FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

hero82

Hogzy wrote: »

I have been going over this paper in my head for the last few weeks. Iv failed it so many times before. I need to know if i was correct in my approaches to the questions. It will soften the impact of receiving the results if i know 100% what the questions were focusing on.

me 2.think id be more relaxed know what to expect when these results arrive.!

Cherry_Angel

Does any one know when we should expect the results?

Strawberry Fields

Normally 6-8 weeks after the completion. Long anxious, agonising, way to go yet.

brian__foley

Hogzy wrote: »

I have been going over this paper in my head for the last few weeks. Iv failed it so many times before. I need to know if i was correct in my approaches to the questions. It will soften the impact of receiving the results if i know 100% what the questions were focusing on.

Question 1: Not about non-delegation at all. Sometimes facts will just be given for the sake of accuracy - i.e. a rule like this may be in a bye-law, but you've no facts at all to engage with as regards non-delegation. Specifically, I have have considered expression / communication (and queried whether this is protected speech), the right to earn a livlihood and whether there is an "attack" here in light of Casey. As regards both, some discussion of whether the restriction (if in fact the rights were in play) was proportionate and the quasi deferential appraoch in Murphy v IRTC.

Question 2: Essay on the administration of justice in public. This has been all over the paper since the examiner started. I wouldn't have thought this would be a problem.

Question 3: Nearly the facts of Doherty and some other cases I'm involved in right now, actually. The simple issue here is whether its legimate to "house" travellers with halting sites only. (This isn't the case in real life, the real issue is whether there is discrimination in failing to provide travellers with caravans and providing "site only" accomodation in certain cases). There is equality to contend with here as well the legacy of O'Reilly subject to the examiners usual warnings about exagerrating the effect of TD etc.

Question 4: Basic, if you have done Article 44 and religion. To me this would seem perhaps the easiet question the examiner has ever set on the paper.

Question 5: Refusal of medical treatment. Again, the essay is straight-forward and calls for some examination of the extent to which such refusals could cause issues with the unborn. This is not an abortion essay.

Question 6: Right to silence etc, Rock v Ireland and the jurisprudence surrounding inferences including the ECHR decisions. Issues relating to the right of access also, such as Buck and O'Brien. The facts here are pretty easily dealt with, since the issues have all been the subject of decisions. You'd probably have to raise (in passing) issues over judicial independence so as to show that Conroy and such like are not in play in a case like this.

Question 7: Case notes are fine. At a minimum, everyone should know about Crotty and Curtin.

Question 8: Essay on privacy. Again...perfectly fine.

Overall, the exam was fine. Again, you see privacy and the administration of justice in public on the paper. Again, you seek equality mixed with justiciability issues which has been there before. At a minimum, understanding areas like privacy, equality, administration of justice in public, proportionality, livlihood, expression, justiciability etc would have got you through the exam and those issues are all over the past papers. Like I said, I didn't want to comment on this paper because so many had so many bad things to say when, in my view, its the simplest constitutional exam in a while.

Hogzy

brian__foley wrote: »

Question 1: Not about non-delegation at all. Sometimes facts will just be given for the sake of accuracy - i.e. a rule like this may be in a bye-law, but you've no facts at all to engage with as regards non-delegation. Specifically, I have have considered expression / communication (and queried whether this is protected speech), the right to earn a livlihood and whether there is an "attack" here in light of Casey. As regards both, some discussion of whether the restriction (if in fact the rights were in play) was proportionate and the quasi deferential appraoch in Murphy v IRTC.

Question 2: Essay on the administration of justice in public. This has been all over the paper since the examiner started. I wouldn't have thought this would be a problem.

Question 3: Nearly the facts of Doherty and some other cases I'm involved in right now, actually. The simple issue here is whether its legimate to "house" travellers with halting sites only. (This isn't the case in real life, the real issue is whether there is discrimination in failing to provide travellers with caravans and providing "site only" accomodation in certain cases). There is equality to contend with here as well the legacy of O'Reilly subject to the examiners usual warnings about exagerrating the effect of TD etc.

Question 4: Basic, if you have done Article 44 and religion. To me this would seem perhaps the easiet question the examiner has ever set on the paper.

Question 5: Refusal of medical treatment. Again, the essay is straight-forward and calls for some examination of the extent to which such refusals could cause issues with the unborn. This is not an abortion essay.

Question 6: Right to silence etc, Rock v Ireland and the jurisprudence surrounding inferences including the ECHR decisions. Issues relating to the right of access also, such as Buck and O'Brien. The facts here are pretty easily dealt with, since the issues have all been the subject of decisions. You'd probably have to raise (in passing) issues over judicial independence so as to show that Conroy and such like are not in play in a case like this.

Question 7: Case notes are fine. At a minimum, everyone should know about Crotty and Curtin.

Question 8: Essay on privacy. Again...perfectly fine.

Overall, the exam was fine. Again, you see privacy and the administration of justice in public on the paper. Again, you seek equality mixed with justiciability issues which has been there before. At a minimum, understanding areas like privacy, equality, administration of justice in public, proportionality, livlihood, expression, justiciability etc would have got you through the exam and those issues are all over the past papers. Like I said, I didn't want to comment on this paper because so many had so many bad things to say when, in my view, its the simplest constitutional exam in a while.

Fingers Crossed. Your analysis of Q1 is exactly what i wrote down. Hope to god i get it this time. It was my 4th time sitting constitutional. Its the only exam i am having trouble with. Thanks Brian for the time you dedicated to this.

erinp

Hi,
For the exams I just sat a few weeks ago I studied from Independent Manuals and found them pretty good. As I don't know how well I did yet I was wondering whether anyone studied from the Griffith Manuals and how they found them? I don't know which to get for the next set.
I didn't want to post this in the Manuals selling thread as I thought people would probably be a bit biased trying to sell theirs (though I guess its probably the same people in both threads!?!) Any experience of either manuals would be great though.
Thanks

crystalmice

erinp wrote: »

Hi,
For the exams I just sat a few weeks ago I studied from Independent Manuals and found them pretty good. As I don't know how well I did yet I was wondering whether anyone studied from the Griffith Manuals and how they found them? I don't know which to get for the next set.
I didn't want to post this in the Manuals selling thread as I thought people would probably be a bit biased trying to sell theirs (though I guess its probably the same people in both threads!?!) Any experience of either manuals would be great though.
Thanks

Hi, I just sat my first four FE1s and I used 2 griffith manuals and 2 independent manuals. Personally I found the griffith manuals better, clearer and better written, there were quite a number of typos and spelling errors in the independent manual for criminal, and the equity manual was a bit rambling and unclear in parts. Just my opinion though, and I think that the quality can vary hugely by subject; I found the griffith company manual excellent.

Amy.M

Hi guys, I know the exams are just over so forgive me for planning so far ahead, I plan on sitting my first four in the next sitting and was wondering if anyone would be able to shed some light on when the timetable for same is likely to become available?

Thanks!

RandolphEsq

Rabeile31 wrote: »

I am sitting my first four next spring

so far i have chosen Contract, Criminal and Tort

I am between minds on whether to have EU or Equity as a fourth

Would Equity be better as a fourth with these particular 3 or would it make much of a difference choosing either

I'm doing the same three as you, and have already decided that Equity is going to be my fourth subject. I was more comfortable with it in college so that swayed it for me.

brian__foley

RandolphEsq wrote: »

I'm doing the same three as you, and have already decided that Equity is going to be my fourth subject. I was more comfortable with it in college so that swayed it for me.

Equity, hands down. There is considerable overlap with elements of contract. Doing both together will stand to you - its a massive boost and offers considerable time saving.

tarab

Hi

Im looking for contract, EU, land and constitutional manuals if anybody has them?

Thanks

CluelessGirl

Its decision time!

I have been mulling over doing these exams for ages! I think its time to bite the bullet and give them a lash! I'm not getting any younger!

