trade- is this a contract FOR services or OF (ie would it be one requiring supervision?)


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭nimcdona


    for equity and charitable trusts, does anyone know if section 3 of the charities act 2009 has fully come into effect?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15 marc24


    nimcdona wrote: »
    for equity and charitable trusts, does anyone know if section 3 of the charities act 2009 has fully come into effect?

    Yes it came into effect in Oct 2014


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11 Supreme!Fox


    Re EU Law - In Competition Law, is there a difference between collective/joint dominance under Art 102 and concerted practices under Art 101?


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭holliek


    marc24 wrote: »
    Yes it came into effect in Oct 2014

    The griffith sample answer to 2015 Oct q3 says it still hadn't come into effect yet..


  • Registered Users Posts: 354 ✭✭Wonderstruck


    holliek wrote: »
    The griffith sample answer to 2015 Oct q3 says it still hadn't come into effect yet..

    Those prep colleges.... I got the receipts bro

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/si/457/made/en/print


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭sbbyrne


    Those prep colleges.... I got the receipts bro

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/si/457/made/en/print
    holliek wrote: »
    The griffith sample answer to 2015 Oct q3 says it still hadn't come into effect yet..

    tbh i think the sample answers are often copy and paste jobs, you'd see some essay questions referring to names as if in a problem question, so might be just a case of it being from an earlier question :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 354 ✭✭Wonderstruck


    sbbyrne wrote: »
    tbh i think the sample answers are often copy and paste jobs, you'd see some essay questions referring to names as if in a problem question, so might be just a case of it being from an earlier question :)

    Yeah I'd say so too! ;) i hope it comes up now for you!


  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭Smiley283


    ErinLP44 wrote: »
    this is what I am confused about

    according to my notes I would say that contracts requiring supervision come into this category
    mine say:

    contracts for service- are those that require constant supervision
    contracts of service - typical employment contracts (ie compelling someone to work for you if specific performance is granted)

    and both of these presumably fall under the title of personal services. Im just a bit confused about which cases fall under each category and how to distinguish between the two. for example - the co-op v argyll stores case that involved an obligation to trade- is this a contract FOR services or OF (ie would it be one requiring supervision?)

    My Griffith manual says they're two different concepts.

    The cases that they have laid out in the section for contracts requiring supervision are

    Posner v scott-lewis
    Cooperative insurance society v Argyll stores
    Wanze properties


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭nimcdona


    marc24 wrote: »
    Yes it came into effect in Oct 2014

    Thank you!


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭nimcdona


    holliek wrote: »
    The griffith sample answer to 2015 Oct q3 says it still hadn't come into effect yet..

    I saw that too, thats what confused me


  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    The topic of Sources of EU Law - is that just regulations, directives and decisions?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭sbbyrne


    I can't seem to get satisfaction into my head, i feel like i'm going in circles with it :(:( anyone have any tips how to simplify it? At this stage i'm desperate


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭Leraf


    Can I skip charitable trusts and tracing and have any hope of passing this exam? Panic is setting in now and I am considering not even going.

    I have covered
    Injunctions
    Trustees
    Estoppel
    Recission
    Specific Performance
    3 certainties
    strong v bird
    dmc
    presumption of advancement

    am i screwed?


  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    Leraf wrote: »
    Can I skip charitable trusts and tracing and have any hope of passing this exam? Panic is setting in now and I am considering not even going.

    I have covered
    Injunctions
    Trustees
    Estoppel
    Recission
    Specific Performance
    3 certainties
    strong v bird
    dmc
    presumption of advancement

    am i screwed?

    I'm not sitting Equity this time but I was in your EXACT position last time round. I wasn't going to bother going the night before the exam because I hadn't covered half the course (I cut all trusts except charitable and 3 certainties). The paper didn't go great, I had 3 good Qs, I only answered 1 out of the 3 notes and my final question on estoppel was a dog's dinner, but somehow I scraped a pass. Definitely go, you will be kicking yourself if everybody comes out and you find out that all your topics came up and you would've been able to do 5 questions.

    In relation to your topics, I was convinced SP and 3 certainties were coming up last time and they didn't so I'd say they are v likely to come up. Feel like it's been a while since she has asked 2 injunction Qs in the 1 paper so there is a good possibility that might happen. All your other topics often come up in note questions and that's a bonus because there's no difficulty in identifying problems etc or arguing your case. Tracing and charitable both came up as standalone Qs last time (I think) so, while charitable always does make an appearance, not the end of the world that you're cutting tracing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    Contract:

    Can anyone explain the difference in the Mercini Lady and Air Tranworth Ltd v Bombardier Ltd?


