FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

coco13

trixabelle86 wrote: »

Just a quick question - where in the companies Acts would one find "Model Reg. 3"? Or is it in it? I thought, maybe I'm wrong, that there were model articles of association in the Consolidation Acts. Or maybe I'm completely confused! Arghh help!

No prob!! I was in the same boat!! Its actually in Part 2 of the Model Regualtions at the back of the 1963 Act..There are two parts to Part A.. Pat 1 and Part 2!! I couldnt find it for ages either!

Liverpoollad

Well all, am really struggling with property law, especially legal and equitable ownership and just have a quick question. With regards to The Life Estate and the 2009 Act, I was wondering if anyone could clarify an issue for me. Under the 2009 Act, anytime a life estate is created it will now create a trust of land. What happens if I have the following scenario

To Tom for life, remainder to Mary

Who is the trustee? Who is the beneficiary? Who is the tenant for life?

Maybe the reason I can't get my round this is because I have always struggled with legal and equitable rights. How do the courts decide between the two, do equitable rights always take precedence over legal rights? Does an equitable ownership in land always convert into a legal and equitable ownership at some stage?
If anybody has any advice or clarification, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

fe1sagain

T.Watson wrote: »

Heard about this yesterday, not sure how relevant it is but thought it might of interest to those doing EU. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0309/1224291667585.html

Just wondering if this changes anything re citizenship. Did the Chen case not already provide a right for non eu parents of citizens to have residence under the 2004 Directive?

Any thoughts?

frustratedTC

Kamilat wrote: »

Just in relation to people who are still note taking, how many exams are you all sitting? And how many days are you planning on using for learning topics? So fed up of this at this stage just want them done...

i'm sitting 4, how bou u?

Kamilat

frustratedTC wrote: »

i'm sitting 4, how bou u?

I'm sitting 3 this time around ( equity, contract and company). R u doing equity by any chance?

frustratedTC

I'm doing equity, tort, contract and criminal. Really struggling with equity. Is this ur first 4

wez99950

frustratedTC wrote: »

I'm doing equity, tort, contract and criminal. Really struggling with equity. Is this ur first 4

For contract what topics u doing? Heard of any tips?? I have 2 days between that and criminal and I'd say that'll be the only time to learn off. Yikes

frustratedTC

wez99950 wrote: »

For contract what topics u doing? Heard of any tips?? I have 2 days between that and criminal and I'd say that'll be the only time to learn off. Yikes

I don't think that there is really any tips purely cos she mixes topics. the 2 days before i'm guna have to learn of void and illegal contracts, wat are they like for studying?
Id say mistake and estoppel are definited this year, and then the usual offer, acceptance, consideration. Discharge is tricky to predict cos they hasked breach twice last yr i think

akom

JCJCJC wrote: »

Our worries are small compared to what's happening in Japan today. Hard not to keep watching it.

Very true...puts things into perspective doesn't it!

Kamilat

frustratedTC wrote: »

I'm doing equity, tort, contract and criminal. Really struggling with equity. Is this ur first 4

Yes I'm the same with equity. Do u think it would be crazy to leave out charitable trusts say if I do injunctions, specific performance, undue influence, rectification,complete constitution, secret trusts, resulting trusts and trusteeship? Although I have a feeling the three certainties will make an appearance and also what r the chances of undue influence coming up for the 5th time in a row?! No I've done four already (crim, tort, constit & property) so these r the ones I'm left with plus eu in October hopefully... R these ur first ones?

itsmol

Thanks!

trixabelle86

JCJCJC wrote: »

Our worries are small compared to what's happening in Japan today. Hard not to keep watching it.

too true

frustratedTC

Kamilat wrote: »

Yes I'm the same with equity. Do u think it would be crazy to leave out charitable trusts say if I do injunctions, specific performance, undue influence, rectification,complete constitution, secret trusts, resulting trusts and trusteeship? Although I have a feeling the three certainties will make an appearance and also what r the chances of undue influence coming up for the 5th time in a row?! No I've done four already (crim, tort, constit & property) so these r the ones I'm left with plus eu in October hopefully... R these ur first ones?

Charitable trusts are very popular, but my god they take ages to wade through and id say ur safe with that covered. i'm doing trusteeship too, would i need to do constructive trusts with that?

itsmol

Ok im really frustrated with property, well more frustrated with myself as ive barely looked at it before now, so Im gonna ask the question as Im unsure as to what I should be concentrating on! what topics are people doing for it? what areas should i focus on to cover myself?

Or maybe im doing ok n ive had too much coffee this am....

Lorraine 25

Hi guys,

Just wondered if someone would be able to post the topics that came up last October for tort please??

itsmol

Lorraine 25 wrote: »

Hi guys,

Just wondered if someone would be able to post the topics that came up last October for tort please??

