FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

sorchauna

I was wondering if I could get some advice.

I got offered a traineeship in a small and new firm becasue I have a 2H1 law degree and LLM. This was a very unexpected offer that came about randomly so I dont have any fe's done and they want me to start working full time with them asap and pass the fe's in in two sittings to be ready for ppc in september 2013. Anybody with experience of the fe's think this would be possible to balance. Getting the traineeship is great but it wont happen without the fe's and I may not get the fe's working full time.

colonel1

sorchauna wrote: »

I was wondering if I could get some advice.

I got offered a traineeship in a small and new firm becasue I have a 2H1 law degree and LLM. This was a very unexpected offer that came about randomly so I dont have any fe's done and they want me to start working full time with them asap and pass the fe's in in two sittings to be ready for ppc in september 2013. Anybody with experience of the fe's think this would be possible to balance. Getting the traineeship is great but it wont happen without the fe's and I may not get the fe's working full time.

Congratulations on being offered a traineeship sorchauna:D The FE1s are quite tough, especially when you are working full time. On the other hand training contracts are pretty hard to get....so why not accept the offer and attempt the first four in the October 2012 sitting. Will the firm give you some time off to study before the exams (say a fortnight or so)?

Good luck with your decision.

Right 2B a liar

IMO I think traineeships are on the up, I got one relatively easy this year despite begging for the majority of last year for one. It will depend on your ability to focus and become somewhat robotic, going from a days work into a nights study for 12 months starting right away but it is 100% doable and people have done it. If I was in your shoes I would accept the challenge as I found searching for a TC more stressful than exams. If you can do them with the confidence that you will have a TC maybe it will be motivation for you, even if you should not get all eight this time next year, the years experience in an office would be as valuable as your LLM. Put on the 'eye of the tiger' and go for it...

sorchauna

Thanks Right 2b a liar and colonel 1 for your very sound advice! I'm glad to know working full time and study is doable as to be honest I've only ever worked part time while doing the BCL and LLM and was never under to much pressure but you hear the horror stories of the fe's I was afraid it would be impossible. I say I could get some leave but it would not be very much!

Congrats Right 2b a liar on your traineeship. I'm glad to hear other people are getting a traineeship and to remain hopeful about it!

Kamilat

Right 2B a liar wrote: »

IMO I think traineeships are on the up, I got one relatively easy this year despite begging for the majority of last year for one. It will depend on your ability to focus and become somewhat robotic, going from a days work into a nights study for 12 months starting right away but it is 100% doable and people have done it. If I was in your shoes I would accept the challenge as I found searching for a TC more stressful than exams. If you can do them with the confidence that you will have a TC maybe it will be motivation for you, even if you should not get all eight this time next year, the years experience in an office would be as valuable as your LLM. Put on the 'eye of the tiger' and go for it...

Hi, do you mind me asking how you went about getting your apprenticeship this year? I agree on the last year bit, I went around all the offices in person with no luck (about 20-25 offices) but I did get some work experience out of it. I think I'll try and go around again next week but I'll try and go to the towns around me also as I just finished my last FE1 and the thought of waiting another year to go to blackball is scaring me.....

sorchauna

Kamilat wrote: »

Hi, do you mind me asking how you went about getting your apprenticeship this year? I agree on the last year bit, I went around all the offices in person with no luck (about 20-25 offices) but I did get some work experience out of it. I think I'll try and go around again next week but I'll try and go to the towns around me also as I just finished my last FE1 and the thought of waiting another year to go to blackball is scaring me.....

I think all you can do is get your names into offices. For me, I had applied for a legal secretary job and they didnt find me suitable but offered me the traineeship instead. And this would be a traineeship that was not advertised so pure luck. I have also known with a few people who have passed a Cv into a law office, which have not found them suitable but that firm would pass it onto another law firm, and they have gotten a job.

Mojo22

Kamilat wrote: »

Hi, do you mind me asking how you went about getting your apprenticeship this year? I agree on the last year bit, I went around all the offices in person with no luck (about 20-25 offices) but I did get some work experience out of it. I think I'll try and go around again next week but I'll try and go to the towns around me also as I just finished my last FE1 and the thought of waiting another year to go to blackball is scaring me.....

Kamilat im in the same position as you, must begin the search for a TC :cool:
Hopw we both find one without much difficulty

Mojo22

Just been go through the PPC 1application pack. Cant believe the Law Society are charging E850 for our application to be processed in addition to the fees.
Does anyone else find this ridiculous??????:mad:

Kamilat

Mojo22 wrote: »

Kamilat wrote: »

Hi, do you mind me asking how you went about getting your apprenticeship this year? I agree on the last year bit, I went around all the offices in person with no luck (about 20-25 offices) but I did get some work experience out of it. I think I'll try and go around again next week but I'll try and go to the towns around me also as I just finished my last FE1 and the thought of waiting another year to go to blackball is scaring me.....

