FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

RebelScorned

Kamilat wrote: »

Great minds think alike! Attempted the exact same q's only didn't get to finish that boomtonia one so now I'm worried, hoping for a miracle!

they say he's a nice marker.

seriously he would want to be.

SeaFlat

godeas16 wrote: »

Anyone any tips from any of the colleges what this new examiner is likely to do? Really struggling for motivation in the sunshine.

WHAT??? New examiner for criminal? Didn't know that!

Strawberry Fields

SeaFlat wrote: »

WHAT??? New examiner for criminal? Didn't know that!

No contract, as in the title.

SeaFlat

godeas16 wrote: »

SeaFlat wrote: »

WHAT??? New examiner for criminal? Didn't know that!

No contract, as in the title.

Ah, I see. You can't see titles with the iPhone app!

I had Cliona Kelly as an undergrad and postgrad in NUIG. She was a tough marker to say the least! Although I don't mean to cause panic by saying that!

Strawberry Fields

SeaFlat wrote: »

Ah, I see. You can't see titles with the iPhone app!

I had Cliona Kelly as an undergrad and postgrad in NUIG. She was a tough marker to say the least! Although I don't mean to cause panic by saying that!

Yeah I realised that when she failed me in October. Ha trying to kick on from 3.

SeaFlat

godeas16 wrote: »

SeaFlat wrote: »

Ah, I see. You can't see titles with the iPhone app!

I had Cliona Kelly as an undergrad and postgrad in NUIG. She was a tough marker to say the least! Although I don't mean to cause panic by saying that!

Yeah I realised that when she failed me in October. Ha trying to kick on from 3.

Same here. I came out of that exam beaming, having answered four good Qs and a reasonable 5th. Shocked when I got 43%!

lolita60

Would anyone have the examiners report from Oct 11 for Contract? Might give some clue as to what Cliona Kelly wants!! Really struggling to get into it!!

qz

SeaFlat wrote: »

godeas16 wrote: »

SeaFlat wrote: »

Ah, I see. You can't see titles with the iPhone app!

I had Cliona Kelly as an undergrad and postgrad in NUIG. She was a tough marker to say the least! Although I don't mean to cause panic by saying that!

Yeah I realised that when she failed me in October. Ha trying to kick on from 3.

Same here. I came out of that exam beaming, having answered four good Qs and a reasonable 5th. Shocked when I got 43%!

Snap she failed me aswel! Found the exam quite tough and hard marking sure doesn't help.

Strawberry Fields

SeaFlat wrote: »

Same here. I came out of that exam beaming, having answered four good Qs and a reasonable 5th. Shocked when I got 43%!

I got 44, a few tough problem questions in there.

Caoileann

SeaFlat wrote: »

Same here. I came out of that exam beaming, having answered four good Qs and a reasonable 5th. Shocked when I got 43%!

I got 50 on the button but didn't get my other two so repeating it on thurs
Really scared I won't get it this time, losing motivation by the minute. Three exams this week including criminal tomorrow soooooo tired

RebelScorned

i am surprised to hear that she is such a tough marker, for contract last time I really didn't prepare well, left it til the night before to do most of my study, attempted an all nighter and knew that i wasn't ready for the exam- i only did one question- the frustration/capacity one- i left after 45 minutes when i had finished, and I got 15 marks for it, which I thought was quite generous. Sad now to hear she's such a meanie with the marks, esp when the problems are getting more and more and more complex i.e. Advise Mr X in relation to Mrs A and Miss B. Ugh no wonder Brian Foley recommends doing as many essay questions as you can first before you tackle the problems.

What's really hilare is that I handed in the Sale of Goods act today but I have no intention of doing consumer q- i think it's just the comfort of having the act on the table, u know for company like!

Gortnakilla12

Hey guys,
Hope the last leg of the study is going well for ye. Just a quick question, in sexual offences is it only s.2 rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and section 4 rape that have come up? do ye think it's ok not to look over sexual offences against children/mentally impaired and incest? just trying to cut my night before revision down! thanks a mill! Best of luck in the rest of them!

ryan606

Gortnakilla12 wrote: »

Hey guys,
Hope the last leg of the study is going well for ye. Just a quick question, in sexual offences is it only s.2 rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and section 4 rape that have come up? do ye think it's ok not to look over sexual offences against children/mentally impaired and incest? just trying to cut my night before revision down! thanks a mill! Best of luck in the rest of them!

If you dont have time dont worry about it but sexual offences against children is really small and its been asked once or twice in one of those 4 part quests so couldnt hurt to take a glance over- its pretty easy!

chops018

Just reading through some sample answers here, for questions that mix offences and a defence there doesn't seem to be much detail. Once you identify the offence, set down the legislation, the actus reus and mens rea and punishment and have a case then that seems to be enough. I'm sure a discussion on the elements with some more case law would be a huge plus. Then if a defence is included, a huge discussion doesn't seem to be needed either, just the elements and some cases.

