FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Hogzy

Ned_led16 wrote: »

is that why there is a mass exodus to the toilet in criminal law exams - not saying people are cheating but adverse inferences may be made - or perhaps a coincidence that 10 times more people need the bathroom during the exam!
if so that really annoys me - when u dont have a law degree and its plainly obvious there are lots of people checking notes in the bathrooms - how can the non law grad compete against that!

What difference does it make if you have a law degree or not? Surely Non law graduates are just as capable of cheating as law graduates?

If I have time, i will usually go to the bathroom just for the sake of getting away from the exam for 2 minutes. You should really try it if your brain goes dead and you cannot think of a case name or something. The few minutes away from the paper allows your brain to rest momentarily. Then come back to the paper and plough on through it.

Its worked for me numerous times. I would never even consider bringing notes into the exam. If you are caught, that is your career down the toilet. You would be an absolute fool to try it.

Strawberry Fields

I too like a trip to the loo, give myself a pep talk and clear my head, helps me to look again fresh at the paper.

Ned_led16

Hogzy wrote: »

What difference does it make if you have a law degree or not? Surely Non law graduates are just as capable of cheating as law graduates?

If I have time, i will usually go to the bathroom just for the sake of getting away from the exam for 2 minutes. You should really try it if your brain goes dead and you cannot think of a case name or something. The few minutes away from the paper allows your brain to rest momentarily. Then come back to the paper and plough on through it.

Its worked for me numerous times. I would never even consider bringing notes into the exam. If you are caught, that is your career down the toilet. You would be an absolute fool to try it.

No of course not!! are u mad? what i meant is that if you have a law degree you would most likely have studied criminal law? and if someone cheats and has a law degree and studied criminal law - how the hell can the normal joe soap compete against that!

to say law students would be more likely than non law grads to cheat is ridiculous!

Not accusing anyone - please dont think that!

I was just making the point that i wondered if there was a correlation to people using the bathroom and the examiner from crim law making u cover everything! from what you have said the answer is no - so thanks for clearing that false thought or allegation i might have had!!!

JCJCJC

Well, if you needed a reminder of the facts in R v Brown a trip to the lavvie might remind you, that's about all. Of all the FE1 exams, I found Criminal easiest to pass and it needed the shortest study period. I was actually surprised to pass it, I didn't think I had done a good enough paper on the day.
On cheating, I remember seeing a guy do it blatantly in UL in a Company law exam. The invigilators didn't know the difference between the Companies Acts and the Cork Examiner. This dude had his own ringbinder of notes on his desk for the full three-hour exam and coolly leafed through it every so often as he pleased, but I wouldn't recommend it.

RebelScorned

when it comes to criminal i would be very wary of being selective about anything- i did it last october but i left it so late to study for it, literally day before job, and i left out the first couple of chapters of the manual- basically did every offence, every defence, omissions and definition of a crime. There were 3 questions on the paper i automatically could not do when i went in and I wasn't too hot on one of them but i still passed. I would just say don't be too selective with criminal and know every offence- inchoate, property, homicide, against person, sexual- you can paraphrase the actual sections which is neat, know what the penalties are- fine, imprisonment, indictment, summary, and know all the defences reeeeeeally well
I agree with JC though, criminal law easiest of all the FE1s to actually pass, doesn't require half the work of most of the other subjects

JCJCJC

I think the key to what got me a pass last October was GCD's advice - for each offense, no matter how minor, formally write down the offense, the mens rea and the actus reus. Dissect out every last offense from the problem scenarios and do that. I wouldn't have thought of it myself, it wasn't the style I learnt in college, but it definitely worked.
For example, (from memory) there was a problem q about a guy who pulled up at a garage, filled some petrol into his car, spilt some more on the ground, fired a gun at the proprietor and burnt the place down. You could easily overlook that in amongst all that excitement was the crime of making off without paying. Don't miss the little things, everybody is going to see the arson and assaults.

JLex

have to do EU and Equity on Monday and Tuesday..........any advice for EU please? i am afraid i will be so tired on Tuesday i won't be able to do well on the exam.

RebelScorned

juliach wrote: »

have to do EU and Equity on Monday and Tuesday..........any advice for EU please? i am afraid i will be so tired on Tuesday i won't be able to do well on the exam.

i'm in same position as you- for EU i defo recommend institutions, impact national legal systems, free movement of goods, free movement of persons, competition, state aid, mergers, preliminary rulings and equality- if you don't have 5 questions out of that- no justice in the world!

chops018

JCJCJC wrote: »

I think the key to what got me a pass last October was GCD's advice - for each offense, no matter how minor, formally write down the offense, the mens rea and the actus reus. Dissect out every last offense from the problem scenarios and do that. I wouldn't have thought of it myself, it wasn't the style I learnt in college, but it definitely worked.
For example, (from memory) there was a problem q about a guy who pulled up at a garage, filled some petrol into his car, spilt some more on the ground, fired a gun at the proprietor and burnt the place down. You could easily overlook that in amongst all that excitement was the crime of making off without paying. Don't miss the little things, everybody is going to see the arson and assaults.

That's the way I'm studying for the exam, trying to learn the offences and defences and then I am gonna try identify each offence and lay out the actus reus and mens rea for it, the punishment and see if a defence is available, hopefully I'll be able to remember a couple of cases and the actual legislation for them too.

Then I have some essays prepared too so hopefully it will be enough, will need revision next week before the exam but I'm hoping to remember most of the stuff!

chops018

So for equity I have 9 topics covered. But some of them are just part topics e.g. duty of trustees to invest and undue influence to third parties, there's another one or two like that, should I just stick to those areas or should I expand. Would prefer just to stick to say investment than going into that area looking at other parts.

Ned_led16

chops018 wrote: »

That's the way I'm studying for the exam, trying to learn the offences and defences and then I am gonna try identify each offence and lay out the actus reus and mens rea for it, the punishment and see if a defence is available, hopefully I'll be able to remember a couple of cases and the actual legislation for them too.

Then I have some essays prepared too so hopefully it will be enough, will need revision next week before the exam but I'm hoping to remember most of the stuff!

Ok cool! But what essays are u planning! i know what your all saying - and thats clear - but one must have a few essays up their sleave to roll out!

chops018

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Ok cool! But what essays are u planning! i know what your all saying - and thats clear - but one must have a few essays up their sleave to roll out!

I have essays prepared for mens rea (intention/recklessness), classification of a crime, definition of a crime, arrest, detention, bail and right to silence.

Ned_led16

id go for omissions, trial in due course of law & duress & automatism too

best of luck

chops018

Ned_led16 wrote: »

id go for omissions, trial in due course of law & duress & automatism too

best of luck

Cheers, I have a sample answer on presumption of innocence, might give it a read for backup. Will go through those defences, I have already anyway but will give them a bit more attention now seeing as they're tipped.

RebelScorned

so i am sitting on my bed now with everything sprawled out around me and i'm just wondering what people are feeling- I've been looking at my notes from the griffith course and the tips from city colleges and both of them highlighted specific performance as must study topics but looking at the grid, it has come up on last three papers, has never come up more than 3 times in a row before? Also for trusteeship, it has come up in last four papers and has never come up more than four times in a row before.

I have in front of me notes done out on:
maxims
injunctions (mareva, quia timet and anton piller)
undue influence
estoppel
tracing
donatio mortis causa
secret trusts
resulting (automatic- failure to exhaust beneficial interest and quistclose and presumed (joint deposit accounts and presumption of advancement)
charitable
cypres
purpose

do you think before i go committing these to memory that i'll get 5 qs? Equity caught me out last time- i didn't have enough for 5 qs in october and i would just be raging if same happened again. Looking at the grids, just so hard to tell? Please tell me i am not the only one on boards today worried i won't have enough!

chops018

RebelScorned wrote: »

so i am sitting on my bed now with everything sprawled out around me and i'm just wondering what people are feeling- I've been looking at my notes from the griffith course and the tips from city colleges and both of them highlighted specific performance as must study topics but looking at the grid, it has come up on last three papers, has never come up more than 3 times in a row before? Also for trusteeship, it has come up in last four papers and has never come up more than four times in a row before.

I have in front of me notes done out on:
maxims
injunctions (mareva, quia timet and anton piller)
undue influence
estoppel
tracing
donatio mortis causa
secret trusts
resulting (automatic- failure to exhaust beneficial interest and quistclose and presumed (joint deposit accounts and presumption of advancement)
charitable
cypres
purpose

do you think before i go committing these to memory that i'll get 5 qs? Equity caught me out last time- i didn't have enough for 5 qs in october and i would just be raging if same happened again. Looking at the grids, just so hard to tell? Please tell me i am not the only one on boards today worried i won't have enough!

