FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Dylan123

Sometimes it helps to try and avoid getting bogged down by illogical decisions; after all we have the benefit of hindsight.
For example in the Waganmound case it was stated that it was reasonably foreseeable that oil would cause damage if it escapes. However it was held that it was not reasonably foreseeable that it would ignite the whole bay.

However the point is: ( i think)

The principle developed in the case in relation to the attachment of liability:
Reasonable forseability was now used at both stages of the two tier test - where as the Polemis principle applied it only at the first stage.
(1) Reasonable foreseability - that oil would escape?
(2) Direct consequences -that the bay would ignite? Were they reasonably foreseeable? (for me the confusion is that yes of course it was forseeable that highly flammable material will ignite almost anything.. but thats irrelevant because i think we are only concerned with the principle opposed to the opinion of the judge?


I think i am getting bogged down by it now!!!

Dylan123

Can anyone sum up the following cases please?
-Glencar
-Caparo
-Ward v Mcmaster
-McShane Wholesale v Veg

JCJCJC

Dylan123 wrote: »

Can anyone sum up the following cases please?
-Glencarr
-Caparo
-Ward v Mcmaster
-McShane Wholesale v Veg

Top-of-the-head stuff, open to correction:

Glencar were a mining and exploration company at the time, probably still are. They spent a considerable sum on exploratory drilling in Mayo, on foot of a department-issued license, with a view to mining there if the results were favourable which it seems they were. This caused local controversy - pre-cursor of the Rossport row and just as hot. The local County Development Plan was up for renewal and the county councillors were under heavy public pressure to deal with the mining concerns. They arbitrarily voted to zone the entire county of Mayo as unsuitable for mining. That left Glencar up a gum tree basically - snookered by the councillors. Glencar sued successfully in tort for breach of duty of care because of the capricious and arbitrary way the County Council acted, without a reasoned and technically sound basis for their resolution.

Caparo

Wards were people of modest means who obtained a loan from Louth County Council to buy an existing house. The Council got the house inspected and valued by an auctioneer - they didn't have a professional engineer or surveyor assess it, which would be a customary thing to do and normal practise in most councils, given that they employ a lot of civil engineers, many of whom manage the feat of being simultaneously notoriously uncivil.

The house turned out to be a disaster, structurally unsound etc, and eventually worthless. Wards argued that they had relied on the Council not to invest its loan capital into an unsound house. The Council argued that their assessment was for value only, and Wards should have got their own engineering report because ultimately it was their house, they picked it etc and they were stuck with the mortgage.
The Court found that a duty of care in fact existed and that it had been breached. Ex-hypothesi, if the Wards needed Council assistance for housing, they weren't terribly well off. The Council should have reasonably foreseen that persons of such limited means can't engage consulting engineers, and would rely on the Council to invest public funds prudently.


PS Edit - I think McMaster was the valuer, but Louth County Council took the big hit.

glengirlie

Anyone any advice on whether i should do the constitutional one day revision course in indep colls? Struggling a little with it, need it broken down. Have attended the GCD ones before, and was really helpful but just wondered do IC do the same and are there notes as good. Wanna see is the money worth it? Would love advice thanks

akom

This may be a ridiculous question but just wondering how much attention is payed to case years or the lack thereof?

I always thought the names were obviously the more important part but do these exams/specific examiners require the exact years aswell or are many marks lost if they're not there?

Any replies would be greatly appreciated!

Dylan123

JCJCJC wrote: »

Top-of-the-head stuff, open to correction:

Glencar were a mining and exploration company at the time, probably still are. They spent a considerable sum on exploratory drilling in Mayo, on foot of a department-issued license, with a view to mining there if the results were favourable which it seems they were. This caused local controversy - pre-cursor of the Rossport row and just as hot. The local County Development Plan was up for renewal and the county councillors were under heavy public pressure to deal with the mining concerns. They arbitrarily voted to zone the entire county of Mayo as unsuitable for mining. That left Glencar up a gum tree basically - snookered by the councillors. Glencar sued successfully in tort for breach of duty of care because of the capricious and arbitrary way the County Council acted, without a reasoned and technically sound basis for their resolution.

Caparo

Wards were people of modest means who obtained a loan from Louth County Council to buy an existing house. The Council got the house inspected and valued by an auctioneer - they didn't have a professional engineer or surveyor assess it, which would be a customary thing to do and normal practise in most councils, given that they employ a lot of civil engineers, many of whom manage the feat of being simultaneously notoriously uncivil.

The house turned out to be a disaster, structurally unsound etc, and eventually worthless. Wards argued that they had relied on the Council not to invest its loan capital into an unsound house. The Council argued that their assessment was for value only, and Wards should have got their own engineering report because ultimately it was their house, they picked it etc and they were stuck with the mortgage.
The Court found that a duty of care in fact existed and that it had been breached. Ex-hypothesi, if the Wards needed Council assistance for housing, they weren't terribly well off. The Council should have reasonably foreseen that persons of such limited means can't engage consulting engineers, and would rely on the Council to invest public funds prudently.


PS Edit - I think McMaster was the valuer, but Louth County Council took the big hit.

Thanks for that. So what was the legal principle developed from those cases.

brumbram6

guys, any tips or ideas for company exam? what do you think might come up in the exam??

trixabelle86

akom wrote: »

This may be a ridiculous question but just wondering how much attention is payed to case years or the lack thereof?

I always thought the names were obviously the more important part but do these exams/specific examiners require the exact years aswell or are many marks lost if they're not there?

Any replies would be greatly appreciated!

Heya!