Also for sexual offences it seems the same, once you can point to the actus reus and mens rea, discuss the consent element and give some cases that seems sufficent.. what do ye think? Is that enough.

Would love an essay on definition of a crime and then a problem on arrest, detention, right to silence and access to a solicitor and then attempt problem questions that have a mix up of the the offences and defences. Don't think I'd go near a defence essay. Wouldn't mind a mens rea essay either.

Mojo22

The EU examiner is pretty generous with his marks. Passed it last time when I thought id failed it. Only did 3 full questions, & 1/3 of 2 other questions as time was against me & I managed to pass so its probly one of the easier ones to score well in.

As for contract.... thought she was a really tough marker the last time. Am hoping to do mostly essay questions & maybe 1 problem question.

So hard to know what to leave out studywise.

Here's hoping its a nice paper:cool:

Best of luck with the study

qz

Gortnakilla12 wrote: »

Hey guys,
Hope the last leg of the study is going well for ye. Just a quick question, in sexual offences is it only s.2 rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and section 4 rape that have come up? do ye think it's ok not to look over sexual offences against children/mentally impaired and incest? just trying to cut my night before revision down! thanks a mill! Best of luck in the rest of them!

I havent sat the exam yet but I would recommend you cover all aspects as from some past papers it appears that there could be a four part Q on advising the DPP in relation to unconnected scenarios:

Eg: March 2007 Q6:
A) s2 rape and consent
sexual assault
C) mentally impaired
D) incest

October 2007 Q3:
A) sex with a minor
aggravated sexual assault
C) sexual assault
D) rape, consent

ryan606

chops018 wrote: »

Just reading through some sample answers here, for questions that mix offences and a defence there doesn't seem to be much detail. Once you identify the offence, set down the legislation, the actus reus and mens rea and punishment and have a case then that seems to be enough. I'm sure a discussion on the elements with some more case law would be a huge plus. Then if a defence is included, a huge discussion doesn't seem to be needed either, just the elements and some cases.

Also for sexual offences it seems the same, once you can point to the actus reus and mens rea, discuss the consent element and give some cases that seems sufficent.. what do ye think? Is that enough.

Would love an essay on definition of a crime and then a problem on arrest, detention, right to silence and access to a solicitor and then attempt problem questions that have a mix up of the the offences and defences. Don't think I'd go near a defence essay. Wouldn't mind a mens rea essay either.

with the amount of issues raised in each prob quest though you wouldnt really have time to do much more!

doing

SeaFlat wrote: »

Same here. I came out of that exam beaming, having answered four good Qs and a reasonable 5th. Shocked when I got 43%!

That's exactly what happened to me. I've passed others doing far worse exams. I'm preparing the bejaysus out of contract this time. I'm even going to learn that feckin' consumer goods chapter tomorrow so I'll have literally the entire book memorised.

The questions were unbelievably tough as well compared to other exams where one topic is asked per question (maybe 2-3 at a stretch), in contract it was literally 5 or 6 per question. I barely got done in time. And I don't know whether the red herrings are them telling you "tell me a bit about this area" or if they're meant to catch you out. Still thought I'd done alright but I think I got low 40's.

chops018

ryan606 wrote: »

with the amount of issues raised in each prob quest though you wouldnt really have time to do much more!

True I suppose, was looking at a question and it contained burglary, aggravated burglary, assault, threat, and the defence of duress.. half a page to a page on each is plenty I suppose.

brannid3

Hey guys, got to a prob q in criminal there. Just wondering if anyone knows what the story is with it or if I've picked it up wrong.

It's q2. (2) on 2010 april paper. It says that David encourages Patrick to engage in sex with a minor, she's 15. David knows she is but patrick believes she is older from appearance and what the girl is told.Before he carries out the act they are interrupted.

You're advising the DPP but surely nothing can be done with regard to stat rape as he didn't actually do anything, also the honest mistake s2(3) and of CC v Ireland, had he carried it out? Not sure what to do about David encouraging because although he had, they still never got down to business?

ryan606

brannid3 wrote: »

Hey guys, got to a prob q in criminal there. Just wondering if anyone knows what the story is with it or if I've picked it up wrong.

It's q2. (2) on 2010 april paper. It says that David encourages Patrick to engage in sex with a minor, she's 15. David knows she is but patrick believes she is older from appearance and what the girl is told.Before he carries out the act they are interrupted.

You're advising the DPP but surely nothing can be done with regard to stat rape as he didn't actually do anything, also the honest mistake s2(3) and of CC v Ireland, had he carried it out? Not sure what to do about David encouraging because although he had, they still never got down to business?

I THINK: David will still be guilty of incitement- doesnt matter that they didnt carry out the act- actus reus is complete when the inciter communicates the words necessary to constitute the encouragement and mens rea is just that he intended that the substantive offence be committed by the incitee- so it doesnt matter that he didnt actually do it.