I'm worried and I have 9 topics, but like you I'm concerned they'll go a different direction.. I have covered:

- Injuntions.
- Proprietary Estoppel (feeling that it won't come up though).
- Charitable Trusts.
- Rectification.
- Specific Performance (but only with regard the sale of land).
- Duty of Trustees (but only with regard investment).
- Undue Influence (but only with regard third parties).
- Three Certainties.
- Non Charitable Purpose Trusts.

My worry is that some of the topics above won't come up and then some of the topics I only have part of them done. Thinking of covering resulting trusts now today, I have sample answers on joint bank accouts, that's usually the only way they ask about resulting trusts I thought? Might give tracing a quick read too.

I'm just afraid if I start panicking that I won't be able to revise the above that I've prepared, kinda hoping for some luck with the questions to be honest!

Hogzy

chops018 wrote: »

I'm worried and I have 9 topics, but like you I'm concerned they'll go a different direction.. I have covered:

- Injuntions.
- Proprietary Estoppel (feeling that it won't come up though).
- Charitable Trusts.
- Rectification.
- Specific Performance (but only with regard the sale of land).
- Duty of Trustees (but only with regard investment).
- Undue Influence (but only with regard third parties).
- Three Certainties.
- Non Charitable Purpose Trusts.

My worry is that some of the topics above won't come up and then some of the topics I only have part of them done. Thinking of covering resulting trusts now today, I have sample answers on joint bank accouts, that's usually the only way they ask about resulting trusts I thought? Might give tracing a quick read too.

I'm just afraid if I start panicking that I won't be able to revise the above that I've prepared, kinda hoping for some luck with the questions to be honest!

Secret Trusts, Tracing and Resulting trusts are fairly important if you ask me. Defo give them a read through

FOOKED

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone has exam grids for Contract of Criminal- feeling a bit overwhelmed and starting to panic that I'm not identifying the questions properly. Kinda freaking out! Would really appreciate any help!

Thanks,
Fooked

RebelScorned

chops018 wrote: »

I'm worried and I have 9 topics, but like you I'm concerned they'll go a different direction.. I have covered:

- Injuntions.
- Proprietary Estoppel (feeling that it won't come up though).
- Charitable Trusts.
- Rectification.
- Specific Performance (but only with regard the sale of land).
- Duty of Trustees (but only with regard investment).
- Undue Influence (but only with regard third parties).
- Three Certainties.
- Non Charitable Purpose Trusts.

My worry is that some of the topics above won't come up and then some of the topics I only have part of them done. Thinking of covering resulting trusts now today, I have sample answers on joint bank accouts, that's usually the only way they ask about resulting trusts I thought? Might give tracing a quick read too.

I'm just afraid if I start panicking that I won't be able to revise the above that I've prepared, kinda hoping for some luck with the questions to be honest!

to be very honest and don't want to sound mean, i think you may have limited yourself too much- don't freak out you still have time- it's just if purpose trusts come up, it'll prob be with charitable, and i would definitely look over cy-pres too because that's due a run. Estoppel has been up in last three papers and has never been up more than 3 times in a row, same with specific performance and trustees). a whole q on three certainties came up last march and rectification is only ever in the 'write on two of the following three' questions. I honest to god wouldn't be saying this only you have time to get more done, i obv didn't set the paper and you don't have to listen to my advice, i could be wrong, but i feel like you might be over limiting yourself a bit, and trust me, i did that last october, i know what i am talking about

kkumk

Sorry to interrupt the intense pre-exam freaking out that's going on right now (best of luck!!) but I was just wondering would I be crazy to try and sit the FE1s while studying for a full time MA in another discipline?(International Relations) I was thinking of sitting four this October (the MA will start in September) and then maybe two next March and two the following October, just to keep my options open! Has anyone had any experience of this? I'm a non-law graduate btw, which probably adds to my difficulties...

