FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Ruby83

NickDrake wrote: »

Tough exam. Not sure if I passed it. Along with Tort this was another shocking paper. Way too long.

Minor topics taking up full questions. A truck load of waffle. Bad structure.

Nothing on institutions. Question on equality that was WAY too long. A question about viewing the records in the EU Institutions. Madness.

Compared to the last 2 years papers, this way way way tougher. I just don't understand why make the paper more difficult. They should not change like this.

The exams are very difficult this year. We all know why. The examiners must have been under instructions.

Totally agree. I thought EU was very hard. Loads of people seemed to leave early in Cork. Three questions from the one chapter in Griffith manual so if u left that out you were pretty screwed. I think I've revised my opinion on the case note question as I'm sure that saved a few people. The direct effect/ MS liability question was way too long and it's really hard to get into the meat of anything in the FMOG/FMOWs questions cos all you seem to have time to do is list the topics that are relevant and a few cases. And there was a big overlap with topics from the last paper (i.e. fundamental rights/transparency). Very hard to get the 5 questions done in the time allocated. Only two left..I'm so excited at the prospect of freedom!!

Brian010

I thought EU was okay. I only got 4 and half questions done tho. Spent way too much time on Citizenship and Workers problem. Definitely way too long. I left out Institutions revision tho which was nice. Direct Effect and Member State Liability, Competition and Equality were expected. Did a bit of a mish mash answer for the goods etc problem. The cases in the case note question were nice.

Question 1 and the Brussels question were ridiculous tho in fairness.

The adrenaline rush you get when opening the paper to see if your topics come up is some craic lol.

hession.law

steph86 wrote: »

Hey
I'm planning on starting my first four fe1s in November with Eu, Tort Criminal and Contract being my first.
i'll be doing the online revision course with griffith college.
Did anyone do these subjects together? I finished college in May and Eu was my last subject and that with Tort would be my strongest areas so believe it would be better to start with strongest areas first seeing as you need to pass three out of four on your first sitting.
Also, did anyone do the griffith online course for the Fe1s? Only know one person that done the on line course but they done it for the Kings Inns exams and passed them first time.

IMO I would definitely not take EU for my first sitting as the course is so long and the FE1 exam experience is so different to college you'll probably end up dropping it the night before the exam. having done all the exams now except for criminal next tuesday I would take contract criminal equity constitutional for my first sitting these four are well taught by GCD and there is some over lap between them.

hession.law

having only look through past exam papers in the comfort of my own home and having sat three different sittings i can safely say the people who pass them now are going to be way better qualified that those gone before them!! honest to god they are likely Rowmtree's randoms they way they mix questions your brain is hoping from one topic to the next and with the tongue twister of names ECJ cases have at the end of eu i had forgotten my own name!!!

runfortheborder

blathblath wrote: »

Charitable. Injunctions probably Mareva. Undue influence, tracing, trusteeship! it's too hard to call but at least there are somewhat bankers!

Yes , i agree think it will be Mareva alright, or Mareva/Anton Pillar type question maybe a donatio mortis causa question this time?

I have a complex about charitable trusts questions , I don't know why because yeah it is a banker but i'm going in with the intention of only doing it if i have to.

Brian010

hession.law wrote: »

having only look through past exam papers in the comfort of my own home and having sat three different sittings i can safely say the people who pass them now are going to be way better qualified that those gone before them!! honest to god they are likely Rowmtree's randoms they way they mix questions your brain is hoping from one topic to the next and with the tongue twister of names ECJ cases have at the end of eu i had forgotten my own name!!!

Yeh no doubt they are getting tougher. Law Society are driving profits up at the entrance level and reducing numbers. Tightening the bottleneck for poor students like us :-(

blathblath

Is it ok to be confident in presuming that equity does not mix topics???

Hogzy

So bloody annoyed. Passed EU last April and judging by todays paper id say i failed. Im really pissed off!!!

page1

I thought it was an awful paper. I spent the first 20 mins or so cursing the exam and examiner under my breath while trying to make sense of the questions. I found the direct effect/state liability question horrible, i had to read it so many times to figure out what he was looking for and i still wasnt sure.
My timing was terrible i dont know what happened i spent 2 hours on direct effect and the first free movement question. Then had to fly through the next three questionsin an hour. I luckily had a pre prepared essay on subsidiariy (thank God) and then had 15 mins to write three case notes - that were prob rubbish i think i wrote all three in the one page.

Im raging it was hopefully my last exam (sat company on tues and found it grand) and no ill prob have to re sit in March.

I was full sure there would be a question on either enforcement action or preliminary ref and i had them inside out.

