FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

JCJCJC

steph86 wrote: »

.... Am avoiding L & Tennant like the plague. .

Jack Anderson in one of his last examiner's reports said Tennants is Scottish beer, tenants rent houses - while he's not the current examiner, his point is good. Watch the details.

Dylan123

Just a little curious as to what independent colleges revision course is like for the fe1's?

6 of 1 half a dozen of another?

I know Griffiths revision day sessions are very good and highly recommended.

law_lady

happy_man2010 wrote: »

HI folks, hope study is going ok for everyone! Does anyone know the topics that arose on the last property paper? I know there was two on succession and a question on adverse possession so anything after that would be brilliant! Thanks.

From what I remember, there was a question on Easements, Family Property and I think there was a question with 4 parts to it and one or two of those parts were on Co-Ownership. Could be wrong on that one. That's just from memory though. It was a very nice paper.

Also in relation to property what topics are people doing?
i've done equity and the doctrine of notice, registered and unregisterd land, succession law, co-ownership and tenure although i'll be using that as a back up question. Am avoiding L & Tennant like the plague. will prob do either family property, licenses and/ or adverse possession.

And to the person asking what else to do for Property, it would be utterly ridiculous not to do Adverse Posession. It's easy to remember and it almost ALWAYS comes up. I also avoided Landlord and Tenant law. I did Lease/Licence Distinction though, a very short and straightforward topic. Family Property is ok but longer than AP or Lease/Licence.

Overall, the topics I did were Succession, Adverse Possession, Covenants, Easements, Family Property, Co-Ownership and Lease/Licence.


As for me, I'm trying to eliminate topics for Constitutional. Any recommendations? Was thinking might leave out The President, The Oireachtas, The Courts, and Emergency Powers. They don't seem to arise very often and I'm hoping if they did I could try to wing something from my copy of the Constitution. Am I chancing it?

Thanks in advance.

trixabelle86

Tried to buy a copy of the Constitution yesterday and was told its out of print for a month because they're updating it re: Lisbon

Make sure everyone doing Constitutional gets their hands on a copy and doesn't leave it till the last minute!!

cd.galway

Hi all, just wondering what everyone is concentrating on for the company exam this time around?
I'm hoping for a question on: Corp personality/lifting the veil
Corporate borrowings
Reckless/fraudulent trading
Disposition of Company Assets
Examinership/receivership
Think a question on Capital maintenance rules is due
Liquidation
Directors
Above is what I'm concentrating on. What is everyone elses thoughts on the matter. Like he usually throws a question up on shares/meetings or Regulation 80...i think this year we'll see a change in this

chopser

law_lady wrote: »

From what I remember, there was a question on Easements, Family Property and I think there was a question with 4 parts to it and one or two of those parts were on Co-Ownership. Could be wrong on that one. That's just from memory though. It was a very nice paper.


And to the person asking what else to do for Property, it would be utterly ridiculous not to do Adverse Posession. It's easy to remember and it almost ALWAYS comes up. I also avoided Landlord and Tenant law. I did Lease/Licence Distinction though, a very short and straightforward topic. Family Property is ok but longer than AP or Lease/Licence.

Overall, the topics I did were Succession, Adverse Possession, Covenants, Easements, Family Property, Co-Ownership and Lease/Licence.


As for me, I'm trying to eliminate topics for Constitutional. Any recommendations? Was thinking might leave out The President, The Oireachtas, The Courts, and Emergency Powers. They don't seem to arise very often and I'm hoping if they did I could try to wing something from my copy of the Constitution. Am I chancing it?

Thanks in advance.

Not sure about leaving out the President and the Oireachtas given the year thats in it, new President and new government this year.

bob_lob_law

Is the Privacy Bill worth looking at in any detail in passing off/defamation? I don't know much about the back story, is it completely stalled or what? DANKE!

Miss_F

Anyone got this yet or know where the best place to get it would be have emailed the people who usually supply it to Griffith but have not received a reply.

