FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Orla FitzP

hi, i was just preparing for contract and a unified doctrine of estoppel...the way i was going to lay it out would be:

1-Def of prom
2-def of prop the limitations of prom
3- similarities and differences between the two????
and then come down that i think a unified doctrine goes against the flexibility of equity basically lord oliver crictism in Taylors fashion of hard and fast set rules???

I didnt get a chance to prepare it and get it corrected in class????

brian__foley

Niamhb10 wrote: »

Hi Jev/N thanks a mil for your reply! sounds as if i would be mental to leave 38.1 out.

slightly panicing now.... for some reason i have no notes at all for 38.1!! only have Casey book 3rd edition from 2000! crap. would be most grateful if anyone could point out any relevant up-to-date cases for Trail in Due Course of Law?? Thanks!

You really need to get more up to date material. Almost everything of interest is post 2000 in relation to Article 38.1.

randypriest

Hi. Does anyone know if its ok to bring in legislation that is not in its most up to date form? Ie: I have the 1990 Bastow Charlton Companies Acts and not the 2000 edition and I find that it serves me just fine in that I have learned all that is applicable from the 1999 Ammendment Act and the 2001 Company Law Enforcement Act. I really dont want to have to shell out for the 2000 edition!

Thanks

Mshellster

Jev/N wrote: »

No worries at all, sorry I gave the wrong answer!

The last sitting was on a quick glance:

Q1 - Freedom of Religion/Freedom of Expression/Unconstitutionality/Proportionality

Q3 - Non-Delegation Doctrine/Right to Property/ Right to Livelihood/Equality

Q6 - Non-Delegation Doctrine/Trial in Due Course/Jury Trial/Unconstitutionality

Q7 - Trial in Due Course (Pubilicy;Duty to seek out and Preserve Evidence)/Jury

Thanks for this. Ya I'm definitely not spotting all the issues but hoping if I can recognise one or two of them on the day or even just write about something relevant I might have a slightly less bleak chance of passing!

0435414@live.ie

Hey guys,

I have a sticky enough question...well its been annoying me all morning anyway.
Does Section 31(4) + 31(6) of the 2009 L+C.R Act replace the courts jurisdiction to to create a tenancy in common in equity...i.e (to fulfil the testators actual intention, legal and benificial ownership are seperated,ct permits they take the property as joint owners in law but insists they hold it on trust for themselves as t.i.c).
Is this concept changed by the 2009 act??..or is it still applicable..does it constitute the "partition" which is abolished under 35(6)?...if brian foley sees this id really appreciate a pointer in this area:(

Hogzy

For Contract

Where do we get the copy of the sale of goods and services act from?
Can we just print it from the website or is there an "officialyl" printed version we must buy like the blackstones for EU?

Is it any importance. Like i learned S13-15 of the act for goods and in the process of doing the services right now. Other than that is there any benefit of having the legislation?

Whoops...meant contract not company

happy_man2010

Hi folks. Have the 2008 Student Edition of the Companies Acts.Is it worth getting the 2009 act also?

RachTheRage

I know it is extremely close to exam time but if there is anyone who wants a couple of days experience in a law firm pls PM me. It is basic data entry but it would be something to stick on the CV. Good luck all.

CFOLEY85

Hi all

I just was wondering does anyone know how long the Company Law examiner Tom Courtney has been the examiner for the FE1's?

Jev/N

CFOLEY85 wrote: »

Hi all

I just was wondering does anyone know how long the Company Law examiner Tom Courtney has been the examiner for the FE1's?

About 10 years or more possibly, that's a guess though

CFOLEY85

Jev/N wrote: »

About 10 years or more possibly, that's a guess though

Cheers for that , was just looking at past exam reports and wanted to know if he was writing them all, to maybe give me some idea of what the man is looking for !!

bbbb

Hi there,

Am sitting these two exams and this is my last chance to get them or have to start all over again. Am really panicking as am working full time right with just the days of the exams off. As a result missed the refresher courses in independant colleges. Wondering if anyone has any genuine tips on either tort or criminal that might have attended a refresher course. At this point can't afford to leave much out but a focus on the more likely topics would be great.

Cheers!

I_hate_FE1s

Jev/N wrote: »

Absolutely, I thought that was evident from my post?



The president and the courts are, by and large, in the constitution so you can definitely afford to leave them out for the exam. Just know where to look!

I'd say you're taking a massive risk leaving out 38.1 as it's the second most popular area on the paper after Separation of Powers and it has often come up in 2 questions on the paper. That's just my opinion though. They're most commonly problem questions too so that will make them easier to answer but possibly harder to spot the issues.



No worries at all, sorry I gave the wrong answer!