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭Leraf


    I'm not sitting Equity this time but I was in your EXACT position last time round. I wasn't going to bother going the night before the exam because I hadn't covered half the course (I cut all trusts except charitable and 3 certainties). The paper didn't go great, I had 3 good Qs, I only answered 1 out of the 3 notes and my final question on estoppel was a dog's dinner, but somehow I scraped a pass. Definitely go, you will be kicking yourself if everybody comes out and you find out that all your topics came up and you would've been able to do 5 questions.

    In relation to your topics, I was convinced SP and 3 certainties were coming up last time and they didn't so I'd say they are v likely to come up. Feel like it's been a while since she has asked 2 injunction Qs in the 1 paper so there is a good possibility that might happen. All your other topics often come up in note questions and that's a bonus because there's no difficulty in identifying problems etc or arguing your case. Tracing and charitable both came up as standalone Qs last time (I think) so, while charitable always does make an appearance, not the end of the world that you're cutting tracing.

    Exactly what I needed to hear. Thank you so much 😊


  • Registered Users Posts: 35 BemusedKettle


    Any Contract predictions being bandied about?

    Momma needs to cut


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭nimcdona


    Leraf wrote: »
    Can I skip charitable trusts and tracing and have any hope of passing this exam? Panic is setting in now and I am considering not even going.

    I have covered
    Injunctions
    Trustees
    Estoppel
    Recission
    Specific Performance
    3 certainties
    strong v bird
    dmc
    presumption of advancement

    am i screwed?

    Feel the exact same as you right now

    I only have charitable, constructive, injunctions, SP, DMC and 3 certainties so likelihood of passing isn't great but nothing to lose in sitting it anyway


  • Registered Users Posts: 47 starfishxxo


    In relation to interlocutory injunctions, is it in considering adequacy of damages per Campus Oil test that you apply the Shelfer principles?

    My brain is fried at this stage...


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    Any Contract predictions being bandied about?

    Momma needs to cut

    Mistake and illegality, apparently


  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭Smiley283


    My god, my notes for certainty of objects are woeful


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭sbbyrne


    Smiley283 wrote: »
    My god, my notes for certainty of objects are woeful

    I was about to say the same thing, i'm all over the place! Every time i look at them - i change them. Suffice to say my answer will be pure waffle if it comes up :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭kasey0123


    Leraf wrote: »
    Can I skip charitable trusts and tracing and have any hope of passing this exam? Panic is setting in now and I am considering not even going.

    I have covered
    Injunctions
    Trustees
    Estoppel
    Recission
    Specific Performance
    3 certainties
    strong v bird
    dmc
    presumption of advancement

    am i screwed?

    I passed in October and only 2 Of my topics came up. Was rightly screwed, basically laughing in the exam but gave it my best shot and just attempted the 3 I could best give a go out of the rest..and I passed by way of a miracle!

    Definitely try it and if caught badly still attempt 5 questions, they can’t give you marks for blank pages but they can for educated waffle!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭kasey0123


    The topic of Sources of EU Law - is that just regulations, directives and decisions?

    I think so, I was going to leave this out as I don’t know how it comes up.. I just have a base line knowledge for answering a Q on direct effect


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭Leraf


    kasey0123 wrote: »
    I passed in October and only 2 Of my topics came up. Was rightly screwed, basically laughing in the exam but gave it my best shot and just attempted the 3 I could best give a go out of the rest..and I passed by way of a miracle!

    Definitely try it and if caught badly still attempt 5 questions, they can’t give you marks for blank pages but they can for educated waffle!!

    These are the stories that we all need to hear, I pray for some luck tomorrow. Thank you all


  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭holliek


    Specific performance is a nightmare - it can literally come up so many ways, no prediction with it at all!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7 Fe12017


    Hi all, can anyone give me some guidance on the courts departure from campus oil test? What are the main cases that you have for this? My notes are quite messy on this and I’m quite confused! Any help appreciated! Cheers


  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭user115


    For FMW and citizenship are people covering criminal convictions, I don't have much on it in my manual but saw it came up in 2017, what ye saying for it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 58 ✭✭scooby321


    Fe12017 wrote: »
    Hi all, can anyone give me some guidance on the courts departure from campus oil test? What are the main cases that you have for this? My notes are quite messy on this and I’m quite confused! Any help appreciated! Cheers

    I have 8 situations where you depart from Campus Oil:

    1. Mantatory Interlocutory injunctions - Lingham v HSE

    2. Where parties agree the interlocutory hearing will constitute the trial of the action

    3. Where there is no arguable defence - Keating & Co. v Jervis Shopping Centre

    4. Where an interlocutory injunction is sought to restrain industrial action - G&T Campton Ltd v Building & Allied Trades Union, Malincross Ltd v Building Allied Trades Union, Dary Blocklaying Ltd v Building Allied Trades Union, and Dublin Airport Authority plc v Services Industrial Professional Technical Union

    5. Where an interlocutory injunction is sought to restrain the publication of allegedly defamatory material - Bonnard v Perryman, Sinclair v Gogarty, Reynolds v Malocco, Quinlan v O'Dea, Cogley v RTE, Foley v Sunday Newspapers, Murray v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd and O'Brien v RTE

    6. Where an interlocutory injunction is sought to restrain the presentation of a petition for the winding-up of a company - Truck Machinery Sales Ltd v Maubeni Komatsu, Cotton Box Design Group Ltd v Earls Construction Ltd and Donal Rigney Ltd v Empresa de Construcoes Amanda Carvalho

    7. Where the trial of the action is unlikely - NWL Ltd v Woods, Cayne v Global Resources plc, Lansing Linde Ltd v Kerr and Jacob v Irish Amateur Rowing Union Ltd

    8. Where the interlocutory injunction is sought in a public law context - Okunade v MJELR

    I hope this helps. I haven't learnt off these cases, I'll probably just choose the one that sticks out the most in each departure


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭sbbyrne


    Tracing:
    A bit last minute but hoping someone can help- what’s the position if a bona fide purchaser buys something from a trustee who has bought said object from trust money? :/


  • Registered Users Posts: 3 ameliaearhart


    hi all, for contract this question came up in 2016 "In respect of pre-contractual verbal statements, how do the Courts decide what is and what is not a term of the contract?"

    Would this be a discussion of the parol evidence rules and the exceptions to it ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    hi all, for contract this question came up in 2016 "In respect of pre-contractual verbal statements, how do the Courts decide what is and what is not a term of the contract?"

    Would this be a discussion of the parol evidence rules and the exceptions to it ?

    Sorry just looked at this again - possibly warranties v mere representations?

    As parole evidence is more to explain the actual contract or things missing from it I think? I could be wrong.

    Think you could also talk about collateral undertakings but think parole evidence or warranties/ representations what she wanted - essays are so specific I won’t be able to write more than a page


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19 LawStudent2018


    hi all, for contract this question came up in 2016 "In respect of pre-contractual verbal statements, how do the Courts decide what is and what is not a term of the contract?"

    Would this be a discussion of the parol evidence rules and the exceptions to it ?

    The Parol Evidence rule is more to do with interpreting the content of the contract.
    As mentioned above, best bet would be to focus on it from misrepresentation point of view


  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    user115 wrote: »
    For FMW and citizenship are people covering criminal convictions, I don't have much on it in my manual but saw it came up in 2017, what ye saying for it?

    I simply have the fact that under the Citizenship Directive previous criminal convictions doesn't constitute grounds for chucking someone out


  • Registered Users Posts: 15 xBell123


    EU

    Is it worth learning Art 101 and 102 only for competition? Leaving out state aid and mergers.

    Or do they come up as a combined question?


  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    Maybe a sneaky idea, but can we use different colour highlighters for our legislation? Like yellow for one topic, pink for another


  • Registered Users Posts: 239 ✭✭LawGirl3434


    Maybe a sneaky idea, but can we use different colour highlighters for our legislation? Like yellow for one topic, pink for another

    I did this for constituional and was fine


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Naddy666


    Are you allowed to highlight the Legislation or just tab it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 140 ✭✭sapphire309


    Naddy666 wrote: »
    Are you allowed to highlight the Legislation or just tab it?

    Both, just no writing


  • Registered Users Posts: 4 Naddy666


    Both, just no writing

    That's great thank you :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭kasey0123


    xBell123 wrote: »
    EU

    Is it worth learning Art 101 and 102 only for competition? Leaving out state aid and mergers.

    Or do they come up as a combined question?

    I’m debating this but I don’t think it’s worth the effort for the chance they come up mixed... I plan on just knowing everything else really well so I’m not caught.. hopefully


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭kasey0123


    Anyone who has done EU.. what are your thoughts on using the legislation for ALOT of theory, I’m glazing overthings because I know it’s in the legislation like equality, legislative procedures institutions etc ... bad idea ?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement