FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

wez99950

am wondering would anybody be able to describe to me the best way to figure out in a problem question whether a person (who doesn't commit the crime itself) comes under inchoate or complicity?

Also, best way to approach problem questions for criminal!? Havent done a lot at all for criminal so thinking of just aiming to do all the problem questions and notch up as many marks as possible! I don't know if there's a good problem question structure that will help pick up marks here and there for stating the obvious.

Thank you!

steph86

best of luck tomorrow everyone sitting criminal. hope it goes well!

Dylan123

wez99950 wrote: »

am wondering would anybody be able to describe to me the best way to figure out in a problem question whether a person (who doesn't commit the crime itself) comes under inchoate or complicity?

Also, best way to approach problem questions for criminal!? Havent done a lot at all for criminal so thinking of just aiming to do all the problem questions and notch up as many marks as possible! I don't know if there's a good problem question structure that will help pick up marks here and there for stating the obvious.

Thank you!

Acts reus of conspiracy = arrangement
Incitement = Persuasion

Common design = One goes beyond
Accessory b4 or after = helper

brian__foley

bob_lob_law wrote: »

Is it ok to leave out silence as misrepresentation re insurance contracts etc? I'm getting quite confused with all this terms, misrepresentations stuff

I would say a big "no". Misrepresentation is misunderstood quite a bit and people tend to ellide the following two types of case:-

(a) the cases where person A tries to argue that statement by person B formed part of the contract because the statement was untrue and A wants to say there was a breach of contract (i.e. misrepresentation in a layman's sense of the word

(b) where a contract is liable to be rescinded by an actionable misrepresentation in tort (deceit, negligent misstatement) or an innocent misrepresentation. Under this heading, the notion of damages in tort may also arise.

Whereas this is a contract exam, the examiner has been interested with increasing frequency in requiring students to understand (see the 2010 papers) how misrepresentation is made out in the (b) sense described above which needs more than simply knowing about Oscar Chess etc and requires one to know about the needs for a statement of fact which induced a party to enter a contract and all the law associated with the bolded terms.

There is also a (c) category of misrepresentation as outlined in Forshall v Walsh.

In short, you need to know it all or gamble that only the type (a) question is asked.

T.Watson

Would anyone be able to explain the difference between Art 24(2) of Directive 2004/38 which allows MSs to restrict entitlement to social assistance during first 3 months of residence and restrict eligibility for maintenace grants for students unless they have permenant residence and yet how in Grelczyk the french national in Belgium was entitled to non-contributory minimum subsistence allowance?

Confused.com

doing

Question for you all on (EU law) Co-Decision/Ordinary Legislative Procedure

Article 294 TFEU lays out the process

no.9 says

"9. The Council shall act unanimously on the amendments on which the Commission has delivered a negative opinion."




Does 'unaminously' here mean the Council will use their veto to shoot the proposal down on the Commissions behalf?

glengirlie

Can anyone tell me what year that crime was classified in the Melling v Mathghamhna case?

ally10

JCJCJC where are u ?? can u predict the criminal paper for me please :P

ally10

glengirlie wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what year that crime was classified in the Melling v Mathghamhna case?

I think it was 1962

glengirlie

ally10 wrote: »

I think it was 1962

cheers-thought that myself but read somewhere that it was 1996, confused now maybe I'll just gloss over the year if I have to

Thirdfox

1962 - it's all on google

Like the Hitchhiker's guide would say - "Don't Panic!"

UberStressed

Having a last minute panic attack for criminal! How important is it to remember the specific sections in the relevant Acts for each offences? Is it enough just to know the Act it's under and what it says?

doing

Thirdfox wrote: »

1962 - it's all on google

Like the Hitchhiker's guide would say - "Don't Panic!"

Do you even need to know the years for the exam?

bob_lob_law

What is everyone doing for Contract? Kind of bricking it now, haven't prepared as much as I should have, gave my all for tort and equity!

ally10

doing wrote: »

Do you even need to know the years for the exam?

No not really, ur doing good to remember case names. I only learn the years for impt cases.

CFOLEY85

hi all

Just looking over past questions and it seems...doctrine of suprem has never been asked?? I know directive effect, indirect effect and ms liability has.. but am I right in saying suprem hasnt been??

Kamilat

bob_lob_law wrote: »

What is everyone doing for Contract? Kind of bricking it now, haven't prepared as much as I should have, gave my all for tort and equity!