Ned_led16

kkumk wrote: »

Sorry to interrupt the intense pre-exam freaking out that's going on right now (best of luck!!) but I was just wondering would I be crazy to try and sit the FE1s while studying for a full time MA in another discipline?(International Relations) I was thinking of sitting four this October (the MA will start in September) and then maybe two next March and two the following October, just to keep my options open! Has anyone had any experience of this? I'm a non-law graduate btw, which probably adds to my difficulties...

barking

chops018

RebelScorned wrote: »

to be very honest and don't want to sound mean, i think you may have limited yourself too much- don't freak out you still have time- it's just if purpose trusts come up, it'll prob be with charitable, and i would definitely look over cy-pres too because that's due a run. Estoppel has been up in last three papers and has never been up more than 3 times in a row, same with specific performance and trustees). a whole q on three certainties came up last march and rectification is only ever in the 'write on two of the following three' questions. I honest to god wouldn't be saying this only you have time to get more done, i obv didn't set the paper and you don't have to listen to my advice, i could be wrong, but i feel like you might be over limiting yourself a bit, and trust me, i did that last october, i know what i am talking about

Cheers for the advice, I think I'll deffo get to adding even 2 more topics to it so.. shouldn't take long, 2 hours for each, a break then back to some revision.. The way I studied was looked at the last 6 sittings and picked the 5 most common and just added 4 others that seem to come up.. but they'll probably change it up this time, they did with property Friday!

JCJCJC

kkumk wrote: »

Sorry to interrupt the intense pre-exam freaking out that's going on right now (best of luck!!) but I was just wondering would I be crazy to try and sit the FE1s while studying for a full time MA in another discipline?(International Relations) I was thinking of sitting four this October (the MA will start in September) and then maybe two next March and two the following October, just to keep my options open! Has anyone had any experience of this? I'm a non-law graduate btw, which probably adds to my difficulties...

Maybe next week people here will have more time to answer this. In my humble opinion, to pass all eight FE1s you need the same level of knowledge as primary degree exams in college at least, so that's what you're taking on. There is a shift in emphasis in the FE1s that is hard to describe - college focuses on academic law, evolution of legal doctrines and policies in a historical context and so on. The FE1s are entrance exams to the profession of solicitor, so they focus on fresh current law and assessing to some extent how you would apply your knowledge to a person with a real current problem. In your case, to come to that point - unless you are a very gifted scholar and they are out there - I'd say do four prep courses in complementary subjects like contract, tort, equity and property and see how you go, but don't underestimate the amount of study you need to get up to standard. Also, if you are registered with some 3rd level institution as a student which, logically, you must be - poke around their on-line databases for legal ones like Lexis-nexus, Firstlaw and Westlaw, access to those is a huge asset. There is free stuff available too on bailii.org and courts.ie, and everything the EU ever did is on the www five thousand times.

ryan606

RebelScorned wrote: »

to be very honest and don't want to sound mean, i think you may have limited yourself too much- don't freak out you still have time- it's just if purpose trusts come up, it'll prob be with charitable, and i would definitely look over cy-pres too because that's due a run. Estoppel has been up in last three papers and has never been up more than 3 times in a row, same with specific performance and trustees). a whole q on three certainties came up last march and rectification is only ever in the 'write on two of the following three' questions. I honest to god wouldn't be saying this only you have time to get more done, i obv didn't set the paper and you don't have to listen to my advice, i could be wrong, but i feel like you might be over limiting yourself a bit, and trust me, i did that last october, i know what i am talking about

what topics are you covering? you seem to have a good idea! equity is def one of the hardest to predict I think. I'm doing:

Injunctions- Mareva, QT, Anton Piller
Tracing
Secret Trusts
Charitable Trusts
Cy-Pres
Resulting Trusts
Trusteeship
DMC
Undue Influence (only the bank one though!)
3 Certainties

Hoping thats enough! Dya think its mad to leave out specific performance and estoppel? I was thinking that shes surely gonna stop putting em up at some point!

RebelScorned

ryan606 wrote: »

what topics are you covering? you seem to have a good idea! equity is def one of the hardest to predict I think. I'm doing:

Injunctions- Mareva, QT, Anton Piller
Tracing
Secret Trusts
Charitable Trusts
Cy-Pres
Resulting Trusts
Trusteeship
DMC
Undue Influence (only the bank one though!)
3 Certainties

Hoping thats enough! Dya think its mad to leave out specific performance and estoppel? I was thinking that shes surely gonna stop putting em up at some point!