I looked around at one stage and there were lots of people just staring at the paper in despair not writing anything.

fe1ready

EU seriously, wtf?

I looked around and eveyone was like

I could tell from the last few papers and reports that he was at some point going to move away from the predictable institutional question.

If you look at the questions being asked now in all topics compared to say, 2004. There is absolutely no comparrison.

They really need to start having these exams 3-4 times per year. Its too long of a wait til March to resit.

NickDrake

What was the examiner hoping to achieve? It seems another petty paper along with tort.

It reeks unprofessionalism if you ask me.

Disgraceful paper!!!

UL GRAD

Shocking exam.. no comparison between to last few.. It's was impossible to do 5 q's! Pissed off, was last 1!

UL GRAD

UL GRAD wrote: »

Shocking exam.. no comparison between to last few.. It's was impossible to do 5 q's! Pissed off, was last 1!

Nearly as shocking as my grammar by the looks things.. That's iPhone for u!

NickDrake

UL GRAD wrote: »

Shocking exam.. no comparison between to last few.. It's was impossible to do 5 q's! Pissed off, was last 1!

Yes disgraceful paper. You are right to be pissed off.

NickDrake

UL GRAD wrote: »

Nearly as shocking as my grammar by the looks things.. That's iPhone for u!

I think you can be forgiven after such a long day. All my hours in UL library and post grad room seem worthless now

Brian010

Brian010 wrote: »

I thought EU was okay. I only got 4 and half questions done tho. Spent way too much time on Citizenship and Workers problem. Definitely way too long. I left out Institutions revision tho which was nice. Direct Effect and Member State Liability, Competition and Equality were expected. Did a bit of a mish mash answer for the goods etc problem. The cases in the case note question were nice.

Question 1 and the Brussels question were ridiculous tho in fairness.

The adrenaline rush you get when opening the paper to see if your topics come up is some craic lol.

Question 2 was pants I mean. EU has wrecked my scone.

NickDrake

I wonder if a call to Liveline tomorrow is something to think about? What do people think?

I'd say they would be very interested

randomchild

Jesus that EU paper was fierce. Think I passed it, but if i did it was by the skin of my teeth. The only "mainstream" questions he asked where each a foot long and full of filler. Everything else were those dud questions he always complains no one answers, brussels 1 regulations? I tried to write a sample answer for that before the exam and it did not even fill a page.... In fairness though, the case note question at least had some cases I knew....

Ruby83

Ya and in fairness he does give plenty of internal choices which he doesn't have to do given that the whole syllabus is examinable. Not taking away from the fact that it was much more difficult from recent papers...

mariaod

question for people doing property exam- Has Leasehold covenants been affected in anyway by the 2009 act, i know freehold covenants have but i am not sure about leasehold.

Anyone have any idea??

JCJCJC

NickDrake wrote: »

I wonder if a call to Liveline tomorrow is something to think about? What do people think?

I'd say they would be very interested

It has wrecked your head - there's no Liveline on saturday

NickDrake

JCJCJC wrote: »

It has wrecked your head - there's no Liveline on saturday

Oh ya. Ha ha . Fe-1's fair wreck your head.

A few of my former class mates rang there to say they are thinking of ringing LiveLine Monday complaining about Tort and EU. Especially Tort due to the poor standard of the paper and state of the questions asked, multiple answers, potential unfair.marking scheme etc.

Arguing lack of a standard of care in setting the exam. Generally, thoughts on the current cilmate for potential trainees etc and what is not being done to help them.

Think they are just arguing EU was very unfair.

I wonder will they go through with it. Will be interesting to hear.

JCJCJC

I don't know that it will acheive much except put a big smile on the face of every solicitor in the country - the law society has us hooked by the bageens at present so our hearts and minds must follow ;-)

I didn't think Tort was too bad, even though I am repeating it and passed it the last time, but that EU paper was bloody mad.

NickDrake

JCJCJC wrote: »

I don't know that it will acheive much except put a big smile on the face of every solicitor in the country - the law society has us hooked by the bageens at present so our hearts and minds must follow ;-)

I didn't think Tort was too bad, even though I am repeating it and passed it the last time, but that EU paper was bloody mad.

Think the issue with Tort was a lot of questions could have been answered in a few different ways but it is likely the marking scheme will only benefit one way. That is a real worry for people and very unfair.

If you compare the standard thought gone into the questions asked, it is way down on previous years.

Ya, EU was just shocking.

