FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

copious

hi guys just a quick question, i dont know is it a very obvious one but feeling v overwhelmed atm so bit ruffled...

I am sitting Property in the upcoming set of exams but only have papers and exam grid until 2010...

im wondering if anyone could point me in the direction of what i can most definitely leave out and what i really cannot for this sitting in light of the 2011 papers?

also, specifically in terms of tenure and estates in land, given the changes in 2009 assumably, neither of these were asked on either paper in 2010 and they used to be bankers for q1...did they come up in 2010 and is there a chance i could get away without learning them?

thanks in advance!

chops018

copious wrote: »

hi guys just a quick question, i dont know is it a very obvious one but feeling v overwhelmed atm so bit ruffled...

I am sitting Property in the upcoming set of exams but only have papers and exam grid until 2010...

im wondering if anyone could point me in the direction of what i can most definitely leave out and what i really cannot for this sitting in light of the 2011 papers?

also, specifically in terms of tenure and estates in land, given the changes in 2009 assumably, neither of these were asked on either paper in 2010 and they used to be bankers for q1...did they come up in 2010 and is there a chance i could get away without learning them?

thanks in advance!

In October 2011 the areas that came up were:

Q. 1. Family Home Protection Act 1976/Co-Habitants.
Q. 2. Co-Ownership.
Q. 3. Sucession: Legal Right Share of Spouses.
Q. 4. Licences.
Q. 5. Landlord and Tenant Law: Residential Tenancies Act 2004.
Q. 6. Finding Objects In or On Land/Treasure Trove.
Q. 7. Adverse Possession.
Q. 8. Succession: Validity.

April 2011:

Q. 1. Landlord and Tenant Law: Residential Tenancies Act. Deasy's Act.
Q. 2. Succession. Formalities and Capacity.
Q. 3. Succession. Legal Right Share.
Q. 4. Co-Ownership.
Q. 5. Adverse Possession.
Q. 6. Objects In or On Land/Treasure Trove.
Q. 7. Family Home Protection Act 1976 - Spouses.
Q. 8. Easements - Necessity.

You're right, they might ask about tenure and the new act, but they rarely do ask about it, and it will usually be one question or maybe part of a question e.g. Write a note on (i), (ii), (iii) pick 2.

The topics I'm picking for Property are: Succession, Finding objects in or on land/Treasure Trove, Adverse Possession, Easements, Family Home Protection Act 1976, Landlord and Tenant - Lease/Licence distinction, Residential Tenancies Act 2004 and Deasy's Act 1860, and I might possibly cover Co-Ownership aswell as they seem to always have a question on that. Are you sitting any other exams, I'm doing 4, it's tough going, I'm picking 6-8 areas for each subject and hoping for a bit of luck that the nice areas such as Treasure Trove and Adverse Possession come up. Succession always comes up so there's one to know off aswell.

JCJCJC

gudbuzz wrote: »

Just a general suggestion here but would it not make some sense to divide this thread into nine different threads according to the eight subject modules and then one for general questions. I'm finding it very tedious looking for information relating to the relative subject matter. Maybe it's just me!

Nine threads? I'd get no study done! I think if we just used the subject fields more, it would make it easier to overlook the posts that aren't relevant. Obviously posts directly to the point in one subject area should be headed accordingly - after that, an indicative remark like 'Exam Rules Query', 'Hotel Prices' etc would clarify things a lot.

copious

chops018 wrote: »

In October 2011 the areas that came up were:

Q. 1. Family Home Protection Act 1976/Co-Habitants.
Q. 2. Co-Ownership.
Q. 3. Sucession: Legal Right Share of Spouses.
Q. 4. Licences.
Q. 5. Landlord and Tenant Law: Residential Tenancies Act 2004.
Q. 6. Finding Objects In or On Land/Treasure Trove.
Q. 7. Adverse Possession.
Q. 8. Succession: Validity.

April 2011:

Q. 1. Landlord and Tenant Law: Residential Tenancies Act. Deasy's Act.
Q. 2. Succession. Formalities and Capacity.
Q. 3. Succession. Legal Right Share.
Q. 4. Co-Ownership.
Q. 5. Adverse Possession.
Q. 6. Objects In or On Land/Treasure Trove.
Q. 7. Family Home Protection Act 1976 - Spouses.
Q. 8. Easements - Necessity.

You're right, they might ask about tenure and the new act, but they rarely do ask about it, and it will usually be one question or maybe part of a question e.g. Write a note on (i), (ii), (iii) pick 2.