I am going to sign up for the GCD pre-course this week.

I work full time from 9 -6 Mon to Fri and will contiinue to do so up until the exams in March next year.

What I am wondering is with the GCD course......can I do the online course during the week and then attend the lectures in the college on the Saturdays??

I am going to do Criminal/Tort/Contract/Equity in the first round! I hope this is the right choice!

Has anyone signed up for this course yet?

Thanks in advance.

corkgirl88

CluelessGirl wrote: »

Its decision time!

I have been mulling over doing these exams for ages! I think its time to bite the bullet and give them a lash! I'm not getting any younger!

I am going to sign up for the GCD pre-course this week.

I work full time from 9 -6 Mon to Fri and will contiinue to do so up until the exams in March next year.

What I am wondering is with the GCD course......can I do the online course during the week and then attend the lectures in the college on the Saturdays??

I am going to do Criminal/Tort/Contract/Equity in the first round! I hope this is the right choice!

Has anyone signed up for this course yet?

Thanks in advance.

I did the Griffith course for a few subjects and found it really helpful.
I did all the lectures online and it was great.

If you are working full time I would suggest you do all the classes online. You can access the classes at any time and fit them in around your own schedule. IMO You are not losing out on anything by not attending the classes in person.

moonbino

brian__foley wrote: »

colonel1 wrote: »

Wow, yeah, I couldn't believe it when I saw the ad on Boards yesterday. A pity about Mark (especially Mark - he was great:D) and Brendan leaving Independent if they are. Mind you the new place is cheaper than indo and Griffith (only 345 and cheaper again for the online course), so I may consider it for constitutional provided the manual is decent. I will stick with Indo for tort though. Don't let them poach Ciaran Patton mind!!

To be expected really, given the litigation. Good luck to them!

Just on the notion of price. GCD runs 4 subjects at the price of 3. Hence, the actual cost of, say, the online is €350 x 3 / 4 = €262.50 per subject, once you enroll for four which most people do!

GCD not da same anymo tho is it. Use to hear so many gr8 tings abt der lecturers n they wer raking in all the awards, wel da students. Evr since Val n Philip left n took some othr good lecs wit em to Independent they been doin very wel wit Overend 3 yrs in a row n gcd jus few subj awards. I wud say gcd n der prices r not worth my tym. Now Val n Philip split wit Philip startn City Colleges. At da mo its eithr Independnt or City Colleges n am leaning to City Colleges coz i lyk der prices n they team of lecturers. I intend to do very wel on da fe1s n i want lecturers who prove thwmselves not a bunch of lecturers riding off da legacy of previous lecs.

brian__foley

moonbino wrote: »

GCD not da same anymo tho is it. Use to hear so many gr8 tings abt der lecturers n they wer raking in all the awards, wel da students. Evr since Val n Philip left n took some othr good lecs wit em to Independent they been doin very wel wit Overend 3 yrs in a row n gcd jus few subj awards. I wud say gcd n der prices r not worth my tym. Now Val n Philip split wit Philip startn City Colleges. At da mo its eithr Independnt or City Colleges n am leaning to City Colleges coz i lyk der prices n they team of lecturers. I intend to do very wel on da fe1s n i want lecturers who prove thwmselves not a bunch of lecturers riding off da legacy of previous lecs.

Well written.

brian__foley

CluelessGirl wrote: »

Its decision time!

I have been mulling over doing these exams for ages! I think its time to bite the bullet and give them a lash! I'm not getting any younger!

I am going to sign up for the GCD pre-course this week.

I work full time from 9 -6 Mon to Fri and will contiinue to do so up until the exams in March next year.

What I am wondering is with the GCD course......can I do the online course during the week and then attend the lectures in the college on the Saturdays??

I am going to do Criminal/Tort/Contract/Equity in the first round! I hope this is the right choice!

Has anyone signed up for this course yet?

Thanks in advance.

Hi,

Just one point here - and maybe other students can help you on this - but you're leaving EU and Constitutional together for your second sitting? There is no problem with that at all, but...most would see the sense in dividing those two subjects.

