FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Orla FitzP

tony28 wrote: »

i didnt think bernard could recover due to a lack of special relationship and even if he overcame this hurdle agagin i thought there may be an issue regarding remoteness of the damage as i didnt think based on the advice given it was reasonably forseeable that he would invest 1m without any other research-could be well wrong though

thats what i said too!!!! snap!!!

littlemac1980

I said he could recover, because he wanted to be one of his clients, and he was meeting with him for that reason, he appeared to have faith in his ability, plus your man was a financial adviser and he clearly gave the impression the investment was sound. Dunno if its right though, probably can argue which ever way you want. Did ye discuss Pure Economic Loss?

LiamMc26

Hi

How did everyone find the company exam? I had three good answers one iffy one and one disaster! My disaster was question 6 by the way - did anyone else do it?

Jev/N

littlemac1980 wrote: »

I said he could recover, because he wanted to be one of his clients, and he was meeting with him for that reason, he appeared to have faith in his ability, plus your man was a financial adviser and he clearly gave the impression the investment was sound. Dunno if its right though, probably can argue which ever way you want. Did ye discuss Pure Economic Loss?

Yeah I said similar.... I said that on the facts it appeared to be a meeting in a professional capacity and thus it could be reasonably inferred that Bernard might use such information in pursuance of financial gain. While the report wasn't created for him, he did read it and Sean never fully disclaimed it besides saying it was confidential. More importantly he gave him a direct opinion which was likely to be relied upon.

Personally I didn't mention pure economic loss as I didn't have time

randomchild

LiamMc26 wrote: »

Hi

How did everyone find the company exam? I had three good answers one iffy one and one disaster! My disaster was question 6 by the way - did anyone else do it?

Thought it was a fairly nice paper over all. Did question 6 as well, seemed straight forward enough? (Validity of petition/injunction to halt the publication of petition).

Jev/N

So how did everyone fare in company? What appeared; any surprises?

Hogzy

In relation to this question is it possible for John to be re trialled if the evidence used to prosecute him was found to be unconstitutional.

Evidence was found that proved he murdered Carol however it was found unconstitutionally. Can he retrialled on the finding of new evidence or does double jeopardy apply?

pink101

Hogzy wrote: »

In relation to this question is it possible for John to be re trialled if the evidence used to prosecute him was found to be unconstitutional.

Evidence was found that proved he murdered Carol however it was found unconstitutionally. Can he retrialled on the finding of new evidence or does double jeopardy apply?

Under O'Brien, Balfe and Cash that the breach of John's constitutional rights will not render the evidence obtained thereby inadmissible. if his application for habeas corpus succeeds Singer (2) permits his immediate rearrest provided all legislative provisions complied with except in the unlikely event that the court were to make an order as was granted in Trimbole barring his re-arrest.

end of sample answer
Hope it helps

pink101

pink101 wrote: »

Under O'Brien, Balfe and Cash that the breach of John's constitutional rights will not render the evidence obtained thereby inadmissible. if his application for habeas corpus succeeds Singer (2) permits his immediate rearrest provided all legislative provisions complied with except in the unlikely event that the court were to make an order as was granted in Trimbole barring his re-arrest.

end of sample answer
Hope it helps

also Says nothing about double jeopardy in answer

Hogzy

pink101 wrote: »

also Says nothing about double jeopardy in answer

Where did you get the sample answer from if you dont mind me asking.

pink101

Hogzy wrote: »

Where did you get the sample answer from if you dont mind me asking.

Trying to send you a private message but is so long since I have been on the site i forget bear with me

page1

Thought it was grand, i did the retention of title clauses, rule in turquands/ostensible auth, directors duties, s213(e) petition and s150 restriction of directors. Think i did ok i had covered all topics well, just last question on s150 was so rushed and my hand was so cramped i couldnt write and had to do more in bullet form but i think i got all the important cases in. I was so surprised not to see a question on corp borrowings or share transfer defo thought either one or both would appear.

Now just EU left on Friday and please god thats me done with the FE1s

coco13

Hey Guys.. Just wondering if anyone has any opinion on an advertisement I saw today re an "Exciting Opportunity" to apply for a short term legal internship with a legal firm in Dublin.. Just shocked when I read it when you think of all the work that you put into these exams,various undergraduate and postgraduate courses and the costs associated! The advertisement basically states that the firm are looking for someone sitting FE1s or similar exams to work unpaid from now until December ie Short Term Legal Internship! I know that there is the benefit of experience and expsosure etc etc but this does not strike me as an exciting opportunity! Oh and by the way to add insult to injury typical hours of work are 8.30am to 5.30pm although as an intern you will be expected to work hours outside these times on occasion! Just feel like the whole system is becoming a bit of a joke with the hoops that you have to jump through to get legal work experience, an apprenticeship etc etc. Any one else of the same opinion? Also I am at a loss as to how individuals that are starting off a legal career can afford to work free to gain experience esp taking into account the costs of sitting the exams alone, not to mention the costs associated with preparatory courses etc??

FreudianSlippers

coco13 wrote: »

Hey Guys.. Just wondering if anyone has any opinion on an advertisement I saw today re an "Exciting Opportunity" to apply for a short term legal internship with a legal firm in Dublin.. Just shocked when I read it when you think of all the work that you put into these exams,various undergraduate and postgraduate courses and the costs associated! The advertisement basically states that the firm are looking for someone sitting FE1s or similar exams to work unpaid from now until December ie Short Term Legal Internship! I know that there is the benefit of experience and expsosure etc etc but this does not strike me as an exciting opportunity! Oh and by the way to add insult to injury typical hours of work are 8.30am to 5.30pm although as an intern you will be expected to work hours outside these times on occasion! Just feel like the whole system is becoming a bit of a joke with the hoops that you have to jump through to get legal work experience, an apprenticeship etc etc. Any one else of the same opinion? Also I am at a loss as to how individuals that are starting off a legal career can afford to work free to gain experience esp taking into account the costs of sitting the exams alone, not to mention the costs associated with preparatory courses etc??

All Barristers work for free for their masters their first year down.

At the moment there are few jobs in busy firms and internships are often unpaid.

coco13

OisinT wrote: »

All Barristers work for free for their masters their first year down.

At the moment there are few jobs in busy firms and internships are often unpaid.

I appreciate your comment re Barristers but it just seems that at that stage when the Barrister is deviling under their Master that they have a guaranteed training contract so to speak and so for some reason it just seems more justifiable to me that they are unpaid, if that makes any sense!!

I also appreciate the lack of work in available in the present economy and in the legal sector but I suppose not everyone has the luxury of being in a position to work for free.. Suppose that's life!

Jev/N

coco13 wrote: »

I also appreciate the lack of work in available in the present economy and in the legal sector but I suppose not everyone has the luxury of being in a position to work for free.. Suppose that's life!

And not every firm has the ability to pay their interns... not that interns are generally paid outside of the top 5 or 10 firms anyways

AnnAh1986

coco13 wrote: »

I appreciate your comment re Barristers but it just seems that at that stage when the Barrister is deviling under their Master that they have a guaranteed training contract so to speak and so for some reason it just seems more justifiable to me that they are unpaid, if that makes any sense!!

I also appreciate the lack of work in available in the present economy and in the legal sector but I suppose not everyone has the luxury of being in a position to work for free.. Suppose that's life!

I don't really use boards but just spotted the comments with regard to your post Coco and had to reply. I appreciate what everyone is saying about Barristers but I totally understand where you are coming from in the sense that if you are not lucky enough to be able to work for free or if you live in a remote area and are unable to live at home while working for free then the whole thing seems a bit impossible. However in saying this don't give up there is light at the end of the tunnel!

Jev/N

coco13 wrote: »

Really!???

Yep... that's why they're called interns

coco13

Jev/N wrote: »

Yep... that's why they're called interns

Ok..Hehe!!!
Just suppose that most people I know are fortunate enough to be getting paid during their internships! Maybe it has coloured my judgement!

NoQuarter

Didnt enjoy that company exam at all, drew a major blank!

What topic was that shares question about or was it just a general question on shares?!?

Ruby83

NoQuarter wrote: »

Didnt enjoy that company exam at all, drew a major blank!

What topic was that shares question about or was it just a general question on shares?!?

I answered it on the right to dividends, attend and vote at meetings, participate in winding up. Duties were to pay what was left unpaid when a call is made and I also did a bit on the nature of shares (ie. nature of personalty, chose in action, confers no interest in the companies assets, s 25 etc).

Chouette

How's everyone sorted for Constitutional?

Ruby83

Chouette wrote: »

How's everyone sorted for Constitutional?

Screwed. Thought I had a grasp on it but was concentrating on company for the last few days and now I can't seem to remember it and don't have time to go over everything tonight. Consecutive days of exams is a nightmare!

Pat.Kenny

Beyond screwed for Constitutional, I'm trying to read over stuff but there just so much ground to cover and I barely know the topics generally let alone the cases so tomorrow will probably three hours of head scratching for me!

Chouette

Pat.Kenny wrote: »

Beyond screwed for Constitutional, I'm trying to read over stuff but there just so much ground to cover and I barely know the topics generally let alone the cases so tomorrow will probably three hours of head scratching for me!

Have passed the other 7 exams and this is my second time sitting Const. I just can't get the hang of it.

Jev/N

Not sure how well I'm set for Constitutional, think it all depends how the questions appear tomorrow! I'm finding it harder to put the head down at the moment!

Hogzy

Jev/N wrote: »

Not sure how well I'm set for Constitutional, think it all depends how the questions appear tomorrow! I'm finding it harder to put the head down at the moment!

+1,
This is my first exam of the term so im panicking alot. Hope to god its as rights based as last years paper. I also hope to god that there is no casenote question like there was last year. THat was a very dirty surprise.

JCJCJC

coco13 wrote: »

I appreciate your comment re Barristers but it just seems that at that stage when the Barrister is deviling under their Master that they have a guaranteed training contract so to speak and so for some reason it just seems more justifiable to me that they are unpaid, if that makes any sense!!

I also appreciate the lack of work in available in the present economy and in the legal sector but I suppose not everyone has the luxury of being in a position to work for free.. Suppose that's life!

I spoke to three newly-qualified barristers in the past few days - former classmates of mine. They feel their current prospects are utterly hopeless. They tell me that a lot of barristers who retired young in the past ten or fifteen years had their pensions in property portfolios that have latterly collapsed, so they are dusting off their wigs and gowns and heading back to the courts, ringing all the solicitors who used to brief them etcetera to get briefs again. It has never been easy for a young barrister to build up a practise, but it is currently utterly impossible. Unless your near relatives have a solicitors practise and you are getting briefs for that reason only, or unless you are somehow known to be exceptionally brilliant in some sphere, you're not going to earn a living.
I am occasionally in courts on the SW circuit, and of the fifty or so junior barristers on the circuit, three or four seem to get all the work. I wouldn't advise any young person to go that route for a few years until the country gets back on the rails - if ever.

Sorry to sound such a dismal note.

JC

Chouette

Hogzy wrote: »

+1,
This is my first exam of the term so im panicking alot. Hope to god its as rights based as last years paper. I also hope to god that there is no casenote question like there was last year. THat was a very dirty surprise.

It was a dirty question alright!! I feel it might come up again...

coco13

JCJCJC wrote: »

I spoke to three newly-qualified barristers in the past few days - former classmates of mine. They feel their current prospects are utterly hopeless. They tell me that a lot of barristers who retired young in the past ten or fifteen years had their pensions in property portfolios that have latterly collapsed, so they are dusting off their wigs and gowns and heading back to the courts, ringing all the solicitors who used to brief them etcetera to get briefs again. It has never been easy for a young barrister to build up a practise, but it is currently utterly impossible. Unless your near relatives have a solicitors practise and you are getting briefs for that reason only, or unless you are somehow known to be exceptionally brilliant in some sphere, you're not going to earn a living.
I am occasionally in courts on the SW circuit, and of the fifty or so junior barristers on the circuit, three or four seem to get all the work. I wouldn't advise any young person to go that route for a few years until the country gets back on the rails - if ever.

Sorry to sound such a dismal note.

JC

Totally agree with what you are saying.. Not easy out there at the mo!