RebelScorned

I am sitting Equity in six weeks time and I was just wondering what ye are doing re injunctions. I was looking through the papers and i made out a little chart and the four that keep appearing time and time again are quia timet, mareva, anton piller and mandatory.

Based on last years paper, I am leaving out the latter from my list, I can't do everything, hedging my bets on it not being asked. Between the other three though, I don't feel too comfortable about leaving any of them out- Mareva is yucky but comes up loads as afaik hasn't come up in last few sittings, as is the case with Anton Piller, and quia timet was asked in last years march paper. I was just wondering whether you think it would be enough to cover these three? There is a q on injunctions pretty much every year so i think it would be craziness to leave them out entirely but I must admit I am not very brave when it comes to picking and choosing topics for these exams!!

Oh to go back to those glorious undergrad days where our exams were oh so predictable

RebelScorned

bob_lob_law wrote: »

Is the Privacy Bill worth looking at in any detail in passing off/defamation? I don't know much about the back story, is it completely stalled or what? DANKE!

Privacy Bill is pretty much dead in its tracks- has been 'parked' for foreseeable future per Brian Lenihan, I this was to allow the newly formed press council to get their footing. TBH i can't see it being enacted any time soon- plethora of privacy protections already available- constitutional, non-specific statutory protection, common law actions incl breach of confidence, ECHR, etc. For exam purposes, I would just look at the definitions and have a good idea of what specific statutory intervention for privacy in Ireland would have looked like were bill enacted. I looked at the area for undergrad dissertation and concluded that, in it's current form, the Privacy Bill 2006 is unlikely to be enacted.

brian__foley

chopser wrote: »

Not sure about leaving out the President and the Oireachtas given the year thats in it, new President and new government this year.

Would agree, but not for that reason - more that the President has featured on the exam and within the law on the "President" is the material (usually) on Article 26 which isn't regular in any sense, but appears enough not to leave it out.

I think the main issue here is not to leave out "topics" by reference to their grand labels. So, leaving out "courts" certainly leaves out a lot of dusty stuff about the courts, but tends also to leave out material on the administration of justice in public which has featured several times on the exam. People tend to leave out grand topics wholesale and then miss that sub-topics within them have a close relation to other areas such as privacy etc and can be examined hand-in-hand with them. This can fuel what happens every year in that some simply don't know what the questions are about because huge tracts are left out. One has to be more discrete and not leave out large tracts like the "courts" but rather be selective as to what within those topics one may feel like leaving out.

lawladdie

Was directed to this site and thread by a friend and just wanted to say thanks to everyone for all the helpful posts. Its brilliant!

Does anyone have any suggestions or tips about EU? Im scared by all the Lisbon stuff because any of the books or things I look at are out of date. Does Lisbon really change that much?

Hogzy

lawladdie wrote: »

Does anyone have any suggestions or tips about EU? Im scared by all the Lisbon stuff because any of the books or things I look at are out of date. Does Lisbon really change that much?

Yes it changes ALOT. Nearly every article number has changed. The procedures have completely changed. There are other major changes here and there especially with the institutions.
If doing EU you cannot under any circumstances get around not studying the Lisbon treaty.

JCJCJC

RebelScorned wrote: »

I am sitting Equity in six weeks time and I was just wondering what ye are doing re injunctions. ... Mareva is yucky

I find Equity OK, and Mareva isn't the worst. If you can remember about eight cases you will know enough about it in my humble opinion. It was invented in the UK in the 70's, and followed by the Irish courts in four big cases. To remember those, visualise an aeroplane flying over a stately home dropping bags of flour on two guys having a boxing match in it!!
Aeroplane - Serge Caudron v Air Zaire
Flour - Fleming v Ranks Ireland
Stately Home - Powerscourt v Gallagher
Boxers - BH v WH ( I have two friends with those initials)

They were followed by CountyGlen and O'Mahony v Horgan.