Kamilat im in the same position as you, must begin the search for a TC :cool:
Hopw we both find one without much difficulty

Yea I hope we get lucky, well my search starts tomorrow, round 1, let's see how that goes...have my suit out ready to go.fingers crossed!

Ned_led16

brian__foley wrote: »

With all due respect, its as predictable as any other paper with probably more clear patterns than others. There seem to be so many myths about this subject! I just can't understand where the perception that this exam is "random" is coming from.

1. The examiner routinely exams privacy and writes about it. Privacy was on the exam. Not only that, but the particular area examined drew on media privacy / expression issues which have been all over the exam, and reflect the examiners research interests etc.
2. The exam routinely asks about the separation of powers; there was a clear separation of powers essay.
3. The exam routinely asks about the administration of justice in public. There it was again.
4. Time and time again there are right to earn a livelihood / proportionality / property questions and there they are again.
5. Equally, unconstitutionally obtained evidence has a good pedigree as do Article 38.1 questions generally.
6. Also, Article 26 has been examined before and there it is again.
7. The case note question referred to cases which are the bread and butter of the subject.

Frankly, the paper reflects a very normal and reasonable spread of a typical undergraduate constitutional law course - separation of powers, presidential / article 26 issues / basic rights focusing on property / proportionality and privacy and Article 38.1. And you add to that the nuancing themes that are emerging in current litigation (e.g. the input of fair process in "non-traditional" areas and so on) (See Question 1, and note that Dellway had been previously asked in the case-note putting it "right on the agenda").

How is any of that random?

Just wonder if these exams are as predictable as you say Brian - is it likely that the same pattern will follow for Tort and Property in Oct 2012 that has done for the last few sittings?

Please correct me if i am wrong and i know you have a far greater understanding and experience with the study of law than i do - but i get the feeling you are positioned in the middle of the fence - on one hand you say we must study all topics and know them all inside out - and on the other side, i guess you are saying no, we can pick and choose because there is a discernible pattern to the questions given.

Criminal law is an example of this and im told you cant leave much out.
As for Tort and Property is there any reason why the pattern would change?

Certainly not having a dig at you, and i know you posted this message a long time ago, but its not clear - do we pick and choose topics or do we have to learn everything?

For Tort and Property exams i chose 8 topics and passed - but if i were to sit them again i might need 12 topics to pass. To me its a gamble, and an assessment of risk which can be minimized by covering as much as possible, but then if you cover to much you run the risk of knowing to little about to much opposed to knowing a lot about a little.

Right 2B a liar

Kamilat wrote: »

Hi, do you mind me asking how you went about getting your apprenticeship this year? I agree on the last year bit, I went around all the offices in person with no luck (about 20-25 offices) but I did get some work experience out of it. I think I'll try and go around again next week but I'll try and go to the towns around me also as I just finished my last FE1 and the thought of waiting another year to go to blackball is scaring me.....

Well I was not sure if I was still going to be a solicitor as I got a lot of interest from bankers to do a compliance role, but I happened to be free for two weeks in March and responded to ads on LSI website. Every cover letter I wrote I explained in detail what I could do and how that would help bring potential customers to the firm. I must admit 50% of it was waffle [you have to be creative] but the other 50% was facts that I backed up in my interviews. I think research is crucial, not only the firm you are applying to but the town/city it is in, and look for little roles you can handle on your own within the firm as your selling point.

And on a side bar if you don't have a personalty try and work on that, I think it doesn't matter how good your C.V. is if the person can't stand you when they meet you, it's probably good luck to you, remember you will be spending 10 hours a day with each other; if you don't like who your working with its not going to work. This may mean watching the highlights of the games at the weekend or even reading a Hello magazine!

Preserve! no one will give it to you, so you got to go out and make it happen

brian__foley

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Just wonder if these exams are as predictable as you say Brian - is it likely that the same pattern will follow for Tort and Property in Oct 2012 that has done for the last few sittings?

Please correct me if i am wrong and i know you have a far greater understanding and experience with the study of law than i do - but i get the feeling you are positioned in the middle of the fence - on one hand you say we must study all topics and know them all inside out - and on the other side, i guess you are saying no, we can pick and choose because there is a discernible pattern to the questions given.

Criminal law is an example of this and im told you cant leave much out.
As for Tort and Property is there any reason why the pattern would change?

Certainly not having a dig at you, and i know you posted this message a long time ago, but its not clear - do we pick and choose topics or do we have to learn everything?

For Tort and Property exams i chose 8 topics and passed - but if i were to sit them again i might need 12 topics to pass. To me its a gamble, and an assessment of risk which can be minimized by covering as much as possible, but then if you cover to much you run the risk of knowing to little about to much opposed to knowing a lot about a little.

