FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

law_lady

Hi ananas, you sound so like me.

For Contract I've done everything except Agency, Quasi-Contracts, Sale of Goods, Formalities and Exclusion Clauses. I chose what to leave out based on what friends who sat it last time did, and it seems to me from looking at the exam grid from GCD that even leaving all those out you're most likely going to have 5 Qs, at least unless we get extremely unlucky.

For Property, I have a lot still to do. So far I've done:

Adverse Possession
Succession
Covenants (but not confident at all)
Easements
Lease/Licence Distinction
Family Property

As mentioned above, I'm giving each subject a week. Contract was last week, Company this week and doing Property next week so hoping to get Settled Land, Licences and Mortgages done then. Its the one subject I've let slide an awful lot, because I'm working off an old manual and this 2009 Act has me so wary that I'm doing the wrong stuff. Avoiding stuff like Tenure and Equity, hope I'm not wrong on that.

Is the doctrine of notice still applicable, could someone tell us?

ananas

law_lady wrote: »

Hi ananas, you sound so like me.

For Contract I've done everything except Agency, Quasi-Contracts, Sale of Goods, Formalities and Exclusion Clauses. I chose what to leave out based on what friends who sat it last time did, and it seems to me from looking at the exam grid from GCD that even leaving all those out you're most likely going to have 5 Qs, at least unless we get extremely unlucky.

For Property, I have a lot still to do. So far I've done:

Adverse Possession
Succession
Covenants (but not confident at all)
Easements
Lease/Licence Distinction
Family Property

As mentioned above, I'm giving each subject a week. Contract was last week, Company this week and doing Property next week so hoping to get Settled Land, Licences and Mortgages done then. Its the one subject I've let slide an awful lot, because I'm working off an old manual and this 2009 Act has me so wary that I'm doing the wrong stuff. Avoiding stuff like Tenure and Equity, hope I'm not wrong on that.

Is the doctrine of notice still applicable, could someone tell us?

Well the only thing with settled land is that overreaching interests have been retained but pretty much everything else has been reformed. Have you printed off the explanatory memorandum? It's really helpful in explaining what changes have been affected.

ananas

Has anyone gotten any tips for Equity??

law_lady

ananas wrote: »

Well the only thing with settled land is that overreaching interests have been retained but pretty much everything else has been reformed. Have you printed off the explanatory memorandum? It's really helpful in explaining what changes have been affected.

Yeah, using the EM to supplement my manual, and found most things fine, like Covenants and Easements. I think its just that things like Tenure, Settled Land, etc. were done further back in my degree so they're not at all fresh in my mind, so I'm constantly suspicious I'm missing something.

No tips that I've heard of yet, will post anything I get, although I'm incredibly wary of tips in general, they rarely seem to come through!

Jev/N

law_lady wrote: »

The way I'm doing things is, 4 subjects, 4 weeks (counting last week) so a week per subject to get it all condensed down and fresh in my mind and then I'll learn it off as best I can in the 2 days before each exam (I'm lucky in the way mine fall, no 2 together).

A few questions:

1. For case names and legislation, is it best to write them in the same colour pen as the rest of the answer and then highlight them, or in a different colour? I hear we should stay away from red anyway as that's what they correct with.

2. Are people learning off judge's quotes verbatim or paraphrasing for most, bar the really catchy, famous statements?

3. Are people learning the facts of each case well or just a general summary and more focus on the actual point of law in the case?

Thanks in advance, hope everyone's going well with study.

lawlady.

1. Just use a highlighter, takes 10% of the time it would to use a different colour pen. Only bother at all if you've a good few cases/statutes and they are well spread out in the answer. Otherwise it'll merely add to your woes if you've only a few cases down in the introduction and first point or two and it'll be more obvious you didn't know your stuff (IMO at least).

2. Don't bother learning off many quotes unless you're banking on certain essays coming up. By all means have a rough knowledge of some in order to be able to paraphrase where necessary. They're no good for problems first off. Secondly, the main ratio is what you want, not really the other remarks. Only use it if it'll add to the answer and is not just pointless extra information.