As regards your question re the lectures. With the online course being the way it is, we don't run Saturday classes or a parallel Saturday course any more. You might see that this year, there are classes being run on a Saturday as part of the regular course to "front load" the material for Christmas revision purposes.

Rather, the online element "is" the lectures given during the week - i.e. recorded and put online.

Honestly, even if there was a weekend course, you'd be wasting your time reviewing and watching the courses during the week and them simply repeating them at the weekend!

Hope that helps

B

FreudianSlippers

brian__foley wrote: »

Well written.

I lol'd.

Charlie D

Just looking for some opinions on the best place to do a revision course for constitutional law and perhaps tort and equity? Cheers.

moonbino

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

brian__foley wrote: »

Well written.

I lol'd.

It's not funny rlly. Am a GCD graduate n some of da lecs teachn da prof course taught me n they boring as hell. Note i said some. Not evry1 was born to teach so while these said lecs myt b qualified in law they jus not good at teachn. So wit Brian sneakily quotin prices here as if GCD standards r da same it annoys me. And he knows am ryt dats y he cudnt come up wit anythng else.

FreudianSlippers

No "txt spk" as per charter. It's irritating.

moonbino

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

No "txt spk" as per charter. It's irritating.

Oh sorry. I'm on my mobile. Didn't notice your rule either. :-) I know now. ;-)

moonbino

moonbino wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

No "txt spk" as per charter. It's irritating.

Oh sorry. I'm on my mobile. Didn't notice your rule either. :-) I know now. ;-)

wait a second. You used "I lol'd" and no ads please when a certain someone quoting griffith prices. Be fair.

law girl

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

No "txt spk" as per charter. It's irritating.

Irritating and makes NO SENSE!!!

doing

Is there a chance of there being a question on the new Judges pay constitutional amendment on the next constitutional exam?

If so, if the Judges don't want their pay cut, can't the Judges just challenge the amendment on any frivolous legal basis at all, then appeal up to the Supreme Court and rule it unconstitutional?

Avatargh

doing wrote: »

...can't the Judges just challenge the amendment on any frivolous legal basis at all, then appeal up to the Supreme Court and rule it unconstitutional?

(a) how can you challenge a constitutional amendment as unconstitutional on a substantive basis (i.e. aside from complaints about the referendum etc)?

(b) if it was frivolous, it would be dealt with accordingly.

Indeed, if one (for what bat-crazy notion) believed it sensible to challenge a constitutional amendment for unconstitutionality (which makes no sense), it would be met with an immediate motion to dismiss which would most likely succeed.

This won't happen!

Can't help you on the exams though, save to say you'd need a crazy Professor to ask a question about the constitutionality of an amendment (unless it was jurisprudence).

doing

Avatargh wrote: »

(a) how can you challenge a constitutional amendment as unconstitutional on a substantive basis (i.e. aside from complaints about the referendum etc)?

(b) if it was frivolous, it would be dealt with accordingly.

Indeed, if one (for what bat-crazy notion) believed it sensible to challenge a constitutional amendment for unconstitutionality (which makes no sense), it would be met with an immediate motion to dismiss which would most likely succeed.

This won't happen!

Can't help you on the exams though, save to say you'd need a crazy Professor to ask a question about the constitutionality of an amendment (unless it was jurisprudence).

But sure who rules it as frivolous? Judges. Who stands to benefit by the amendment being overturned? Judges.

Looking at cases like Mowberry lane v Telecom Eireann 1999, or McMahon v Kerry Country Council, the Supreme Court has made blatantly corrupt and self serving rulings before, although in both those cases they were being corrupt on behalf of state bodies.

The principal is the same though, they can make any ruling they want and come up with any old explanation for it. They are a law unto themselves. And obviously they are the best legal minds in the country, they'll have no problem coming up with some frivolous reason to challenge it.

Glad to hear it won't come up on the exam!

Avatargh

doing wrote: »

But sure who rules it as frivolous? Judges. Who stands to benefit by the amendment being overturned? Judges.