The most important thing to remember from the cases is the judgement, the ratio of the case - the name and facts of the case fall second to that. Even if you don't remember the name of the case in the exam, put down the judgement, you will still get marks for it!!! The year is of little importance, however if you put it down it won't hurt if you remember a few of them or you remember that one is a recent case saying "In the recent case of..." is a good idea.
I'm not trying to learn the years of the cases, however a few slip in regardless. Once I know the name of the case or even a party involved in the case so I can say "the Caparo case" for example, I'll be happy

frustratedTC

Hey guys, just wondering are any of u still writing notes, I am freaking out im not onto learning and pastpapers!

trixabelle86

frustratedTC wrote: »

Hey guys, just wondering are any of u still writing notes, I am freaking out im not onto learning and pastpapers!

me!!!! loadsa time left...i hope...

i'm trying to go over the notes as i'm writing them to minimise learning time later

frustratedTC

So am I, what subjects are u doing?

coco13

Yeah.. Im still writing notes too.. And feeling the pressure!

trixabelle86

frustratedTC wrote: »

So am I, what subjects are u doing?

Tort, Criminal, Contract and Company

trixabelle86

coco13 wrote: »

Yeah.. Im still writing notes too.. And feeling the pressure!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a01QQZyl-_I

coco13

trixabelle86 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a01QQZyl-_I

He he!! Im doing Company, Eu and Cons!!!

frustratedTC

i think ur right we do still have a gud bit left!wud just be nice to have them outa the way considering i dont know their content lol!! im doing contract, tort, equity and criminal.
Are u leaving any topics out, i'm getting very tempted!

trixabelle86

Yeah I'm leaving out a few, all based on exam grids though. Gambling all the way... I just don't think my head will fit in all 4 complete subjects otherwise! How the fook do people do 8???

coco13

trixabelle86 wrote: »

Yeah I'm leaving out a few, all based on exam grids though. Gambling all the way... I just don't think my head will fit in all 4 complete subjects otherwise! How the fook do people do 8???

No idea..It is beyond me.. Dunno how it is done!

trixabelle86

coco13 wrote: »

No idea..It is beyond me.. Dunno how it is done!

I'd say it involves plenty of red bull and not sleeping for three months. I'm doing the revision courses in Griffith next week and the week after for criminal, tort and company in a desperate effort to cram. Fingers crossed it'll work!! :rolleyes:

coco13

trixabelle86 wrote: »

I'd say it involves plenty of red bull and not sleeping for three months. I'm doing the revision courses in Griffith next week and the week after for criminal, tort and company in a desperate effort to cram. Fingers crossed it'll work!! :rolleyes:

Best of luck with it!:D

trixabelle86

coco13 wrote: »

Best of luck with it!:D

I'll let you know what they say for Company. You're a mad one for doing the three longest subjects together! :eek:

JCJCJC

Dylan123 wrote: »

Thanks for that. So what was the legal principle developed from those cases.

Duty of care is owed to a very wide set of persons potentially affected by the negligent act of the tortfeasor, per Atkin's neighbour principle, no 'relationship' of any kind necessary - any person reasonably within your sphere of contemplation as being likely to be affected by your actions etc.

I'm not revved up on tort at all at the moment because I have it passed for FE1s so anybody who is sharper is welcome to improve on my obs on this topic. I'm just answering from memory on this.

coco13

trixabelle86 wrote: »

I'll let you know what they say for Company. You're a mad one for doing the three longest subjects together! :eek:

I have no choice,,,They are the only ones I have left to do.. Such an ejet I didnt pick subjects more wisely!!! Too late now!! Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

JessieJ

Very random question - I'm doing an intensive revision course in GCD this week. I need to get a taxi from GCD after the course ends at 10pm so that I'll be able to get the last bus from Dublin to my town.

Does anybody have a number for a taxi company based out near GCD? PM if you do. Please and thank you!

coco13

JessieJ wrote: »

Very random question - I'm doing an intensive revision course in GCD this week. I need to get a taxi from GCD after the course ends at 10pm so that I'll be able to get the last bus from Dublin to my town.

Does anybody have a number for a taxi company based out near GCD? PM if you do. Please and thank you!

I usually use 01 848 2000

JCJCJC

JessieJ wrote: »

Very random question - I'm doing an intensive revision course in GCD this week. I need to get a taxi from GCD after the course ends at 10pm so that I'll be able to get the last bus from Dublin to my town.

Does anybody have a number for a taxi company based out near GCD? PM if you do. Please and thank you!

Which night and where's your town - I'm driving from GCD to Galway on tuesday night, and GCD to Limerick on Friday night if that's any use?

frustratedTC

Just looking at tort now, do u think it would be dagerous to leave all those little itty bitty chapters out plus the land torts, there's just soo much!!

brian__foley

JCJCJC wrote: »

Which night and where's your town - I'm driving from GCD to Galway on tuesday night, and GCD to Limerick on Friday night if that's any use?

Heart-warming!

brian__foley

JessieJ wrote: »

Very random question - I'm doing an intensive revision course in GCD this week. I need to get a taxi from GCD after the course ends at 10pm so that I'll be able to get the last bus from Dublin to my town.

Does anybody have a number for a taxi company based out near GCD? PM if you do. Please and thank you!

GCD is on the South Circular Road, and about 400 feet from Clanbrassil Street (or whatever the extension of that is called).

There won't be an issue getting a taxi!

lawladdie

glengirlie wrote: »

Anyone any advice on whether i should do the constitutional one day revision course in indep colls? Struggling a little with it, need it broken down. Have attended the GCD ones before, and was really helpful but just wondered do IC do the same and are there notes as good. Wanna see is the money worth it? Would love advice thanks

I asked that a few pages back but didnt get much feedback on Independent. People seemed happy with GCD though.

Ive signed up for the UCD constitutional seminar as well so hopefully that will be worth it.