FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Orla FitzP

Eu law today what wer the issues in Q3?? Totally hadn't a clue!

Orla FitzP

hero82 wrote: »

well what did everyone make of eu???so annoyed over that paper!!

I thought it was ok wer where the free movement of goods thou????

Ciaran Patton

banterful wrote: »

Hi again,

Quick q on sexual assault - manual & various places online say max punishment = 10 years or 14 years if victim was u/14 years at time.

However the actual statute - S2(2) of 1990 Act says the max punishment 5 years for sexual assault.

Confused! Which is it does anyone know?

Cheers and good luck tomo everyone!

S. 2(2) of the 1990 Act was amended by s. 37(1), Sex Offenders Act, 2001, which incresed the maximum punishment for sexual assault to 10 years' imprisonment or 14 years' imprisonment if the victim was under the age of 17 years.

hero82

Orla FitzP wrote: »

Eu law today what wer the issues in Q3?? Totally hadn't a clue!

me neither wasnt the usual straight forward question.overall what did you think?

hero82

hero82 wrote: »

me neither wasnt the usual straight forward question.overall what did you think?

oops didnt see your reply above.eu went disastrous for me not happy at all!

Orla FitzP

hero82 wrote: »

Orla FitzP wrote: »

Eu law today what wer the issues in Q3?? Totally hadn't a clue!

me neither wasnt the usual straight forward question.overall what did you think?

Ugh I'm afraid to say in case im completely wrong and people r like wtf- but cuz they didn't implement until 09 I said abit of ms Lib and 267?? Could b totally off?

Nang

EU law was a complete disaster today! Thought that the third question which was on Direct Effect...I hope...was very badly phrased, especially the third part to it...and WHERE WERE THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS?! :mad: Also disappointed with the internal choices in questions.

neenee

Could someone tell me what came up on the EU paper?I was due to sit it but couldn't

Charlie D

I have to agree about question three. I didn't know what to say except direct effect and a bit of state liability as well. The third part to the question made no sense. Could it have been to do with equivalence or effectiveness???? I don't know if anybody worked out what he was looking for.

Nang

Charlie D wrote: »

I have to agree about question three. I didn't know what to say except direct effect and a bit of state liability as well. The third part to the question made no sense. Could it have been to do with equivalence or effectiveness???? I don't know if anybody worked out what he was looking for.

I answered it on equivalence and effectiveness...but whoever drafted that question needs to learn to use fullstops.

hero82

Nang wrote: »

EU law was a complete disaster today! Thought that the third question which was on Direct Effect...I hope...was very badly phrased, especially the third part to it...and WHERE WERE THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS?! :mad: Also disappointed with the internal choices in questions.

complete disaster.!didnt like that paper at all.internal choice was crap!!defo repeat 4 me.!!!!

cooper10

Nang wrote: »

EU law was a complete disaster today! Thought that the third question which was on Direct Effect...I hope...was very badly phrased, especially the third part to it...and WHERE WERE THE FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS?! :mad: Also disappointed with the internal choices in questions.

Yeh bit annoyed about the FMOG seeing how I spent the whole day Friday learning it!!! I may regret saying this (when the results are out) but I actually thought it was ok. Oh apart from the Helmut qs - wasn't sure what Part (i) of that was - FMOCapital?

randomuser77

Does Duress of Circumstances come up at all in the exams? I know Necessity is uncommon but duress is less so, and as this is a little bit of both I'm not sure if it comes up or not.

Help!

LSH

randomuser77 wrote: »

Does Duress of Circumstances come up at all in the exams? I know Necessity is uncommon but duress is less so, and as this is a little bit of both I'm not sure if it comes up or not.

Help!

It came up as part of a problem Q last year Q7, before that it was Oct 09 Q6.

I would say if you have an outline of most of the defences maybe leaving out unconstitutionality, mistake?

Bit hard what to leave out coz they seem to try deal with all issues within the problem Q...

hero82

cooper10 wrote: »

Yeh bit annoyed about the FMOG seeing how I spent the whole day Friday learning it!!! I may regret saying this (when the results are out) but I actually thought it was ok. Oh apart from the Helmut qs - wasn't sure what Part (i) of that was - FMOCapital?

ya me 2.what did you do for the 1st 2 parts.im honestly afraid to even say what i did for it as the paper overall was not good for me.!any one else tell me what they answered for it?

sin0city

Thought it was a tough enough paper alright. No 3 part FMOG question and mergers for question 8. Does anyone actually cover mergers??

Also no 263 or 258 and the 114/352 question hasn't come up in a format that difficult before...The direct effect/equivalence question didn't exactly leap out at you either.

bob_lob_law

I was lucky I prepared fundamental rights yesterday, that was an easy one. I said the disabled chap was receiving services, don't have a clue if that's what they were after. Don't really care at this stage. Roll on criminal tomorrow!

