FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

mirm

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??

Sorry but what do u expect at this time??? If you are taking the view that you are going to be paid mega bucks while doing FE1's or a masters then think again. There are plenty of qualified solicitors out there on the dole queue and I know some qualified solicitors doing unpaid internships in order to gather more extensive work experience so they may have a better chance at obtaining a job. Don't think that no one will apply for that unpaid internship because they will and those people who are willing to gain experience while doing it for free will be the ones who will get ahead and the one's who turn their nose up at it will be left exactly where they are now.

I worked for three months for free, 9 to 5 Monday to Friday and also worked a part time job at the weekend in order to stay alive. That firm subsequently offered me an apprenticeship so the free work paid itself off for me.

If you are interested in getting ahead in life, put the money to the back of your head and focus on getting experience for free or otherwise cos if you wont take it there will be plenty who will.

coco13

mirm wrote: »

Sorry but what do u expect at this time??? If you are taking the view that you are going to be paid mega bucks while doing FE1's or a masters then think again. There are plenty of qualified solicitors out there on the dole queue and I know some qualified solicitors doing unpaid internships in order to gather more extensive work experience so they may have a better chance at obtaining a job. Don't think that no one will apply for that unpaid internship because they will and those people who are willing to gain experience while doing it for free will be the ones who will get ahead and the one's who turn their nose up at it will be left exactly where they are now.

I worked for three months for free, 9 to 5 Monday to Friday and also worked a part time job at the weekend in order to stay alive. That firm subsequently offered me an apprenticeship so the free work paid itself off for me.

If you are interested in getting ahead in life, put the money to the back of your head and focus on getting experience for free or otherwise cos if you wont take it there will be plenty who will.

I not am not taking the view that interns or students should be paid mega bucks and thats not the issue that I was seeking to raise.. I just feel that it reasonable for someone to be paid a basic wage when they are working a forty hour working week. Im working in the legal industry myself and I am lucky enough to have secured an apprenticeship. Look we've all done the part time working thing tp stay afloat and yes I am fully aware that there will a large number of applicants for the above position in light of the the current climate but I just feel that it is not unreasonable to pay someone a basic wage in return for a forty hour working week.

FreudianSlippers

coco13 wrote: »

I not am not taking the view that interns or students should be paid mega bucks and thats not the issue that I was seeking to raise.. I just feel that it reasonable for someone to be paid a basic wage when they are working a forty hour working week. Im working in the legal industry myself and I am lucky enough to have secured an apprenticeship. Look we've all done the part time working thing tp stay afloat and yes I am fully aware that there will a large number of applicants for the above position in light of the the current climate but I just feel that it is not unreasonable to pay someone a basic wage in return for a forty hour working week.

Not to be abrupt, but that isn't the way the legal profession in this country works and I doubt it will in the near future.

People who can't do that or don't want to may want to consider a different career.

Sure, the same thing can be said for medicine - there's no real money to be had after getting out of College of Surgeons either.

mirm

coco13 wrote: »

I not am not taking the view that interns or students should be paid mega bucks and thats not the issue that I was seeking to raise.. I just feel that it reasonable for someone to be paid a basic wage when they are working a forty hour working week. Im working in the legal industry myself and I am lucky enough to have secured an apprenticeship. Look we've all done the part time working thing tp stay afloat and yes I am fully aware that there will a large number of applicants for the above position in light of the the current climate but I just feel that it is not unreasonable to pay someone a basic wage in return for a forty hour working week.

If you work in the legal industry so you should be aware that fees may not be coming in everyday to pay someone a basic wage for work experience, if someone is not willing to do it for free or who feels that it is a necessity to be paid should most definitely look at changing career

JCJCJC

coco13 wrote: »

I not am not taking the view that interns or students should be paid mega bucks ...I just feel that it is not unreasonable to pay someone a basic wage in return for a forty hour working week.

Not much wrong with that, however solicitors generically have always been notorious for stinginess in their treatment of their clerical/secretarial staff, and yes, I know there are some decent individuals out there but they are rare. Ex-hypothesi everybody here (with the notable exception of Dr. Brian Foley BL of course) is probably trying to break into the solicitors' profession. To do that we must sit exams set by the law society. That society is run by solicitors for solicitors. Many solicitors are now out of work or earning far less money than they think they are worth. Why should their representative society make it easy for new entrants? Why should they not take advantage of the situation and lower their practise overheads by assigning some tasks to unpaid volunteers? I could be wrong, but if you get that wonderful experience as advertised, in return for your unpaid labour, I think you will be seeing a lot more of the photocopier, the filing cabinet in the attic and the kettle under the stairs than you will see of top senior counsel airing arcane corners of the law in the Supreme Court.