Q1 Defamtion
Q2 Negligence Liability with respect to Animals
Q3 Products Liability/Negligence for Defective Products
Q4 Professional Negligence/Employers Liability & Vicarious Liability
Q5 Intentional Torts
Q6 Causation
Q7 General Principles of Negligence
Q8 Nuisance

I think these are correct.

akom

frustratedTC wrote: »

Charitable trusts are very popular, but my god they take ages to wade through and id say ur safe with that covered. i'm doing trusteeship too, would i need to do constructive trusts with that?

Cnstructive trusts can come up with trusteeship..I haven't done it yet either, not totally sure if im going to..purely because im hoping the fact that it came up as a problem question on the last 2 papers, that it will appear essay style this time!!

I know its a bit of a risk but sure thats what its al about eh?!!

Also...please dont blame me if it doesn't

_JOE_

For all those doing company, there's an article on receivership in this month's law society Gazette...

Also, look in the update section at the back, there's a few interesting cases mentioned...

Kamilat

frustratedTC wrote: »

Charitable trusts are very popular, but my god they take ages to wade through and id say ur safe with that covered. i'm doing trusteeship too, would i need to do constructive trusts with that?

well I suppose it would be of some benefit to do them together but I'm leaving it out its way too long and plus in problems q's it seems to appear in three distinct parts but always on the same area, ive noticed that by reading over the past q's and reports, the first part is always removal of trustee, the second is conflict of interest and third part is duty to invest. And essays are always based on removal/retirement of trustees and either duty not to profit or duty to invest or renumeration, also based from the past q's. thats all im covering...

dpgalvin

Any tips for company exam ?

frustratedTC

So as all of u who are doing tort know its incredibly long and im just wondering if ive covered enough basicially i'm soing

Principles of neg
res ipsa loquiter
professional neg
employers liability
VL
Economic loss
psych damage
product liability
passing off
defamation
trespass to the person
trespass to land
nuissance

Also has anyone heard what might be tipped?

Dylan123

Any idea on the difference between the following:
(1) Construction of a will
(2) Making of a will

Hogzy

Dylan123 wrote: »

Any idea on the difference between the following:
(1) Construction of a will
(2) Making of a will

Construction of a will is how the courts interpret wills. Making of a will speaks for itself really and would probably involve the requirements of a valid will etc.

Dylan123

Dirt!

Thanks Hogzy! If thats not a trick question pigs can fly! there is no definition in the English dictionary which states that construction has any relevance to interpretation. 1 + 1 = 4 million here! anyway no time to moan! Never been so grumpy in my life! these exams are dirty! think i did just moan!!!

Hogzy

Dylan123 wrote: »

Dirt!

Thanks Hogzy! If thats not a trick question pigs can fly! there is no definition in the English dictionary which states that construction has any relevance to interpretation. 1 + 1 = 4 million here! anyway no time to moan! Never been so grumpy in my life! these exams are dirty!

I know. But the property lecturer at Griffith has it absolutely drilled into our heads that Construction of will relates to interpretation and not how they are made.

Dylan123

Hi there,
Do you mean construction means:
(1) Intention of the testator
or
(2) Interpretation of the will

sorry i know you said interpretation twice - its just that the intention of the testator is examinable also!

dumb A** its the same thing! oops

coco13

Hogzy wrote: »

I know. But the property lecturer at Griffith has it absolutely drilled into our heads that Construction of will relates to interpretation and not how they are made.

Did Property last time round and this was highlighted as one of the big trick questions to watch for.. Construction = Interpretation. Its a mistake students make every year and you wont get any points for discussing how to make a valid will if asked to discuss the Construction of Wills!

Dylan123

coco13 wrote: »

Did Property last time round and this was highlighted as one of the big trick questions to watch for.. Construction = Interpretation. Its a mistake students make every year and you wont get any points for discussing how to make a valid will if asked to discuss the Construction of Wills!

What are the other "big trick areas?"

for

- property
- tort
- eu
- criminal

law_lady

In relation to Constitutional, I'm finding that like a lot of you it's quite difficult to work out what's being asked. I'm working off exam papers up to October 2009 only so I got a shock when I heard talk of a case note question.

A few questions:

1. Do you find that some of the questions are on a very specific area and are answerable quite briefly, for example the questions on unconstitutionally obtained evidence, right to life, etc. I feel like there are max 2 pages I could write on these having studied all the cases and academics from the manuals, is that normal?!

2. Which cases have come up in the case note question to date, and do people suspect this will be a continuing trend on the paper? There are so many cases to know that I doubt I'll know enough on any to do a decent note. Anyone else in this position?

I felt like I had more to ask but now that I'm typing my heads gone blank, Hope that won't happen in the exam too!! Thanks in advance, hope study is going well.

AnnAh1986

I feel the exact same law lady.

I am starting to wonder what is the point of me studying constitutional as after I do a topic I still don't seem to have an adequate answer to the questions. I am doing the GCD course and I still don't seem to be hitting the nail on the head or even near the head for that matter with the answers I give to questions.

I think it is one I will take big risks with. I will know a bit on as many topics as I can and then see how I do. I am nearly just not expecting to know what to do when I read the paper!!