Jev/N

NickDrake wrote: »

A few of my former class mates rang there to say they are thinking of ringing LiveLine Monday complaining about Tort and EU. Especially Tort due to the poor standard of the paper and state of the questions asked, multiple answers, potential unfair.marking scheme etc.

Arguing lack of a standard of care in setting the exam. Generally, thoughts on the current cilmate for potential trainees etc and what is not being done to help them.

Think they are just arguing EU was very unfair.

I wonder will they go through with it. Will be interesting to hear.

Ah Jaysus, now in fairness neither paper was that bad. I don't understand this attitude to the exams, and I sat both of those papers.

They were tough, fair enough, but they weren't impossible and the whole point is that they're not supposed to be predictable and/or a walk in the park.

The only thing of either paper that could be argued is the length of the FE1/FE2 problem question in the grand scheme of things but besides that there's little to be pointed out

fe1ready

NickDrake wrote: »

Oh ya. Ha ha . Fe-1's fair wreck your head.

A few of my former class mates rang there to say they are thinking of ringing LiveLine Monday complaining about Tort and EU. Especially Tort due to the poor standard of the paper and state of the questions asked, multiple answers, potential unfair.marking scheme etc.

Arguing lack of a standard of care in setting the exam. Generally, thoughts on the current cilmate for potential trainees etc and what is not being done to help them.

Think they are just arguing EU was very unfair.

I wonder will they go through with it. Will be interesting to hear.

While I agree that tort and eu were insane I am a regular listener to Joe Duffy and not too long ago a trainee solicitor rang in saying how tough things were and quite literally everyone who called in blasted her on air. As though she had a silver spoon in her mouth and didn't have a place to be complaining.

Which i think is hillarious because if these same people had kids who were accepted to do law, they'd be as proud as punch.

JCJCJC

fe1ready wrote: »

Which i think is hillarious because if these same people had kids who were accepted to do law, they'd be as proud as punch.

If those same people failed the intoxalyser they'd want a solicitor who sat on Denning's lap for fifty years to act for them.

rick flair

Agree will all, exam papers too long, tooooo many topics interwoven and little time to do the questions justice. BUT we all know why this is - supply and demand folks. EU was ridiculous and impractical so too torts and const.

I think a better way around these exams in to get rid of the must pass 3 first go - to passing them all in say a set numbers of sittings.

But it is very clear that the papers were drafted to put the maximum number of students to the point of breaking - perhaps the marking will be easier (cough, cough). If they want to change the paper or system why dont they do it openly , instead of digging below the belt. Although if you where on the other side of the fence...........

Anyway I have equity so you can bank that no injunction q's will come up, or specific performance, trusts or charities. There will probably be 8 questions all on obscure maxims with the second part canonical and Roman law.

Crawling over broken glass would be easier.

Brian010

We can't complain about topics. They are on the syllabus so we have to learn them so arguing that a topic came up last year and isn't to be expected in x sitting is futile.

Maybe there is an argument for length and content of some of exams. I felt in EU today that I could be writing an answer on 10 questions never mind 5. Clearly there is a discrepancy there. It is impossible to cover all the material areas within the time period.

I agree there should be more sittings each year and I don't see any justifiable reasons why we are required to pass three first time.

The Law Society is in a dominant position and is seriously abusing it lol!!

coco13

How disastrous was EU Law today! I’m absolutely gutted. Put a lot of work into preparing for this exam but I am certain that it was all in vain. I definitely did not reach the requisite grade today and am gutted. I must admit that I am very much of the opinion that today’s EU law paper was a very unfair paper. I have no difficulty with a tough exam but there is a difference between a tough exam and an unfair exam. While I accept that the topics examined on the exam paper were in themselves contained in the EU Law syllabus, I would argue that the paper did not facilitate any student in the manner in which the questions sought to examine niche areas of the course eg subsidiarity/proportionality/access to documents/Brussels Convention. I would argue that a more just system would be for more mainstream topics to be examined and that the papers are marked more difficultly. I am of the opinion that the exam paper should to some extent examine areas where there is room for a student to discuss the matters addressed. Whilst I covered the topics examined in the niche area questions in preparation of today’s exam I was certainly in no position to extend what was covered in half a page in the preparatory manuals into a comprehensive essay on the topic. Some may argue that this is a defect in my preparation for the above exam however with the vastness of the various courses it is very difficult to be “Essay Prepared” on all smaller aspects of courses when there are other more substantially lengthy areas to cover in the subject at hand and other subjects also. The absence of an Essay on the EU Institutions did not assist in any way today nor did the lengthy question on Direct Effect, MS Liability. It also is a very difficult system for students in that by the time that the March exams come around all this law will be a distant memory. Where will it end!!???