The topics I'm picking for Property are: Succession, Finding objects in or on land/Treasure Trove, Adverse Possession, Easements, Family Home Protection Act 1976, Landlord and Tenant - Lease/Licence distinction, Residential Tenancies Act 2004 and Deasy's Act 1860, and I might possibly cover Co-Ownership aswell as they seem to always have a question on that. Are you sitting any other exams, I'm doing 4, it's tough going, I'm picking 6-8 areas for each subject and hoping for a bit of luck that the nice areas such as Treasure Trove and Adverse Possession come up. Succession always comes up so there's one to know off aswell.

thanks for the advice and run down of the 2011 papers. im thinking very similar topics, will try get mortgages in if possible, specifically judgement mortgages really just because its so current..i just really hope they dont bring up random stuff like registered/unreg land, covenants, future interests, rules against remoteness etc.. hoping property will be a banker...seems in 2011 there wasnt so much intermingling of topics and option questions, having treasure trove as a whole question is pretty sweet!

im doing 4 too and yes finding it pretty daunting!-property, equity, contract, company, havent really sat down with any of them yet to really analyse papers, grids etc and figure them out, bit behind tbh, not much work under my belt ! oops!.. dreading company, i just know there will be so little to shave off but hopefully contract and equity will be similar to property in that theres banker topics and the waffly smaller ones or ones which havent come up in years which can be left out...hopefully!!

histories

Thanks for the response JC

chops018

copious wrote: »

thanks for the advice and run down of the 2011 papers. im thinking very similar topics, will try get mortgages in if possible, specifically judgement mortgages really just because its so current..i just really hope they dont bring up random stuff like registered/unreg land, covenants, future interests, rules against remoteness etc.. hoping property will be a banker...seems in 2011 there wasnt so much intermingling of topics and option questions, having treasure trove as a whole question is pretty sweet!

im doing 4 too and yes finding it pretty daunting!-property, equity, contract, company, havent really sat down with any of them yet to really analyse papers, grids etc and figure them out, bit behind tbh, not much work under my belt ! oops!.. dreading company, i just know there will be so little to shave off but hopefully contract and equity will be similar to property in that theres banker topics and the waffly smaller ones or ones which havent come up in years which can be left out...hopefully!!

Yes I'm hoping the papers won't be nasty with those random areas either, seems the last few sittings they weren't. Succession is always on it so that's a must know, just kind of hoping for the best with the other topics and they do seem to come up a lot. There's 8 topics there too, so I will hopefully be covered, as you say it's hard to cover everything perfectly and remember little bits when you're studying for 4 exams, we try to narrow it down as best we can and hope for the best on the day!

ananas

Hello all, where do people get the Companies Acts?

Robbo

ananas wrote: »

Hello all, where do people get the Companies Acts?

Waterstones or Hodge Figgis in Dublin will have them; about €25-30 for the Student edition. Failing that, any college bookstore should.

Robbo

I've suggested over at Forum Requests that a FE/KI exam specific subforum be created.

Feel free to add in any suggestions on the matter.

randomuser77

Could anyone suggest a good article/book or maybe even send me notes on proportionality please? Seems the examiner is prickly about how people invoke this.

JCJCJC

Has anybody here done any analysis of the cases that appear most frequently in the case-note question? At first glance, it seems there are some that repeat fairly often.

EDIT: reply received (with thanks) from Randomuser via PM.

JC

DaleWinton

JCJCJC wrote: »

Has anybody here done any analysis of the cases that appear most frequently in the case-note question? At first glance, it seems there are some that repeat fairly often.

EDIT: reply received (with thanks) from Randomuser via PM.

JC

Hey I would be very interested in feedback with the case-note question if possible.

I have always felt though with the feedback question that it should only be a desperate measure for a fifth question if you are struggling. Get the feeling its one of those questions thats difficult to score well on. I passed Constitutional but avoided the case-note question in that like the plague despite the fact that I knew all the cases. I just felt it would be hard to excel in the question because your depth of knowledge on the specific case would have to be pretty wide.

That said I'd be interested in any feedback randomuser.

JCJCJC

Anybody sitting Const this year might like to go along to this, to hear your examiner speak on the top 20 cases of 2011.

JC

JCJCJC

DaleWinton wrote: »

Hey I would be very interested in feedback with the case-note question if possible.

I have always felt though with the feedback question that it should only be a desperate measure for a fifth question if you are struggling. Get the feeling its one of those questions thats difficult to score well on. I passed Constitutional but avoided the case-note question in that like the plague despite the fact that I knew all the cases. I just felt it would be hard to excel in the question because your depth of knowledge on the specific case would have to be pretty wide.