Yea I'm pretty much the same and it doesn't seem like we can leave out anything on the syllabus though as its so mixed. I'm just worried that I won't be able to spot the issues... what topics are you doing? I'm thinking offer& acceptance, consideration&estoppel, intention to create legal relations, privity(if I have time), contractual terms and exemption clauses, misrep, mistake, discharge of contracts(breach and frustration) and remedies. So I don't know if I will have time for duress, undue influence,illegal contracts and might leave out void contracts... You think I'm leaving out too much maybe?

hession.law

Hi, I'm staying at the Red Cow tonight if anyone is interested in meeting to discuss EU...

bob_lob_law

Kamilat wrote: »

Yea I'm pretty much the same and it doesn't seem like we can leave out anything on the syllabus though as its so mixed. I'm just worried that I won't be able to spot the issues... what topics are you doing? I'm thinking offer& acceptance, consideration&estoppel, intention to create legal relations, privity(if I have time), contractual terms and exemption clauses, misrep, mistake, discharge of contracts(breach and frustration) and remedies. So I don't know if I will have time for duress, undue influence,illegal contracts and might leave out void contracts... You think I'm leaving out too much maybe?

I'd definitely do privity if you can. I'm doing capacity as well. Going to do illegal contracts today and go over capacity, damages. Still haven't done frustration either.

I'll go over estoppel from equity and just a case of looking over undue influence from equity as well. Otherwise just the same as yourself.

I think the best approach is not to leave anything out, even if you just have a case name and the principle, then your not precluded from doing a problem, or doing yourself out of marks. I should start taking some of my own advice!

Hogzy

Just to remind everyone. Mothers day is this Sunday.

Completely forgot about it with all the study.

T.Watson

If you're answering a problem question and it's just one big long problem and at the very end you're asked maybe 3/4 questions in separate parts (all sort of interrelated so your answer might bleed into different sections) can you just write a big long answer and then when giving advice split it into 3/4 parts at the end to answer the individual questions asked?

ally10

So what did everyone think of the Criminal paper...was it just me or was it a really nice paper??

Now to face EU

fe1sagain

T.Watson wrote: »

If you're answering a problem question and it's just one big long problem and at the very end you're asked maybe 3/4 questions in separate parts (all sort of interrelated so your answer might bleed into different sections) can you just write a big long answer and then when giving advice split it into 3/4 parts at the end to answer the individual questions asked?

Hard to know really. Its been a while since a question on direct effect and ms liability was asked in that manner - if its the prob q I think you are referring to. I'd say its ok. Time is tight so I understand you want to avoid repetition.

Really hoping for a nice paper tomorrow without topics such as Brussels etc

Are there any improvements in the venue this week re sound etc?

CFOLEY85

Is it just me or are all the justifications for restrictive measures on freemovements (particularly FMOW< FOE< FTPS< )ridiculously CONFUSING!!

I really dont know how Im gona have time to do 5 questions, with the amount of information needed per question.....

Anyone else feeling this way??

JCJCJC

ally10 wrote: »

So what did everyone think of the Criminal paper...was it just me or was it a really nice paper??

Now to face EU

I wasn't ready enough for it at all this time, but it struck me too as a very passable paper if you had anything at all done, seemed very straightforward. I hope the September one is similar ;-)

glengirlie

ally10 wrote: »

So what did everyone think of the Criminal paper...was it just me or was it a really nice paper??

Now to face EU

Thought it was a nice enough paper all right. Some of the problem questions didnt have that many problems, that I could recognise anyways. Also, not a fan of those split up questions. Bail and Arrest question-a beauty, unfortunately, I didnt have time to learn off the notes that I had done out on them in January so I had to wing it O

Overall happy enough tho, hope I pass!!!

Now for EU all right, anyone got any idea of what the basics might be to scrape a pass, or a decent enough fail???

glengirlie

JCJCJC wrote: »

I wasn't ready enough for it at all this time, but it struck me too as a very passable paper if you had anything at all done, seemed very straightforward. I hope the September one is similar ;-)

If I am there in September sitting Criminal (fingers crossed not), I hope it is like that!!! They say they set the papers toegther at the start of the year. That might be all hype tho!

JCJCJC

ally10 wrote: »

JCJCJC where are u ?? can u predict the criminal paper for me please :P

I'm in the bar in the Red Cow of course, drinking all the money I made predicting winners in Cheltenham ;-)

Criminal ain't my forte at the moment, but there's a long summer there to be reading it ;-)

JCJCJC

Hogzy wrote: »

Just to remind everyone. Mothers day is this Sunday.

Completely forgot about it with all the study.

Lawyers have no mothers, Hogzy.

JCJCJC

This was in my inbox when I got home, having filled out the automatic on-line survey they sent out...

Dear JCJCJC,

Thank you for taking the time to tell us about your stay at the Ibis Dublin West, but I was very disappointed to hear that your experience did not meet your expectations. I am sorry to hear that the tea bags served was not to your satisfaction and you have found the price in the bar too expensive.

At Ibis, we strive to provide a superior service experience for every guest and your feedback is very important to us. I would like to confirm that we are taking the appropriate measures to address your concerns and prevent future occurrence.

We appreciate your feedback, and I hope that you will give us the opportunity to welcome you back Ibis Dublin West and provide you with a genuine hassle-free experience.

Yours sincerely,

Patrick Le Henaff

General Manager

Ibis Hotel Dublin

Impressive customer service. If any of you are there for the rest of the week, report back on whether the teabags improve!!