BroadwayBound

Purely due to lack of time I am cutting public order offences and offences against justice. I see from my grid that they rarely come up and came up last time. Also thinking of cutting CCA, SCC, Arrest and Bail from chapter 14 of my independent manual, all im doing from that chapter is the presumption of innocence and right to silence. Am I mad? Helpo! Thats only 2 and a half of 14 chapters.. oh god I will not miss this!

evercloserunion

BroadwayBound wrote: »

Purely due to lack of time I am cutting public order offences and offences against justice. I see from my grid that they rarely come up and came up last time. Also thinking of cutting CCA, SCC, Arrest and Bail from chapter 14 of my independent manual, all im doing from that chapter is the presumption of innocence and right to silence. Am I mad? Helpo! Thats only 2 and a half of 14 chapters.. oh god I will not miss this!

Well, I'm already cutting more than that. I'm really only doing AR, MR, property offences, homicide, sexual offences, NOAPA, defences, complicity, inchoate offences. As far as I can see that's generally enough to get five questions.

cooper10

hero82 wrote: »

ya me 2.what did you do for the 1st 2 parts.im honestly afraid to even say what i did for it as the paper overall was not good for me.!any one else tell me what they answered for it?

Well I thought part ii was provision of services and I threw in a bit about social advantages although I'm not sure that was relevant. It was my fifth question so I didn't actually have time to do it all so I left out part i because I really didn't know WTF it was about. I thought it was FMOCapital but that was the one frigging freedom I didn't learn! Ah well.

wez99950

evercloserunion wrote: »

BroadwayBound wrote: »

Purely due to lack of time I am cutting public order offences and offences against justice. I see from my grid that they rarely come up and came up last time. Also thinking of cutting CCA, SCC, Arrest and Bail from chapter 14 of my independent manual, all im doing from that chapter is the presumption of innocence and right to silence. Am I mad? Helpo! Thats only 2 and a half of 14 chapters.. oh god I will not miss this!

Well, I'm already cutting more than that. I'm really only doing AR, MR, property offences, homicide, sexual offences, NOAPA, defences, complicity, inchoate offences. As far as I can see that's generally enough to get five questions.

Exact same as me. Except I know the bare minimum for defences - enough to recognise i hope!
Finding it impossible to remember all the cases!!

law girl

What would be a distinguishing point in terms of a problem question that would enable you to determine that it refers to an easement rather than a covenant or vice versa?

I can see how a question could be phrased rather similarily.

Charlie D

It was Laval and free movement of services.

smjsmj

due to simply running out of time, would it be ok just to do an outline of defences focusing mainly on self defence, provocation, intoxication and necessity.
i've covered everything except the courts, arrest and bail and offences against the state( according to my exam grid they have never came up)

hero82

Charlie D wrote: »

It was Laval and free movement of services.

phew did that much right ha ha.!cheers good luck with the rest!

sazzyfiz

law girl wrote: »

What would be a distinguishing point in terms of a problem question that would enable you to determine that it refers to an easement rather than a covenant or vice versa?

I can see how a question could be phrased rather similarily.

a covenant is a promise in a deed - as in there was a contract between the parties at some point!

this is not the case for easements which can be acquisised by virtue of express grant, by implication, estoppel, reservation or implied grant ie prescription/long user

brian__foley

Hi,

I thought I should just bring this up because its been asked a bit in PM and, indeed, suggested to me.

From what I see, more and more people each year are finding it harder to get the time to prepare for these exams. In the past, the prep courses (where-ever they may be) have tended to run for 14 or 15 weeks from November and onwards up to March.

It struck me that this doesn't make the best use of a holiday period which we all have.

So, at GCD I'm having the time-tables "front-loaded" in a way which will permit us to get as much material done as possible prior to Christmas. This will include some weekend classes (but all still online). The logic is that students would then have the full set of lectures etc there and ready considerably earlier than before. Equally, coming up the Christmas vacation there wouldn't be so long a "break" so to speak, as students would be able to continue with "fresh" lectures online, due to the front-loading of dates before Christmas.

Maybe this is unnecessary, but I certainly sense that work for many is no longer as accommodating with long time off prior to the exams. It made sense to me, therefore, to use the time you may have to the best possible extent and give the most possible exam-time / study time.

Obviously, it is the same course duration in the sense of hours, but I think this delivery method will be helpful to a lot of people who would like to "draw a line" under the courses earlier, and get to their own study sooner.

Regards

Brian

GCD

frustratedTC

So how are we all doing for tomorrow, I've cut it down to:
succession
finding and ownership
equity
tenure
adverse possession
easements
systems of land reg
co-ownership
licenses
family property

Hopefully 5q's in there

UberStressed

I'm doing even less
Succession
Mortgages
CoOwnership
Easements
Adverse Possession
Family Property
Licences
Leasehold
Systems of land reg?

Roll on half 12! Seriously running on empty at this point!

boomtown84

yeah i'm doing a stupid amount of topics too.if i get 5 q's i'll be lucky!