The last sitting was on a quick glance:

Q1 - Freedom of Religion/Freedom of Expression/Unconstitutionality/Proportionality

Q3 - Non-Delegation Doctrine/Right to Property/ Right to Livelihood/Equality

Q6 - Non-Delegation Doctrine/Trial in Due Course/Jury Trial/Unconstitutionality

Q7 - Trial in Due Course (Pubilicy;Duty to seek out and Preserve Evidence)/Jury

I know u said its on first glance but Q3 where does equality come into play? worried i can't identify the issues!

Thanks

Jev/N

I_hate_FE1s wrote: »

I know u said its on first glance but Q3 where does equality come into play? worried i can't identify the issues!

Thanks

You're right, it's not really a full issue or an issue at all.

First off, the human person doctrine would probably be a bar to a claim under eqaulity. The area that I thought it was applicable to is that the ban affects people in the west/north more than in other places. It wouldn't make any difference to the question if you didn't mention it as it's just something I thought but am not definite on. Quinns Supermarkets would be of some help but that's where the trail would end for this I'd say

Mshellster

bbbb wrote: »

Hi there,

Am sitting these two exams and this is my last chance to get them or have to start all over again. Am really panicking as am working full time right with just the days of the exams off. As a result missed the refresher courses in independant colleges. Wondering if anyone has any genuine tips on either tort or criminal that might have attended a refresher course. At this point can't afford to leave much out but a focus on the more likely topics would be great.

Cheers!

I haven't gone to a refresher course but I think for Criminal the major response you're going to get (or at least the one I got previously) is that Criminal is of those exams where it's very hard to knock topics out because problem questions tend to mix in loads of different offences and defences so it's hard to say "leave this one out and you'll be grand". I think the essay questions can be fairly handy enough, might be worth looking back to see if there's any topics that tend to come up in that format (like provocation/characteristics of a crime etc) and see what ones haven't come up in the last say two sittings, might be more of a chance of them coming up this time (but obviously there's no guarantees with that sorry!).

As for tort, I'm thinking along lines of defamation/nuisance/nervous shock/professional negligence - purely guessing here not based on anything other than some of them weren't on last time!

cd.galway

Just wondering if anyone with the time at this late stage could explain the blasphemy laws and defamation with regards to freedom of expression...think my manual may be out of date!!! Think journalistic privilege was amended.

Help would be greatly appreciated

law_lady

Is anyone else having as much trouble as I am staying motivated? Today and yesterday I'm a disaster. I don't know what to do, I've cut my notes down to the minimum and I'm trying to read through sample answers but my concentration is non-existent and I feel like I won't actually learn off anything until I have the fear, like the day or two before the actual exam.

Anyone else like this? What type of study are people doing at this stage?! Learning off? Re reading? None?!

hession.law

cd.galway wrote: »

Just wondering if anyone with the time at this late stage could explain the blasphemy laws and defamation with regards to freedom of expression...think my manual may be out of date!!! Think journalistic privilege was amended.

Help would be greatly appreciated

hey its not too late to download the act from irish statute books one read of it and i think you will understand it better than being told imo with regard to FOE it is a balancing act as this right is pitted against the right to a good name/reputation so the nature/gravity of the statement and the permanency of the defamatory statement are factors you would have to discuss

brian__foley

Jev/N wrote: »

You're right, it's not really a full issue or an issue at all.

First off, the human person doctrine would probably be a bar to a claim under eqaulity. The area that I thought it was applicable to is that the ban affects people in the west/north more than in other places. It wouldn't make any difference to the question if you didn't mention it as it's just something I thought but am not definite on. Quinns Supermarkets would be of some help but that's where the trail would end for this I'd say

Question 3 is basically a form of seeing if people read Casey v Minister for Arts etc. The issue is really about the non-application of the non-delegation doctrine to administrative powers - i.e. the view that it only covers a power to make regulations in the formal sense, rather than anything less than that. Casey was also argued on livlihood grounds, but an "attack" wasn't even established, yet alone an unjust attack.

This hits on the other main problem with the exam - not spotting the issues. This may sound harsh, but you can't but spot the issues if you understand the case-law. The issues on the exam are pretty such the same as the issues that prompt all the cases you have to study and know about.

bbbb

thanks for that...yep criminal is one of those things that you really do have to cover everything.

Beginning to feel the same about tort...a few of the papers have been fairly nasty in the past. Appreciate the reply!

Best of luck to you with them

brian__foley

law_lady wrote: »

Is anyone else having as much trouble as I am staying motivated? Today and yesterday I'm a disaster. I don't know what to do, I've cut my notes down to the minimum and I'm trying to read through sample answers but my concentration is non-existent and I feel like I won't actually learn off anything until I have the fear, like the day or two before the actual exam.

Anyone else like this? What type of study are people doing at this stage?! Learning off? Re reading? None?!