hi ryan, i am pretty much same as you- i have written out notes on estoppel but not sure whether i'll learn them, don't really understand why everyone has gona ga-ga for specific performance either looking at grid! If i feel like i know the rest of my topics well enough i might bullet point SP and trustees but they wouldn't be priorities of mine. I agree equity not very predictable. As for undue influence, what i have prepared is presumed- class 2A and 2B, substantial benefit calling for explanation, rebutting presumption and undue influence and third parties incorporating all the bank shizzle. It's not my fave topic, i actually prefer the trusts side tbh, but she has asked it so much, i am wondering is it like the new *cough* guaranteed injunctions question? I have covered quite alot of topics already but i am wondering whether to add 3 certainties and trusteeship- very torn with trustees cos it has been up last 4 papers and has never been up four times in a row before, it kinda looks from the grid like it's due a break. I thought the last paper was a bit equity heavy so she may lean more towards trusts this time out- but is secret/resulting and charitable on one paper too much to hope for?? It's so hard to tell with this examiner, i mean realistically you can't do every topic, but if you leave out like 5 things and those five things come up, you're screwed!

I am just baffled as to why people are so convinced SP/trustees are gonna be on when they look like they are due a break!

Caoileann

I am covering:

1. Injunctions- Quia Timet, Mareva, Anton Pillar.
2. Specific Performance
3. Undue Influence
4. Secret Trusts
5. Charities and cy pres (This is all I'm doing from Purpose trusts)
6. Resulting Trusts
7. Trustees
8. Tracing
9. Donatio Mortis Causa, Three Certainties and Strong v Bird (Leaving out the rest of Express Trusts)
10. Proprietary estoppel
11. Satisfaction
12. Rectification
13. Maxims.

So basically all I'm leaving out is constructive, half injunctions, non charitable purpose trusts and parts of express trusts!

Don't know whether to do the full chapters for purpose and express, also might try get all injunctions done if I have time

Hogzy

Undue Influence
Specific Performance
Proprietary Estoppel
Tracing
Secret Trusts
Auto & Presumed Resulting Trusts
Charitable + CyPres
Express Trusts - Formalities + 3 Certainties + Constitution
Trustees
Injunctions - Interloc/Mareva/QTI/APO/

Leaving out constructive Trusts.
Going over Maxims now just in case they are part of a 3pt Q.

chops018

Hogzy wrote: »

Undue Influence
Specific Performance
Proprietary Estoppel
Tracing
Secret Trusts
Auto & Presumed Resulting Trusts
Charitable + CyPres
Express Trusts - Formalities + 3 Certainties + Constitution
Trustees
Injunctions - Interloc/Mareva/QTI/APO/

Leaving out constructive Trusts.
Going over Maxims now just in case they are part of a 3pt Q.

Added to my list that I put up previously as I agreed that it seemed restrictive, just finished going over Resulting trusts - failure to exhaust a beneficial interest, joint bank accounts quistclose trusts. (Didn't take long, read over the stuff a few times, made concise notes, was delighted it didn't take long).

Going to go over half secret trusts now. Then I'll add in tracing, quia timet and cy pres later - they're all small and should get through them handy enough. All that with my list will hopefully cover me, then a full revision day tomorrow and Monday morning, the amount I'll have done, hope I remember it all.

lolita60

Do ye think I've cut down too much....So far I've covered:

Maxims
3 certanties
Strong v Bird
Donatio Mortis Causa
Anton Pillar&Mareva
Rectification
Specific Performance - Recission - Undue Influence
Secret Trusts
Charitable (Poor&Education)
Quistclose

Just need to go over them all again

Mojo22

Caoileann wrote: »

I am covering:

1. Injunctions- Quia Timet, Mareva, Anton Pillar.
2. Specific Performance
3. Undue Influence
4. Secret Trusts
5. Charities and cy pres (This is all I'm doing from Purpose trusts)
6. Resulting Trusts
7. Trustees
8. Tracing
9. Donatio Mortis Causa, Three Certainties and Strong v Bird (Leaving out the rest of Express Trusts)
10. Proprietary estoppel
11. Satisfaction
12. Rectification
13. Maxims.

So basically all I'm leaving out is constructive, half injunctions, non charitable purpose trusts and parts of express trusts!

Don't know whether to do the full chapters for purpose and express, also might try get all injunctions done if I have time

I have covered the same topics as you. We will surely get 5 q's from the above list. Just goin to give a quick look through what i havnt done and just read anything else that i may think may come up, just in case im stuck for a 5th q. Better to get attempt marks than to get nothing