That said I'd be interested in any feedback randomuser.

If you PM me with your email I'll fwd what Randomuser77 sent me. I'd say that a bit of study on ten stock cases would pay off well, you can always get case summaries on Westlaw anyway which is in effect what he's asking, and reading the cases has to help the overall effort.
I'm not concerned at all with excelling - 51% is plenty for me to get the blasted thing behind me forever. I did the case-law question on const last October, I knew Crotty of old, and EC had dealt with Dellway in his top 20 lecture and handout so I knew what he wanted to hear in relation to that case. I was delighted with that question, knew it would be a banker for me (no pun on Dellway intended ;-)

JC

DaleWinton

JCJCJC wrote: »

If you PM me with your email I'll fwd what Randomuser77 sent me. I'd say that a bit of study on ten stock cases would pay off well, you can always get case summaries on Westlaw anyway which is in effect what he's asking, and reading the cases has to help the overall effort.
I'm not concerned at all with excelling - 51% is plenty for me to get the blasted thing behind me forever. I did the case-law question on const last October, I knew Crotty of old, and EC had dealt with Dellway in his top 20 lecture and handout so I knew what he wanted to hear in relation to that case. I was delighted with that question, knew it would be a banker for me (no pun on Dellway intended ;-)

JC

Thanks JC. I probably used the wrong term when I said "excel", what I meant was I didn't think I had sufficient knowledge to get the 11 or 12 out of 20 marks going for the question. I like yourself am only concerned with passing the exam. 50 is the magic number.

You clearly did the same Constitutional exam I did. Do you mind me asking how you got on? The only reason I say that is because I had heard prior to the exam that there was a pretty high fail rate for that subject, but that didn't seem to be the case with how he marked me. I felt that I didn't do a particularly good exam but still managed to score 60. I only mention that because if people are stressing out about Constitutional, just like I was a few months ago, I think he's a fairly nice marker, so that should be something to be pleased about.

JCJCJC

DaleWinton wrote: »

Thanks JC. I probably used the wrong term when I said "excel", what I meant was I didn't think I had sufficient knowledge to get the 11 or 12 out of 20 marks going for the question. I like yourself am only concerned with passing the exam. 50 is the magic number.

You clearly did the same Constitutional exam I did. Do you mind me asking how you got on? The only reason I say that is because I had heard prior to the exam that there was a pretty high fail rate for that subject, but that didn't seem to be the case with how he marked me. I felt that I didn't do a particularly good exam but still managed to score 60. I only mention that because if people are stressing out about Constitutional, just like I was a few months ago, I think he's a fairly nice marker, so that should be something to be pleased about.

passed, but less than 60!

Robbo

JCJCJC wrote: »

Has anybody here done any analysis of the cases that appear most frequently in the case-note question? At first glance, it seems there are some that repeat fairly often.

EDIT: reply received (with thanks) from Randomuser via PM.

JC

Frequency:

1. Microsoft – 5
2. Simmenthal – 3
3. Altmark – 3
4. Kobler – 3
5. ERTA - 3
6. Van Gend en Loos - 3
7. Zhu & Chen – 3
8. Marshall – 3
9. P Kadi – 2
10. Laval – 2
11. Bar – 1

That's out of 8 outings. Cover the top 10 there and you have 30 out of 54 since the question began; terms and conditions apply, investments may go up and down as well as side to side.

lolita60

Would anyone be willing to swap sample answers.....

I have Contract, Company, EU looking for any of the other subjects.... Particularly Equity and Property!!!

sorchauna

lolita60 wrote: »

Would anyone be willing to swap sample answers.....

I have Contract, Company, EU looking for any of the other subjects.... Particularly Equity and Property!!!

I would swamp property for EU if you have them? I have 2009-2011 in property

ryan606

What would people say are the most important topics to study for equity?

JCJCJC

ryan606 wrote: »

What would people say are the most important topics to study for equity?

I'm certainly not trying to be rude or unhelpful here, but for a query like yours if you use the search function on this thread for key words associated with Equity, or any subject for that matter, you'll see essentially similar questions and loads of replies, usually 5-6 weeks before the exams in each year. For Equity, search for distinctive equity-specific words like Mareva, Bayer, Anton Pillar, Quistclose, Strong v Bird, Charitable Trust, Cypres and so on and you'll get lots of opinion on what topics are considered to be relevant. Use a grid too if you have one or can get one.