Patrick- its also an offence under s3 of 2006 Act to attempt to engage in such an act but he has a defence as to mistake as to age so he wouldnt be convicted.

If anyone thinks any diff though just shout!

trying to cram

doing wrote: »

That's exactly what happened to me. I've passed others doing far worse exams. I'm preparing the bejaysus out of contract this time. I'm even going to learn that feckin' consumer goods chapter tomorrow so I'll have literally the entire book memorised.

The questions were unbelievably tough as well compared to other exams where one topic is asked per question (maybe 2-3 at a stretch), in contract it was literally 5 or 6 per question. I barely got done in time. And I don't know whether the red herrings are them telling you "tell me a bit about this area" or if they're meant to catch you out. till thought I'd done alright but I think I got low 40's.

Me too- scared to leave anything out - got really bad result in this one last time! So, covering as much as possible! Happy Birthday to that person who said it is their birthday today!

qz

trying to cram wrote: »

Me too- scared to leave anything out - got really bad result in this one last time! So, covering as much as possible! Happy Birthday to that person who said it is their birthday today!

Haha thanks. Bit of a shítty birthday but needs must.

chops018

So, looks like I'm not retaining cases names, I never really do unless I can associate them with facts. The book, manual and sample answers don't seem to do that, they will go through the statutory provision and just mention a case name as support but it's not looking good for me remembering, only seem to be able to remember an odd few. Just case names rambling around in my head with nothing to connect them too, usually if I thought of a case I'd say "oh that happened here, that's for this" etc.

I should be ok remembering the legislation and discussing the actus reus and mens rea, will that be enough to scrape a pass if I do this for the issues of a problem?

I'm doing ok with remembering cases for my essays though so that's good.

Guess I'm just wondering will I be penalised for not making references to a lot of cases in the problem questions.

Gibbonw2

What were the EU case notes? At least we know FMG is due a run in 6 months!

JCJCJC

Gibbonw2 wrote: »

What were the EU case notes? At least we know FMG is due a run in 6 months!

Any three out of:

Van Gend en Loos
ERTA
Faccini Dori
Brassiere de Pecheur v Germany & Factortame III
Schmidberger
Rothley ve EP
laval
Kadi
Association belge des consommateirs test achat

At first glance at the paper, I thought I was out for the early-bird special lunch, no effin' institutions after I spending the last month on them. So I had a go at Boomtonia, but the bottom line is - stupid question ultimately - whatever clever little victories we may win against Windy Ltd won't last long, they'll re-apply and get it right the second time. Barrelled on into John, Mairead and Heinz, and settled down a bit - then tackled the 'neccessitated by obligations of membership', Meagher and Maher, Cityview principles, stuff I'd done for constitutional came to my rescue there, good ol' principles and policies. Did Van Gend, Faccini and Schmidberger case notes and wrote a weak last one on conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, luckily enough I had highlighted the relevant parts of the treaty.
I thought the retrospective questions - two mentioning the Maastricht treaty, and one mention of Amsterdam, were total, utter, complete bullsheet. Who needs to know obsolete stuff like that now, for any useful purpose - it's hard enough to try to keep abreast of current EU law.
Anyway in the end I stayed for the three hours, three ok questions and two weak enough ones - hope you guys are right when you say it's marked kindly but I wouldn't be counting on it.

ryan606

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=301295179940081&set=a.272235629512703.63096.271951946207738&type=3&theater

brannid3

ryan606 wrote: »

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=301295179940081&set=a.272235629512703.63096.271951946207738&type=3&theater

Too Right!

RandolphEsq

Typical, I try and think of anything from criminal law and nothing comes to my head. Hate the morning before an exam

coco13

Hi guys,

Just wanted to get an idea of the perception of EU Law yesterday. It's my last exam and am so so hoping I did enough to get it over the line;

First off I did the Preliminary Ref Essay Question which was very straightforward and hoping to have done ok in that.

Secondly I did the Subsidiarity and Proportionality Q - Again an essay and while it would be the most eloquently written essay I would have hope to hit most of the main points.

Third, I did the DE and MS Liability Prob Question which I thought was a lovely Q and hope to do well in that.

Hadn't planned on doing the cse note question but could write about three of the cases. I had a sparse knowledge of the facts of each case and the main princple and relevance of same. Just worried about this one cause he goes on so much in his Examiners Reports about the sub standard answers he gets to this question.

Finally I was forced into doing the citizenship Q which I had very little time left to do and a sparse enough knowledge of the area.. Answered part 3 first which I think I was ok with as it appeared to be Free Movement of workers and Public exemptions. Threw in one or two cases for the second part about lawfullt entering the state etc but it was very incohorent and part 1 was was a mess.

Enough to get it over the line? I have no idea as to what is enough or not enough with these exams any more I have been so disillusioned by them! Any feedback would be great.