JC

rick flair

I can say that FAS have a very large number of qualified solicitors on their books, not to mention wigs. FAS and the Law Society has been trying to get these people work experience. Wait for it - you keep your dole money - but work 42 hours a week just to say your "working" in the legal domain. You would be absolutely shocked at the level of professionalism they have, sitting on the dole queue. The market will pick up, but it will take at least 3 years and there:mad: will be a new structure of fees and rules by then, the LS will try and close down the supply, but this years attendance is noticeably lower that last years.

rick flair

Can anyone tell me if i am wasting my time on this exam working off the 2009 manuals and legislation ? I have wrapped up all of the old reliables for EU but now scared that i have left out Lisbon - its my forth exam but still would ike to pass this one.

Any help ????????????

FreudianSlippers

rick flair wrote: »

Can anyone tell me if i am wasting my time on this exam working off the 2009 manuals and legislation ? I have wrapped up all of the old reliables for EU but now scared that i have left out Lisbon - its my forth exam but still would ike to pass this one.

Any help ????????????

Don't have a specific answer to your question, but I'm not sure how leaving Lisbon out could possibly be safe?

JCJCJC

rick flair wrote: »

Can anyone tell me if i am wasting my time on this exam working off the 2009 manuals and legislation ? I have wrapped up all of the old reliables for EU but now scared that i have left out Lisbon - its my forth exam but still would ike to pass this one.

Any help ????????????

Honestly - in my humble opinion you're mad not to be familiar with Lisbon (not that I am). All the institutions and their relationships have changed, and there are new things like the High Commissioner for foreign affairs etc. It's a whole new scene. I suppose if you are really good at 'old' EU and you work your ass off for the next 24 hrs, looking at the EU websites etc and marking up your treaty you might get your head around it. Having said that I personally detest EU law at this stage, I just can't retain it and these exam problem questions with hypothetical regs and directives are utter nonsense.
Get to know the new numbering for FMOG & W and all the old classic reliables - if you know the old numbers get to know the conversion chart part of the book. I'm regarding EU as my No 4, I expect to fail it, if I can get the magic three in the bag I'll be happy enough this round, only got two last spring.

JC

JCJCJC

ad deleted. JC

Arsenal1986

Not the right thread to advertise selling books, theres a specific thread for that

Orla FitzP

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?

no......just the time pressure- ugh?!

FreudianSlippers

JCJCJC wrote: »

I have a pristine unmarked March 2010 Griffith's EU manual - up-to-date with Lisbon etc. After the FE1s this time, I'm interested in selling for €70 straight-deal, or exchanging for similar Griffith's or Independent 09/10 Criminal, Equity, Company or Constitutional.

PM me if genuinely interested, advertised before here but re-advertising again now due to time-wasters.

JC

Please keep advertisements in the specific thread for advertising FE1 materials. Consider this a warning - advertisement posts in this thread following this warning will be given infractions.

Brian010

Are there topics that appear every year on the EU paper? I'm assuming you are guaranteed a question or two on the internal market and one on competition/state aids....

JCJCJC

Arsenal1986 wrote: »

Not the right thread to advertise selling books, theres a specific thread for that

Sorry - didn't know that, there used to be a lot of book ads here around the March 2010 FE1s. What's the URL of the right thread? I've looked through twenty pages of stuff and can't see it.

JC

FreudianSlippers

It's on page 2

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055100192


Can always use search too!

moppet

hey guys
what are people looking at for equity?

coco13

rick flair wrote: »

Can anyone tell me if i am wasting my time on this exam working off the 2009 manuals and legislation ? I have wrapped up all of the old reliables for EU but now scared that i have left out Lisbon - its my forth exam but still would ike to pass this one.

Any help ????????????

At this late stage in the game I wouldnt get too excited about it.. While LT has brought about changes in the EU the main changes are organisational and structural and therefore will have most impact on a question on the Institutions/ Decision Making Process in the EU. Yes there are other changes as a result of the LT but dont have time to go into them here and now.. If I get a few minutes later I'll PM a list of bullet points so at least you can even be aware of the fundamental changes.

fe1ready

re: rick flair

Yeah, Lisbon is neccessary for institutional question so i certianly wouldn't leave it out if you're doing that q.

RE: unpaid work experience

Personally Id be happy to do the 5 day week for free as long as Im getting good experience. At the end of the day, you have a better chance of getting into a top firm by having some experience.

I went for interview this week and the solicitor who was giving the unpaid work experince couldn't get over the quality of CVs they were getting. But they said right off the bat that if they took me on and i had passed all my exams, they would give me my training contract and that's worth its weight in gold!!!!

Plus, I have it in my head that if I see the law in practice and in real tangible terms it might stick in my head better than rote learning from a text book.

page1

I'd love to be in a position to work for free but I would have childcare costs for two children to cover. I was going to try and get some experience working for free a day a week but it would probably be sniffed at given that there are many qualified solicitors willing to work a full week for free.