3. Facts of the case are only needed for A) your own memory to be able to link to the case name and if there's a problem question based around a specific case. The legal principle garnered from each case is the most important, the facts to a much lesser degree.

That'd be my view anyways. Best of luck!

ah22

Anyone have any tips for Tort & Company??

radioface

Rain at last!! Might get some work done now

Pat.Kenny

Would anyone be able to tell me the core topics for Constitutional and Tort? I'm in cutting down mode because there is too much to cover and too little time and any help would be seriously appreciated. If anyone knows the topics that came up on the papers in the last sitting too that would be great help.

I'm also wondering where the best place to look for succint info on defamation is for Tort? Also is there anyhere I can access and read some of the examiner's articles online by any chance? Cheers everyone

mariaod

hi,

quick question~ im doing the first sitting of FE1 exams in oct and im after running out of time to study a fourth subject.

Does anyone no if it would be ok to just study for the three well and then just go into the fourth and stay for about half an hour and then leave.

would that work or would u be caught out for really only sitting three the first time round?

i could just do 5 the next time around then.

help would be appreciated!!

randomchild

mariaod wrote: »

hi,

quick question~ im doing the first sitting of FE1 exams in oct and im after running out of time to study a fourth subject.

Does anyone no if it would be ok to just study for the three well and then just go into the fourth and stay for about half an hour and then leave.

would that work or would u be caught out for really only sitting three the first time round?

i could just do 5 the next time around then.

help would be appreciated!!

Thats perfectly acceptable, many people do it. I would advise you though to have a decent stab at the 4th, as if you bottle one of the others you have to sit them all again. Worst case scenario: you make doing the 4th subject again in march easier.

mariaod

does anyone know if there have been changes to family property in property law under the 2009 act, i looked at the explanatory memo but cant seem to see any??

ananas

mariaod wrote: »

does anyone know if there have been changes to family property in property law under the 2009 act, i looked at the explanatory memo but cant seem to see any??

As far as I know, the LCLRA hasn't changed anything in relation to family property. However the Civil Partnership Bill has changed the situation regarding cohabitees and contributions to the family home. Now the courts can take into account the indirect contributions that a cohabitee has made to the family home when making a property adjustment order.

Cohabitees are also afforded protection similar to that under the 1976 Family Home Protection Act as regards the sale of the family home. You should have a read of the Explanatory Memorandum which sets out these changes clearly. You'd be able to find it on the Oireachtas website.

Ruby83

ananas wrote: »

As far as I know, the LCLRA hasn't changed anything in relation to family property. However the Civil Partnership Bill has changed the situation regarding cohabitees and contributions to the family home. Now the courts can take into account the indirect contributions that a cohabitee has made to the family home when making a property adjustment order.

Cohabitees are also afforded protection similar to that under the 1976 Family Home Protection Act as regards the sale of the family home. You should have a read of the Explanatory Memorandum which sets out these changes clearly. You'd be able to find it on the Oireachtas website.

But note that that Civil Partnership Bill only relates to same sex cohabitants. For opposite sex cohabitants, the equitable principles still apply as well as the law reform commissions report on cohabitants from 2006 recommending a cohabitation agreement. That's my understanding anyway.

ananas

Ruby83 wrote: »

But note that that Civil Partnership Bill only relates to same sex cohabitants. For opposite sex cohabitants, the equitable principles still apply as well as the law reform commissions report on cohabitants from 2006 recommending a cohabitation agreement. That's my understanding anyway.

Are you sure? My understanding of it is that it applies to qualified cohabitants regardless of whether they are a heterosexual relationship or a same sex relationship?

From the explanatory memorandum:
"The Bill also establishes a redress scheme for opposite-sex and and same sex cohabiting couples who are not married or registered in a civil partnership as the case may be."

Part 15 relates solely to cohabitants- and sections 169-206 gives cohabitants the same level of protection as civil partners.

170.—(1) For the purposes of this Part, a cohabitant is one of 2
adults (whether of the same or the opposite sex) who live together
as a couple in an intimate and committed relationship and who are 15
not related to each other within the prohibited degrees of relationship
or married to each other or civil partners of each other.

