FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

MoneyMilo

Hey, would anyone please be able to tell me if, under the LCLRA 2009, mortgagees now need a court order in order to seek possession of the mortgaged property?

Also, do people think mortgages is going to come up, and if so, in what fashion? Thanks

sazzyfiz

Hey guys,....

hope study is goin well, we're nearly at the end!

just wondering if anyone had an hints for what might come up on tort????

the course is huge and having serious trouble in rememberin case names!!! stress!

bcdccm

MoneyMilo wrote: »

Hey, would anyone please be able to tell me if, under the LCLRA 2009, mortgagees now need a court order in order to seek possession of the mortgaged property?

Also, do people think mortgages is going to come up, and if so, in what fashion? Thanks

Hey MoneyMilo, Just after studying this part like an hour ago lol:

Under s97(1) "a mortgagee shall not take possession
of the mortgaged property without a court order granted
under this section, unless the mortgagor consents in writing to such
taking not more than 7 days prior to such taking."

Hoping mortgages come up! Havent a clue about that though.

db707

Seems like tranaparency is coming up more and more (eg Qu2, Sep 2010, part b). GCD manual only has 2 paragraphs on it and the sample answers supplied are a bit dodgy (based on other areas!!) Anyone have cases under this area?

db707

evercloserunion wrote: »

I would have been of the mind that proprietary estoppel is more likely to arise in equity, while promissory is more likely to be examined in contract.

Previous examiner liked to discuss both sorts in contract but all up in the air as there is a new examiner- Dr Cliona Kelly (or so I was told!!)

-aboutagirl-

db707 wrote: »

Previous examiner liked to discuss both sorts in contract but all up in the air as there is a new examiner- Dr Cliona Kelly (or so I was told!!)

Oh no! :eek: Didn't realise there was a new examiner!

sazzyfiz

-aboutagirl- wrote: »

Oh no! :eek: Didn't realise there was a new examiner!

check the law society website, they tell you who all the examiners are!

-aboutagirl-

sazzyfiz wrote: »

check the law society website, they tell you who all the examiners are!

I know I just double checked there! Last time I had looked it was Clarke! I just did the Independent course & there was no mention of a new examiner, even the revision notes are based on Clarke's preferences e.g. her love of mistake etc.

Makes me nervous that there's a new one!

MoneyMilo

Has Cliona Kelly not been the examiner for a few years??

-aboutagirl-

MoneyMilo wrote: »

Has Cliona Kelly not been the examiner for a few years??

No, the list I have saved from earlier in the year definitely has Blanaid Clarke as examiner.

I hope Cliona Kelly is feeling nice and we're not in for too many surprises

BroadwayBound

-aboutagirl- wrote: »

I know I just double checked there! Last time I had looked it was Clarke! I just did the Independent course & there was no mention of a new examiner, even the revision notes are based on Clarke's preferences e.g. her love of mistake etc.

Makes me nervous that there's a new one!

I took the independent course too, this is not helping the stress levels! All our hints are rendered completely useless now. Out of curiousity, was the Griffith lecturer aware of this? I suppose how could Independent have known because I also checked the law society's website not too long ago and Blathnaid was the examiner. Not a happy camper!

Hogzy

Just because there is a new examiner doesnt mean the exam has changed. The exam was probably drafted back in April/May or else in January with the April/May paper.

I wouldnt worry about it to be honest. Dont let it stress ye out.

-aboutagirl-

BroadwayBound wrote: »

I took the independent course too, this is not helping the stress levels! All our hints are rendered completely useless now. Out of curiousity, was the Griffith lecturer aware of this? I suppose how could Independent have known because I also checked the law society's website not too long ago and Blathnaid was the examiner. Not a happy camper!

I know how you're feeling!

I guess it doesn't really change that much, we still have to cover as much of the course as possible etc.

I can't help feeling a bit panicked though and left wondering if areas Clarke doesn't really examine that frequently are likely to make an appearance. I had adapted my study to the areas that Clarke tends to favour and am wondering if I should now go back and make more extensive notes on other areas I had just done bullet points on??

Looking at the exam grids seems pretty pointless now

-aboutagirl-

Hogzy wrote: »

Just because there is a new examiner doesnt mean the exam has changed. The exam was probably drafted back in April/May or else in January with the April/May paper.

I wouldnt worry about it to be honest. Dont let it stress ye out.

Thanks, that's true I hadn't thought of that. Here's hoping!

MoneyMilo

Surely there's a way of finding out if Clarke drafted this paper?