JCJCJC

For anyone interested in a basic fast run-through of some interesting points of criminal law, Paul Anthony McDermott SC was on Derek Mooney's radio programme on RTE radio 1 today and he was very good - go to the rte website to hear it back, it begins 35 minutes into the Mooney show.

JC

LawNerd2011

Fellow FE1ers,

Anyone know what Ross Alyward tipped to appear on the March exam paper. In Dire Straights here guys. Any help appreciated. Can't get much time off work for study so starting to feel the pressure!

chops018

I've been studying for quite a bit now, have around 5 areas or so in each subject covered fairly well i.e. some past exam papers done on each topic and notes done out plus reading - they will have to be revised though I know haha.

I picked an extra 2-3 topics for each subject to give myself some cover which I am going to sink my teeth into next week!

Just wondering would I be ok, I don't have exam grids, just have the past papers (plus text books/manuals) and I spent a day going through them all and taking down what came up and decided to cover 7-8 of the repeated areas. Now I know the syllabus is longer than 7-8 areas and even subjects like land can have some surprises with abstract areas being included that most people wouldn't study. However due to time constraints I'm going to stick to the 5 topics I have covered already and add 2-3 and just hope for some luck, or should I try get grids/wait and see here what the predictions are then try concentrate on adding some of the predictions to my current topics covered?

seanmk77

ryan606 wrote: »

What would people say are the most important topics to study for equity?

Was wondering about this myself as I had been preparing equity without the benefit of the most recent paper only to find when I saw it that all of the things I had studied came up in that paper which logically means I’d be screwed for the coming paper. Tracing would appear to be something you have to do because if it doesn’t come up that would be the longest it’s ever gone without being asked. If anybody else has anything useful or constructive to say about equity I’d love to hear it myself.

Ned_led16

For medical negligence i need to know:
Bolam v Friern
O'Donovan v Cork
Dunne v Nat Maternity
Quinn v South West Health Board
Collins v Midwest Health Board

i was thinking just remembering: B,O,D,Q,C. But for 8 questions on 4 exams.....
Any better ideas... i came up with a crap sentence so maybe ill just stick to bodqcb


Best of luck to everyone studying!!

shaneybaby

Ned_led16 wrote: »

For medical negligence i need to know:
Bolam v Friern
O'Donovan v Cork
Dunne v Nat Maternity
Quinn v South West Health Board
Collins v Midwest Health Board

i was thinking just remembering: B,O,D,Q,C. But for 8 questions on 4 exams.....
Any better ideas... i came up with a crap sentence so maybe ill just stick to bodqcb


Best of luck to everyone studying!!

i'm done with the fe1s a while but i actually remember the way i remembered this. Richard Dunne (with a big pregnant belly)(is he saying no or double or something??) Bowling a ball down Cork street with a Massive Niall Quinn directing traffic down that one way street at the end into Michael Collins holding his...midrift;) Weird i know...anyways.....good luck peeps!

JCJCJC

Ned_led16 wrote: »

For medical negligence i need to know:
Bolam v Friern
O'Donovan v Cork
Dunne v Nat Maternity
Quinn v South West Health Board
Collins v Midwest Health Board

i was thinking just remembering: B,O,D,Q,C. But for 8 questions on 4 exams.....
Any better ideas... i came up with a crap sentence so maybe ill just stick to bodqcb


Best of luck to everyone studying!!

what about Bad Operation - Doctor Quite Confused, or something like that ;-)

chops018

JCJCJC wrote: »

what about Bad Operation - Doctor Quite Confused, or something like that ;-)

I've been studying for quite a bit now, have around 5 areas or so in each subject covered fairly well i.e. some past exam papers done on each topic and notes done out plus reading - they will have to be revised though I know haha.

I picked an extra 2-3 topics for each subject to give myself some cover which I am going to sink my teeth into next week!

Just wondering would I be ok, I don't have exam grids, just have the past papers (plus text books/manuals) and I spent a day going through them all and taking down what came up and decided to cover 7-8 of the repeated areas. Now I know the syllabus is longer than 7-8 areas and even subjects like land can have some surprises with abstract areas being included that most people wouldn't study. However due to time constraints I'm going to stick to the 5 topics I have covered already and add 2-3 and just hope for some luck, or should I try get grids/wait and see here what the predictions are then try concentrate on adding some of the predictions to my current topics covered?

Ned_led16

JCJCJC wrote: »

what about Bad Operation - Doctor Quite Confused, or something like that ;-)

Thanks Jc - thats seems really good! But do you or do people include the second name of the case or do you just try and remember it with the prompt of the first name! Ive never really had to focus so much on memory learning for my degree in a diff area.. it was just a different ball game!