Ruby83

ananas wrote: »

Are you sure? My understanding of it is that it applies to qualified cohabitants regardless of whether they are a heterosexual relationship or a same sex relationship?

From the explanatory memorandum:
"The Bill also establishes a redress scheme for opposite-sex and and same sex cohabiting couples who are not married or registered in a civil partnership as the case may be."

This indicates that it applies to heterosexual cohabitants and same sex cohabitants equally.

Had a look at the memo there and seems ur right. Does that mean so that once this comes into effect that the equitable interests previously applicable to unmarried cohabitants will be replaced by the Civil Partnership Act or must same sex/opposite sex couples opt into the ambit of the act? Have printed it myself so will have a read. Thank God u highlighted that to me!! I thought I had put Family Property Chapter to bed!! Thanks!

ananas

That's what we're all here for, to help each other out!:)

To be honest I'm not entirely sure, it appears that the equitable principle will still apply the same as they do with married couples when calculating the beneficial interest in the family home. I think that it's supplementary protection for cohabitees in response to the LRC recommendations. But as I said I'm not 100% on this.Just on reading I think that in order to avail of this protection they have to be "qualified".

mariaod

thanks for yer help, this new property act is a nightmare!!

is anyone else having difficulty with mortgages? im studying from a 2009/2010 griffith manual but its not up to date with the 2009 act so im completly lost!!

madma

Hi

ive been looking at courses at one that stands out for me is, Diploma in legal studies. it s and evening course 2 days a week for a year and in dublin buisness school. it covers constitutional, crimianal,company,property,Tort and contract

has anyone on here done anythign similar. ill be starting out and im wondering if it would be a good course to do. i have a diploma in media production which ive never progressed in and this course would be starting off in law.

thanks in advance for any help

p_bateman

Just a quick question in relation to Property law - If covering Landlord and Tenant law from one of the property law manuals, would it also be advisable to cover the chapters on Freehold Covenants and Licences given their prominence in the area of L&T law? Obviously time is of the essence at this stage, so I'm wondering whether the info contained within the L&T chapter is sufficient for the purpose of answering an exam question! Thanks!

Mshellster

Pat.Kenny wrote: »

Would anyone be able to tell me the core topics for Constitutional and Tort? I'm in cutting down mode because there is too much to cover and too little time and any help would be seriously appreciated. If anyone knows the topics that came up on the papers in the last sitting too that would be great help.

I'm also wondering where the best place to look for succint info on defamation is for Tort? Also is there anyhere I can access and read some of the examiner's articles online by any chance? Cheers everyone

I'm doing these two and property and they are wrecking my life altogether. Just starting defamation but my book is very out of date so does anyone know if I should just focus on the new Act and go from there or is it important to know the lay of the land before the new act? Tort has me completely baffled can't seem to get my head around it all!

RebelScorned

Hi guys, sitting first four fe1s (crim, contract, equity and constitutional). The first three are pretty straightforward, but like so many before me, constitutional is wrecking my head! The past papers are confusing, the examiners reports are useless and the syllabus is far from ideal ("the following is not an exhaustive list") etc. The clue we are given is that areas of recently relevant consideration will be particularly important, so I was wondering if anybody has any thoughts on this?

Also, if there is anybody else in the same constitutional boat, what topics are ye picking? The papers are so jumbled I know it's a dodge bet but realistically i would like to learn at least a few topics well and hopefully get a chance to write those. Rights (both enumerated and unenumerated), separation of powers (non-justicability) and interpretation are three areas I am definitely swallowing. Anybody have any ideas or questions or comments? Also, if anybody has done one of the courses, was there anything in particular highlighted?

Ruby83

RebelScorned wrote: »

Hi guys, sitting first four fe1s (crim, contract, equity and constitutional). The first three are pretty straightforward, but like so many before me, constitutional is wrecking my head! The past papers are confusing, the examiners reports are useless and the syllabus is far from ideal ("the following is not an exhaustive list") etc. The clue we are given is that areas of recently relevant consideration will be particularly important, so I was wondering if anybody has any thoughts on this?