You're taking quite a lot of out context. That post was in response to a post which castigated the constitutional law exam as completely random.

And I think you're being a bit too formal here. Its not as black and white as me saying "oh you have to study everything" and "there are patterns" and I think you've taken this quite of context.

Anyway, if you sit back and look, for example, at contract or constitutional law, you will see that the same issues occur over and over. That doesn't mean they recur every year in five questions. It simply means you're mad if you go into a constitutional law exam not knowing privacy, media expression, the administration of justice in public and so. Or, for contract, it means you're mad if you don't know mistake, frustration, offer and acceptance and so on. Equally, it means you can't really complain when a constitutional law paper examines Article 26, or requires you to tease out the lingering ratio of Sinnott / TD etc. That doesn't mean it comes up every year. It just means its not something to be avoided.

There is a difference between clearly recurring issues and predicting 5 exam questions each sitting, and I think you're fixated on that. That's not necessarily unreasonable in that everyone wants that, but its not possible nor something to depend on. There is patterns to what arises, but you're assuming you can make the leap and assume this gives you 5 questions. The post was there to make the point that there are things you simply have to cover time in and time out. It may well turn out that this gives you 5 questions, and if it does, you'll smile like a cheshire cat. The point is just that it is absolutely impossible - with a straight face - to look at many of these exams and say they are "random". So, yes, watch the patterns and make sure at a minimum that you have them covered but never, ever rely on shortcuts.

jeangeanie

http://www.adverts.ie/school-college-books/griffith-college-manuals-and-exam-papers-company-tort-contract-and-property/1655537 Manuals etc available.

valleyoftheunos

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Just wonder if these exams are as predictable as you say Brian - is it likely that the same pattern will follow for Tort and Property in Oct 2012 that has done for the last few sittings?

Please correct me if i am wrong and i know you have a far greater understanding and experience with the study of law than i do - but i get the feeling you are positioned in the middle of the fence - on one hand you say we must study all topics and know them all inside out - and on the other side, i guess you are saying no, we can pick and choose because there is a discernible pattern to the questions given.

Criminal law is an example of this and im told you cant leave much out.
As for Tort and Property is there any reason why the pattern would change?

Certainly not having a dig at you, and i know you posted this message a long time ago, but its not clear - do we pick and choose topics or do we have to learn everything?

For Tort and Property exams i chose 8 topics and passed - but if i were to sit them again i might need 12 topics to pass. To me its a gamble, and an assessment of risk which can be minimized by covering as much as possible, but then if you cover to much you run the risk of knowing to little about to much opposed to knowing a lot about a little.

As Brian points out the the Exams are all predictable to a point but not in the sense that it is possible to identify eight topics that will come up or how they will be asked. By analyzing the past papers it is possible to see a pattern of questions that show which Topics are simply too important to leave off the paper, topics that are less important to the subject but are a favorite of the examiner and so appear more frequently that might be expected and other topics that are oddities really but still come up and give nice questions when they do.

Identifying the topics which are too important not to leave off the paper is vital, Every subject has at least two, most have three and one or two subjects have four. By doing this you can confidently spend time learning them well knowing that you will most likely get a question from them. Examples would include murder in Criminal, directors in Company and free movement of goods and services in EU.

questions that are examiner's favorites often come up more than one in every two papers even though normally that might not be expected. Spotting these means that you can spend time on them knowing that there is a good chance that you will be rewarded with either a question or part of a question.

Finally the oddities are things like donatio mortis causa in Equity, almost entirely irrelevant but yet has come up as Question or self contained half question on more than a few occasions. Usually every paper will have a question like this and by preparing one or two such topics you might just get lucky. Furthermore because the topics are tangental the questions are usually straightforward and simple so it is possible that small amounts of specialised knowledge can reap a lot of marks.

I used this as the basis for focusing my study in the final 6 or so weeks before the exam and for each exam I was confident that I could narrow my studies to eight topics that would give me five questions and I was correct. on no occasion did all eight come up but I always got five questions and most papers six.

However it is important to note that identifying topics is only half the issue. Questions may be asked in a number of different ways and for that reason it is important to cover all aspects of a topic, trying to predict whether something will appear as a problem or essay is dangerous and not something I ever felt was worth attempting.

All that waffle is only my two cents based on what worked for me over the last 18 months, It is kind of the "Moneyball" approach to the FE-1s but I found it effective, especially during those times when the syllabus seems impossibly massive and you feel swamped and not sure of what to study.

Best of Luck to anyone taking them on in the future

chops018

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

As Brian points out the the Exams are all predictable to a point but not in the sense that it is possible to identify eight topics that will come up or how they will be asked. By analyzing the past papers it is possible to see a pattern of questions that show which Topics are simply too important to leave off the paper, topics that are less important to the subject but are a favorite of the examiner and so appear more frequently that might be expected and other topics that are oddities really but still come up and give nice questions when they do.