Looking at cases like Mowberry lane v Telecom Eireann 1999, or McMahon v Kerry Country Council, the Supreme Court has made blatantly corrupt and self serving rulings before, although in both those cases they were being corrupt on behalf of state bodies.

The principal is the same though, they can make any ruling they want and come up with any old explanation for it. They are a law unto themselves. And obviously they are the best legal minds in the country, they'll have no problem coming up with some frivolous reason to challenge it.

Glad to hear it won't come up on the exam!

I think you're hearing what you want to hear here and exagerating the difficulties of judicial subjectivism. It won't be challenged by Judges. It can't be in any serious sense. If it was, it wouldn't succeed. No Judge would be mad enough to bring such a nonsensical case. I could go on like this, but we clearly would simply disagree over how the matter would dealt with by the Courts. You believe the Courts are self-serving the point that they could possibly entertain what would be, in effect, "a challenge to the Constitution". I don't believe that. We won't progress past that.

wallst

Anyone out there who could give me free advice on how to even begin doing the FE-1 exams.
I have a degree, so I need to do the FE-1 exams next. Correct?

1.Do I need to do a course?
2.What study materials do I need?
3.Where I can I buy the study materials(manuals, notes, previous exams)?
4. Do I need to buy recent 2010 manuals, notes etc?
5. Where can I find out detailed info other than this forum?

6. What is my next step?
Is it choose 5 subjects and study then apply to sit the 5 exams?

I apologise as they post may seem totally ignorant which is exactly what I am towards this subject.

brian__foley

wallst wrote: »

Anyone out there who could give me free advice on how to even begin doing the FE-1 exams.
I have a degree, so I need to do the FE-1 exams next. Correct?

1.Do I need to do a course?
2.What study materials do I need?
3.Where I can I buy the study materials(manuals, notes, previous exams)?
4. Do I need to buy recent 2010 manuals, notes etc?
5. Where can I find out detailed info other than this forum?

6. What is my next step?
Is it choose 5 subjects and study then apply to sit the 5 exams?

I apologise as they post may seem totally ignorant which is exactly what I am towards this subject.

1. No-one needs a course. Some people find them helpful, but equally some people are very strategic in choosing their undergrad subjects to take care of some of the heavy lifting.

2. Leaving aside courses, you can obtain the syllabus from the law society. Then whatever text books you have used as part of undergrad can help you. Getting more "focused" for exams, you'll find help in the "Nutshells" series and for subjects like contract (where English law is still quite relevant) the English nutshells would help. So long as you are covering the syllabus areas, and can work alone, this method works well. IF you look in, say, the middle section of the Bar Review or the Annual Update of Irish Law you could supplement anything out of date with the recent cases mentioned therein. Certainly manuals from institutions are more focused, but its hardly possible to say that the relevant material is only available therefrom! There are many decent books (and particularly study-focused) books that do the job with dedication and time spent studying.

3. Courses provide proprietary materials. Leaving those aside, the Law Society provides past papers and syllabi (but the past papers have to be purchased).

4. No you don't need them. See above. But I'm sure lost of people prefer to have manuals than not if only from a time saving perspective. Whether I like it or not, there is a massive thread on here where second hand manuals are sold.

5. Depends what you want to know about!

As regards the 5 subjects. No, that is not necessary. What is necessary though is you must sit 4 subjects and pass 3 to "carry" those passes over. Many people like to split the subjects 4/4 and there are lots of posts on here about how well the subjects divide and match up.

Brian

GCD

wallst

Mr Foley, I thank you for a very informative response. Much appreciated.:D
However, I have more questions for you.
My first steps should be.
1. Contact the law society for syllabi and past papers. For past papers, How many years do I need, 2008,9,10,11?
2. Choose an appropriate first 4 subjects by reading this thread for advice.
3. Derive from (syllabi + past papers) what I need to learn on 4 subj chosen.
4. Find relevant materials on those 4 subjects and start studying.
5. Apply for exams when ready.