Also, if there is anybody else in the same constitutional boat, what topics are ye picking? The papers are so jumbled I know it's a dodge bet but realistically i would like to learn at least a few topics well and hopefully get a chance to write those. Rights (both enumerated and unenumerated), separation of powers (non-justicability) and interpretation are three areas I am definitely swallowing. Anybody have any ideas or questions or comments? Also, if anybody has done one of the courses, was there anything in particular highlighted?

I'm feeling your pain with constitutional. I'm doing property, eu, equity and company as well and they are all surprisingly way better than constit. I just can't seem to remember anything I've studied for it and I find it very hard to pinpoint what is being asked in the questions. I only have another few days to get it because I need to move on but it seems like i haven't studied it at all when I look at exam questions when in fact I have. I think I'll be winging it on the day!!! If I were u I'd also look at locus standi which seems to feature in one way or another on every paper.

law_lady

Hi all, studying for Company at the moment and have the following covered:

s25 Contracts
Corporate Personality
Corporate Capacity
Doctrine of Ultra Vires
Directors (everything)
Shareholder Protection and Remedies
Corporate Borrowing
Retention of Title Clauses
Disposition of Company Assets

Would be really interested to see what others have decided to cover. Is it safe to leave out Winding Up, Examiners and Receivers or am I being foolish? Thanks in advance.

mariaod

law_lady wrote: »

Hi all, studying for Company at the moment and have the following covered:

s25 Contracts
Corporate Personality
Corporate Capacity
Doctrine of Ultra Vires
Directors (everything)
Shareholder Protection and Remedies
Corporate Borrowing
Retention of Title Clauses
Disposition of Company Assets

Would be really interested to see what others have decided to cover. Is it safe to leave out Winding Up, Examiners and Receivers or am I being foolish? Thanks in advance.

i have left out those 3 aswell, they dont feature as often as other things so i think its safe enough.

Ruby83

law_lady wrote: »

Hi all, studying for Company at the moment and have the following covered:

s25 Contracts
Corporate Personality
Corporate Capacity
Doctrine of Ultra Vires
Directors (everything)
Shareholder Protection and Remedies
Corporate Borrowing
Retention of Title Clauses
Disposition of Company Assets

Would be really interested to see what others have decided to cover. Is it safe to leave out Winding Up, Examiners and Receivers or am I being foolish? Thanks in advance.

I think those three are horrible but the only thing is that Winding up sometimes comes up with s205, specifically s213f, so if you're doing s 205 you should also do the s213f section of winding up chapter

Pat.Kenny

I agree with above, definitely wouldn't leave out Winding Up cause it's nice enough chapter and it can come up in other questions so it's a handy to know.

Jev/N

You just need to skim over a few cases for it, the rest is in the Acts anyway. That's what I did when I sat it, it's handy to point out as a remedy

law_lady

Thanks, forgot about S213f actually. I'm going to just learn the main cases from my old uni notes and use the Acts for the rest. My copy of the Acts is 3rd hand and its been highlighted to death, dreading using it! Thanks for the replies, have a good weekend all.:o

LiamMc26

law_lady wrote: »

Thanks, forgot about S213f actually. I'm going to just learn the main cases from my old uni notes and use the Acts for the rest. My copy of the Acts is 3rd hand and its been highlighted to death, dreading using it! Thanks for the replies, have a good weekend all.:o

Hi
I'm sitting Company too and don't know how best to utilise/organise the Acts. Do people rely on them to jog the memory in the exam or are they more of a distraction?

Jev/N

LiamMc26 wrote: »

Hi
I'm sitting Company too and don't know how best to utilise/organise the Acts. Do people rely on them to jog the memory in the exam or are they more of a distraction?

Anyone who doesn't bring them in is at a severe disadvantage IMO. If you wrongly state a section (having not brought the Acts in) you'll be slated as the examiner will expect you would have availed of the opportunity if you didn't know the sections verbatim.

Also, some questions have, in the past, been able to be largely answered by merely re-stating and paraphrasing some of the sections of the Act.