OK. That's the foundation of the jurisdiction. In England and Wales, Marevas have evolved into freezing orders in effect, due mainly to the UK Supreme Court Act 1981, the use of a standard form of order that restricts the Def to 'otherwise dealing in' his assets and due to the exuberance of plaintiff's solicitors who served marevas on Defendant's banks who interpreted them conservatively as freezing orders. The nuclear weapon of Lord Denning became the routine tactical ballistic missile of London's best commercial lawyers at interlocutory stage.
In Ireland, the pure form continues, it's an order to prevent the Def dissipating his assets wrongfully in order to defeat the court's jurisdiction - Countyglen, Bennett v Lipton, O'Mahony v Horgan and Universal Tractors v Saenko. The threshold of proving risk of dissipation is high - Saenko.

O'Mahony is still good law - followed most recently in Dowley v O'Brien [2009] on bailii.org.

Side issues - the standard is 'good arguable case' in Ireland, leave the big argument for the big day.

There has been much call for reform in England for the reasons given - the evolution into freezing orders has strayed from the original intentions, we haven't: CAB v Mc SWeeney. The UK have tried to tinker with it with the Babanoft provisos and the Baltic guidelines etc but basically they have taken the jurisdiction in a crazy direction. Willoughby in an article cites a case where STG 200,000 was run up in interlocutory costs for a case involving STG14,000 to begin with.

There are various farts and grunts from the House of Lords and the CA to the effect that the case must be made out fully in the grounding affidavits, not in the exhibits, they can't be reading thousands of pages and discerning the intended meaning - that's for the plenary hearing. The applicant must make out all likely or anticipated defences and deal with them. There might be a case for appointing a supervising solicitor who is independent of both parties to approve disbursements while the order is in place. The undertaking as to damages must be very real.

The order should have a threshold amount - whatever the P is after in the main action. You can't lock down all the D's money - only as much as you are after. You must establish that he has an asset to be locked down to begin with.

A Mareva can cover non-cash assets, eg a plane or a ship. Visualise Darina Allen parachuting out of a plane and landing on a ship.
Plane - Allen v Jumbo Holdings
Ship - The Rena K

That's basically what I know of it - top-of-the-head stuff but I find that Mareva topic ok. The little picture-stories help me remember lists of cases when I'm under exam stress. Make little diagrams to help you and read Tony Buzan's books for kids on mind-mapping to learn the techniques. The approach will differ depending on whether it comes as an Essay or a problem.

Would anybody fill me in on how the recent legislation on Charities has altered trust law?

JC

trixabelle86

Miss_F wrote: »

Anyone got this yet or know where the best place to get it would be have emailed the people who usually supply it to Griffith but have not received a reply.

Heya! You can get it on Amazon (found it for less than €100 there) or in Easons but think its almost €130 for the student version there

I ordered it on Amazon and it arrived in about a week! Hope that helps

steph86

lawladdie wrote: »

Was directed to this site and thread by a friend and just wanted to say thanks to everyone for all the helpful posts. Its brilliant!

Does anyone have any suggestions or tips about EU? Im scared by all the Lisbon stuff because any of the books or things I look at are out of date. Does Lisbon really change that much?

yes there has been a significant change as a result of lisbon. i would forget about reading pre lisbon books as you are just going to confuse yourself.
This is my first sitting of Eu and from looking at the exam grid the procedural aspects of eu law re institutions, competences,vde, hde, preliminary ref etc just can not be left out.

Dylan123

Any idea?

Art 36 TFEU purports to give an exception to the restriction of the (FMOG) for various reasons such as:
-Treasure possessing artistic, historical or archaeological value.

-Surely its arguable that contradicts the ratio in the Commission v Italy - which imposed a tax levy on fine art leaving the country. I would have thought fine art could be considered alongside those exceptions?

Or am i missing the point?

The fe1 fever is kicking in

lawladdie

Hogzy wrote: »

Yes it changes ALOT. Nearly every article number has changed. The procedures have completely changed. There are other major changes here and there especially with the institutions.
If doing EU you cannot under any circumstances get around not studying the Lisbon treaty.