JCJCJC

bob_lob_law wrote: »

Hi JC is the case you reference on Bailii? I couldn't see it, I haven't looked at retroactive legislation at all so I'm a bit stumped by it. Doesn't seem to be covered in the griffith manual either. Unless I'm missing something?

Go to Fennell's case and search for hefferon, you'll get enough info on it for the purpose. Hope that helps.

Edit - in fact, just use the simple general search function on bailii for 'Hefferon' and you'll get a reasonable number of relevant hits. The name is sufficiently uncommon to make searching worthwhile. Bailii wasn't around in 1992 and they are only back-loading the most important historical cases.
JC

bob_lob_law

JCJCJC wrote: »

Go to Fennell's case and search for hefferon, you'll get enough info on it for the purpose. Hope that helps.

Edit - in fact, just use the simple general search function on bailii for 'Hefferon' and you'll get a reasonable number of relevant hits. The name is sufficiently uncommon to make searching worthwhile. Bailii wasn't around in 1992 and they are only back-loading the most important historical cases.
JC

Thanks!

randomuser77

'sup y'all?

Quick question re winding up. There is a terrible amount of stuff to learn about voluntary liquidations, does that stuff actually come up in exams though? I know the official winding up procedure is a regular feature and all I can find is questions on that section.

JCJCJC

randomuser77 wrote: »

'sup y'all?

Quick question re winding up. There is a terrible amount of stuff to learn about voluntary liquidations, does that stuff actually come up in exams though? I know the official winding up procedure is a regular feature and all I can find is questions on that section.

I think y'all meant COMPANY law. What y'all are asking has f'all to do with contract

randomuser77

JCJCJC wrote: »

I think y'all meant COMPANY law. What y'all are asking has f'all to do with contract

Hehe, whoops :-)

Still, what's the answer?

Charlie D

It doesn't seem to have ever come up from looking at the exam papers. I'm leaving voluntary liquidation out, could just use the Acts to make something up if it did come up.

OBSC

Hey guys, hope you're all less panicky than me on the final furlong, almost there!

Wondering if anyone has a company exam grid covering the last 2 or 3 exams. Working from my old college notes and an old manual which covers old papers but now that d-day approaches I'm getting nervy about what changes may have come about in the past few papers.

Has examinership started to feature for example?


Thanks in advance, I've gotten loads of great info from here the last few weeks already

OB

brian__foley

BroadwayBound wrote: »

I took the independent course too, this is not helping the stress levels! All our hints are rendered completely useless now. Out of curiousity, was the Griffith lecturer aware of this? I suppose how could Independent have known because I also checked the law society's website not too long ago and Blathnaid was the examiner. Not a happy camper!

Yep. It became known a while ago.

No basis for making any conclusions on who drafted what though, but equally no basis for presuming the paper continues on the 4+4 basis. Every basis in the world for thinking that you simply need to know contract law, and deal with the paper!

Cliona Kelly is (1) very good (from her works etc - I don't know her) and (2) is someone with a reasonable range of written material on contract on the areas of frustration, consumer issues and privity. I believe she was the principle researcher on the LRC paper/report on privity.

db707

db707 wrote: »

Seems like tranaparency is coming up more and more (eg Qu2, Sep 2010, part b). GCD manual only has 2 paragraphs on it and the sample answers supplied are a bit dodgy (based on other areas!!) Anyone have cases under this area?

anyone got some cases on this one??

bob_lob_law

db707 wrote: »

anyone got some cases on this one??

There was a recent case re access to docs called Toland v EP. Here's some info: http://jasonomahony.ie/ciaran-toland-vs-the-european-parliament/

trying to cram

I have a Company law question.......Are the model regulations in the lyndon mccann courtney companies acts? I have the student edition 1963-2006 and cant find them....

Hogzy

trying to cram wrote: »

I have a Company law question.......Are the model regulations in the lyndon mccann courtney companies acts? I have the student edition 1963-2006 and cant find them....

Yes they are in the statutory instruments towards the back of the book. Took me an age to find them aswell.

trying to cram

Thanks for that Hogzy, so glad to know that they are there - just in case. Any chance you know what SI number they are found under please?

Hogzy

trying to cram wrote: »

Thanks for that Hogzy, so glad to know that they are there - just in case. Any chance you know what SI number they are found under please?

I think they are all under different ones. What Mod Reg are you looking for?

123A

First time on the thread! Just wondering in criminal law do you actually have to recite the definitions contained in the acts word for word or is it ok if you just named the section, act and gave it a line in your words?
Please help anyone who's passed criminal and not quoted them word for word??:)