Concentrate on your notes and concentrate on understanding the material in your own words. I would never recommend spending time on sample answers until you have your own material understood and capable of repetition and use.

ananas

law_lady wrote: »

Is anyone else having as much trouble as I am staying motivated? Today and yesterday I'm a disaster. I don't know what to do, I've cut my notes down to the minimum and I'm trying to read through sample answers but my concentration is non-existent and I feel like I won't actually learn off anything until I have the fear, like the day or two before the actual exam.

Anyone else like this? What type of study are people doing at this stage?! Learning off? Re reading? None?!

Law Lady, don't be thinking you're the only one finding it hard to concentrate, I'm exactly the same.

I'm still in the slicing process and trying to learn it as well. I'm disastrous, I haven't even looked at Equity and Property yet, I'm trying to cram in all I can with EU and Contract. Contract I'm so freaked out over because I was working off an old manual and notes but I'm afraid I won't recognise the topics.

bbbb

cd.galway wrote: »

Just wondering if anyone with the time at this late stage could explain the blasphemy laws and defamation with regards to freedom of expression...think my manual may be out of date!!! Think journalistic privilege was amended.

Help would be greatly appreciated

Found this webpage yesterday and in tandem with the synopsis of the act would probably do for a bullet point answer if you get really stuck. Sorry...might not be much help!

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Explanatory%20Memo%20to%20Defamation%20Bill.pdf/Files/Explanatory%20Memo%20to%20Defamation%20Bill.pdf

http://irishbarrister.com/defamation.html

bbbb

cd.galway wrote: »

Just wondering if anyone with the time at this late stage could explain the blasphemy laws and defamation with regards to freedom of expression...think my manual may be out of date!!! Think journalistic privilege was amended.

Help would be greatly appreciated

Sorry ignore my last post...was thinking defamtion for tort not constitutional...oops!

Mshellster

Just wanted to check the significance of the Monica Leech case regarding damages for defamation in Tort? Is it just that it was a record amount for a libel case and highlighted the need to allow judges give guidance to juries on the award of damages (which new Act brought about)? Thanks

CFOLEY85

Hi all

Just wondering does anyone know how the examiners favour abbreviations in our exam answers, such as P= Plaintiff, Def= Defendant, SH= shareholder, &=and, Co=company, etc.

While I know its a law exam and not an english exam I presume some creditability is giving for good english however would such abbreviations be frowned upon?

law_lady

CFOLEY85 -
From what I have seen here before, it seems to be that you should write the word in full the first time and put in brackets after what abbreviation you will use for now on. As in "...the shareholders (hereafter SHs)..." etc. That's definitely the approach for shortening case names anyway, and I personally will be doing that. As for '&' instead of 'and', I'm a devil for that one and I'll make no apologies to the examiner for it!!:rolleyes:

Question for those studying Company... I'm doing October 2006 Q5, its a Q comparing Foss v Harbottle exceptions and S205. I completely understand the two concepts but I'm at a loss as to how to compare them. I know there are more remedies available under S205, that much I've got, but the examiners report says -

"dentify the limitations of seeking to bring an action under one of the exceptions to the Rule in Foss v Harbottle as opposed to demonstrating 'oppression' or 'actions in disregard of shareholders' interest'."

What is needed here, does anyone know? Is it the fact that the exceptions are more specific and less broad? I know its end game for most people but if anyone can help its much appreciated! Thanks.

cd.galway

Cheers, got a synopsis on the Defamation Act i'll just go with that.

Also, there was recently something on the news about double jeopardy...just wondering if anyone knows exactly what is proposed???!
Starting to get really freaked out about constitutional now...just not enough time and i've company and eu too...agggggh!!!

NoQuarter

law_lady wrote: »

"dentify the limitations of seeking to bring an action under one of the exceptions to the Rule in Foss v Harbottle as opposed to demonstrating 'oppression' or 'actions in disregard of shareholders' interest'."

What is needed here, does anyone know? Is it the fact that the exceptions are more specific and less broad? I know its end game for most people but if anyone can help its much appreciated! Thanks.

Hi law_lady, it seems to me that the question is asking for the problems, or limitations of using section 205.

There are a number of limitations:

1. There is no remedy where there is fraud on the minority.

2. Arbitration clauses can essentially contract out of section 205's scope nowadays

3. Cost: s205 goes straight to the High Court and therefore needs junior and senior counsel.

4. probably the biggest drawback is that damages wont be rewarded in a 205 breach.

Hope that puts you on the right track!

CFOLEY85

Thanks Law_Lady. I was just abit apprehensive about it but it would save alot of time esp when Im used to abbreviating, I blame text messaging As for your question, I am sitting Company Law this Tuesday but Im not planning on studying that question, I hope Im not crazy by leaving it out!!! aaaggghhh There's just so much!