:(

More work for me then. Any recommendations for up to date books? Or should we look for articles?

coco13

Hey guys..Just wondering when studying the various topics in the courses do people generally just learn a case name and a ratio for most cases and then the facts for the big ones? Im afraid if I dont know the facts I wont be able to do the problem questions? But its really slowing me down trying to learn facts.. is the bare ratio enough for most cases? Also there isnt enough time really to go writing out facts etc but am afraid if I dont know them Ill be in bother??

JCJCJC

coco13 wrote: »

Hey guys..Just wondering when studying the various topics in the courses do people generally just learn a case name and a ratio for most cases and then the facts for the big ones? Im afraid if I dont know the facts I wont be able to do the problem questions? But its really slowing me down trying to learn facts.. is the bare ratio enough for most cases? Also there isnt enough time really to go writing out facts etc but am afraid if I dont know them Ill be in bother??

You have to have some notion what the cases are about I think, and you have to show the examiner that you know a little more than the case name. I find that case notes that you get on the law databases are great, usually they are written by barristers and are very concise. If there's a big long line of cases on a particular point, always read the freshest one first, on bailii.org or similar sites. With any bit of luck, it will cite the worthwhile extracts from the earlier ones and give the judges' names etc, so you will get as much as you need from one case.

Sarahaw

Hey guys

Just wondering if anyone knows who the new property law examiner is?

Thanks!

JCJCJC

Sarahaw wrote: »

Hey guys

Just wondering if anyone knows who the new property law examiner is?

Thanks!

It's all here but in any event it's currently Dr. Aisling Parkes from UCC, assisted by a Ms. Wills, of all possible names. I wonder if she's anything to Bob?

Excuse the levity - that Friday feeling...

Sarahaw

Thanks a mill JCJCJC.

obama2008

I am sure this might have been answered before but the thread is so long. if finishing up a law degree in May and approaching the FE1s in Sept/Oct, sitting 4, how long is needed to prepare?

Hogzy

obama2008 wrote: »

I am sure this might have been answered before but the thread is so long. if finishing up a law degree in May and approaching the FE1s in Sept/Oct, sitting 4, how long is needed to prepare?

You will have loads of time if you plan to start in July. I really regret not starting in July. I waited till the march sitting which was just stupid.

obama2008

Thanks for that, I am doing property and equity in college this year so hope to do them again, I was over a law job abroad for June and July so I am not sure if I will cut it a bit fine!

Hogzy

obama2008 wrote: »

Thanks for that, I am doing property and equity in college this year so hope to do them again, I was over a law job abroad for June and July so I am not sure if I will cut it a bit fine!

If i were in your position. I would choose, equity, property, contract and criminal. Equity, property and contract overlap and criminal is a short and relatively easy course.

Keep away from EU, Constitutional, Company and Tort as they are the most time consuming courses.

This is my opinion now your study techniques might be different but if i were in your shoes thats what i would be doing

may54321

Hi, I'm looking for the following manuals:
- company
- Tort
- Consitution
-Equity

As recent as possible.

PM if you want to sell yours and include price.
0877808397

Thanks

JessieJ

Anybody want to point me in the direction of 'must know' topics for equity please? Injunctions, estoppel...

I'm seriously fed up with study at this stage! Ggggrrrrrrr!

JCJCJC

JessieJ wrote: »

Anybody want to point me in the direction of 'must know' topics for equity please? Injunctions, estoppel...

I'm seriously fed up with study at this stage! Ggggrrrrrrr!

Injunctions and trusts represents half the syllabus, and you can always use knowledge of the maxims. The maxims can come as half a question, and you can always bring them into answers on everything in equity, for plaintiffs and defendants. I'm doing bits and pieces after that, stuff like donatio mortis causa, quistclose trusts, remedies and so on. You absolutely must know trusts and injunctions though.