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

Leraf · 19-03-2019 7:54pm

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?

sapphire309 · 19-03-2019 8:02pm

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.

LawGirl3434 · 19-03-2019 8:14pm

Contract:

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

Leraf · 19-03-2019 8:30pm

sapphire309 wrote: »

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 ðŸ˜Š

BemusedKettle · 19-03-2019 8:37pm

Any Contract predictions being bandied about?

Momma needs to cut

nimcdona · 19-03-2019 8:37pm

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

starfishxxo · 19-03-2019 8:39pm

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...

LawGirl3434 · 19-03-2019 8:40pm

BemusedKettle wrote: »

Any Contract predictions being bandied about?

Momma needs to cut

Mistake and illegality, apparently

Smiley283 · 19-03-2019 9:23pm

My god, my notes for certainty of objects are woeful

sbbyrne · 19-03-2019 9:24pm

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:

kasey0123 · 19-03-2019 9:53pm

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!!

kasey0123 · 19-03-2019 9:55pm

sapphire309 wrote: »

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

Leraf · 19-03-2019 10:05pm

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

holliek · 19-03-2019 11:20pm

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

Fe12017 · 20-03-2019 1:38am

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

user115 · 20-03-2019 2:12am

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?

scooby321 · 20-03-2019 7:21am

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

sbbyrne · 20-03-2019 7:39am

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?

ameliaearhart · 20-03-2019 9:14am

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 ?

LawGirl3434 · 20-03-2019 10:13am

ameliaearhart wrote: »

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

LawStudent2018 · 20-03-2019 10:21am

ameliaearhart wrote: »

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

sapphire309 · 20-03-2019 11:18am

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

xBell123 · 20-03-2019 11:26am

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?

sapphire309 · 20-03-2019 11:57am

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

LawGirl3434 · 20-03-2019 12:03pm

sapphire309 wrote: »

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

Naddy666 · 20-03-2019 12:08pm

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

sapphire309 · 20-03-2019 12:35pm

Naddy666 wrote: »

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

Both, just no writing

Naddy666 · 20-03-2019 12:36pm

sapphire309 wrote: »

Both, just no writing

That's great thank you

kasey0123 · 20-03-2019 1:01pm

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

kasey0123 · 20-03-2019 1:07pm

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 ?

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

Comments