NoQuarter

coco13 wrote: »

If I get a few minutes later I'll PM a list of bullet points so at least you can even be aware of the fundamental changes.

Coud you post them here in this thread too??

NoQuarter

Just found this and thought id throw it up:

Previous numbering contained in the EC Treaty
New Article number contained in the TFEU - sometimes with textual changes
Article 12 (non discrimination - nationality)
Article 18


Article 28 (free movement of goods)
Article 34


Article 30 (justifications for restricting free movement of goods)
Article 36


Article 39 (free movement of workers)
Article 45


Article 43 (freedom of establishment)
Article 49


Article 49 (freedom to provide services)
Article 56


Article 56 (free movement of capital)
Article 63


Article 81 (competition - restrictive agreements)
Article 101


Article 82 (competition - abuse of dominance)
Article 102


Article 86 (public undertakings/special exclusive rights)
Article 106


Article 87 (state aid)
Article 107


Article 230 (judicial review of Community acts)
Article 263


Article 234 (preliminary references to the Court of Justice)
Article 267


hope that shows up properly. (edit, didnt come out right, ah well!)

Full renumbering found here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0361:0388:EN:PDF

Hogzy

Consitutional paper couldnt have gone worse for me. Only answered four and a half questions. Half the question being the casenote- did Abortion information case - Completely spoofed, never read the case just talked about how it changed interpretation of rights from Natural law to JPC.

The only 3 chapters of the manual i didnt do were AG, Principles of Social policy and the Courts and they all came up. Im livid!!!!!!!!!!

Failed constitutional the last time round and looks like im going to fail it again.

What did people say in regards to John and his leaking tank?

Jev/N

Constitutional was alright for me, I think.

Dodged the AG, Art 45 and Courts questions as well. Really annoyed with the judicial independence question as I'd done out an essay for study but more focused on Sep of Powers cases.

Casenotes were alright, McDonald v Bord na gCon I had just looked at this morning and Re A26 was mostly just a waffle of anything I knew about the condemnation of natural law interpretation!

The Separation of Powers essay was a bit off-putting due to its construction but I gave it a shot, hoping for the best.

For John, I said the entrance might have been unlawful more so than unconstitutional but not definite on it. Mentioned about strict liability, proportionality, unconstitutionality etc. I don't think the conclusions matter as long as you identify the issues

Hogzy

Jev/N wrote: »

Constitutional was alright for me, I think.

Dodged the AG, Art 45 and Courts questions as well. Really annoyed with the judicial independence question as I'd done out an essay for study but more focused on Sep of Powers cases.

Casenotes were alright, McDonald v Bord na gCon I had just looked at this morning and Re A26 was mostly just a waffle of anything I knew about the condemnation of natural law interpretation!

The Separation of Powers essay was a bit off-putting due to its construction but I gave it a shot, hoping for the best.

For John, I said the entrance might have been unlawful more so than unconstitutional but not definite on it. Mentioned about strict liability, proportionality, unconstitutionality etc. I don't think the conclusions matter as long as you identify the issues

Yeah i didnt come to any definite conclusions per se just said if court thinks X it does A it it thinks Y it does B. Im in the same boat as you when it came to the Judicial independance, my prepared essay was completely SOP focused.
I cannot fathom the thought of sitting another constitutional paper. I hope to god i passed.

Jev/N

With 4 1/2 questions you should be fine, especially if you can identify the issues in the problem, that's the bulk of the work.

EU is next for me, not looking forward to it!

law86

The essay questions overlapped a bit, I thought. Suppose they always do. I was happy enough with it though, ided same issues for poor old John.

Hogzy

Jev/N wrote: »

EU is next for me, not looking forward to it!

+1, Passed it last time round but i feel much less prepared this time round which is worrying. I find EU is relatively easy to spot the issues. Its trying to remember the bloody cases is the tough part.

Contract in the morning for me. I feel i could sleep for days after today but i gotta go cram

law_lady

My sympathies to anyone with a few of these wretched exams in a row, so tough to stay going!

Question about Contract, I'm leaving out Exclusion/Exemption Clauses, Consumer Law/Sale of Goods, and Formalities of Contracts out. Am I taking too great of a risk? I might have time to do them but I just feel I've time to get what I have done really well done so I'd rather not do too much and have a lesser knowledge of everything. What are others leaving out?

runfortheborder

page1 wrote: »

I'd love to be in a position to work for free but I would have childcare costs for two children to cover. I was going to try and get some experience working for free a day a week but it would probably be sniffed at given that there are many qualified solicitors willing to work a full week for free.

that is probably the best way to do work experience for free actually, one day a week, I was offering to work for free during a time of desperation, recently, a very well known and solid Solicitor told me not to do it, he said it breeds resentment, and I think it would do so. But if you really need the experience that is one way of getting some experience without being , well, used.