Identifying the topics which are too important not to leave off the paper is vital, Every subject has at least two, most have three and one or two subjects have four. By doing this you can confidently spend time learning them well knowing that you will most likely get a question from them. Examples would include murder in Criminal, directors in Company and free movement of goods and services in EU.

questions that are examiner's favorites often come up more than one in every two papers even though normally that might not be expected. Spotting these means that you can spend time on them knowing that there is a good chance that you will be rewarded with either a question or part of a question.

Finally the oddities are things like donatio mortis causa in Equity, almost entirely irrelevant but yet has come up as Question or self contained half question on more than a few occasions. Usually every paper will have a question like this and by preparing one or two such topics you might just get lucky. Furthermore because the topics are tangental the questions are usually straightforward and simple so it is possible that small amounts of specialised knowledge can reap a lot of marks.

I used this as the basis for focusing my study in the final 6 or so weeks before the exam and for each exam I was confident that I could narrow my studies to eight topics that would give me five questions and I was correct. on no occasion did all eight come up but I always got five questions and most papers six.

However it is important to note that identifying topics is only half the issue. Questions may be asked in a number of different ways and for that reason it is important to cover all aspects of a topic, trying to predict whether something will appear as a problem or essay is dangerous and not something I ever felt was worth attempting.

All that waffle is only my two cents based on what worked for me over the last 18 months, It is kind of the "Moneyball" approach to the FE-1s but I found it effective, especially during those times when the syllabus seems impossibly massive and you feel swamped and not sure of what to study.

Best of Luck to anyone taking them on in the future

I did that the last time and it didn't work for me. I picked the 2-3 must know topics, learned them off, then picked 5 of the most frequent topics learned them off and then had 2-3 back ups learned off. All the papers but one I could only do 3 full questions and only partly do 2 others, needless to say I failed and will be repeating, this time I'm going to try learn all I can. I know I could have got lucky by doing what I did had the questions fallen my way, but they didn't and it's not worth it having to wait another 6 months to re-take the exams if you don't get lucky by picking and choosing.

valleyoftheunos

chops018 wrote: »

I did that the last time and it didn't work for me. I picked the 2-3 must know topics, learned them off, then picked 5 of the most frequent topics learned them off and then had 2-3 back ups learned off. All the papers but one I could only do 3 full questions and only partly do 2 others, needless to say I failed and will be repeating, this time I'm going to try learn all I can. I know I could have got lucky by doing what I did had the questions fallen my way, but they didn't and it's not worth it having to wait another 6 months to re-take the exams if you don't get lucky by picking and choosing.

Really sorry to hear that things didn't work out for you, you obviously were just a bit unlucky as just another two half questions and you would have been ok. I still feel the exams aren't as random as some people suggest and that while prediction might not be possible it is possible to know which areas and topics will give you the best return for your time. As one lecturer put it, know which areas are target rich for questions and focus on them.

bern8

http://www.adverts.ie/school-college-books/fe-1-manuals-sample-answers-and-legislation/1681598 Constitutional, EU, Equity and Contract and sample answers for most subjects!

Fe1erere

http://www.adverts.ie/1547160 Manuals, sample answers and further materials FE1 exams:D

seanmk77

http://www.adverts.ie/school-college-books/fe1-manual/1647309?utm_source=email&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=AdCreated
Tort, Equity and Contract manuals

chops018

Why do people keep putting ad's up for their manuals in this thread, there is another thread dedicated for that. Very annoying clicking in to see if people are talking about the exams and it's all ad's for manuals.

seanmk77

chops018 wrote: »

Why do people keep putting ad's up for their manuals in this thread, there is another thread dedicated for that. Very annoying clicking in to see if people are talking about the exams and it's all ad's for manuals.

Sorry that upsets you. Could you put a link to that thread? I looked for it and couldn’t find it and I asked a question about its whereabouts on this thread a while back. Nobody answered that question. The answer to your question is in order to sell the manuals and make back a little of the money we’re spending on these exams.

-aboutagirl-

Thread for selling manuals can be found here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056512376

seanmk77

-aboutagirl- wrote: »

Thread for selling manuals can be found here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056512376

cheers

chops018

seanmk77 wrote: »

Sorry that upsets you. Could you put a link to that thread? I looked for it and couldn’t find it and I asked a question about its whereabouts on this thread a while back. Nobody answered that question. The answer to your question is in order to sell the manuals and make back a little of the money we’re spending on these exams.

Haha, it was a rhetorical question! Ah I know what you mean, plenty of money and preparation spent on the exams and it's time to pass them on, I just got a bit annoyed earlier as the last few days I'd see people posted on here but a lot of it was selling manuals.

lawgirl12

Hi all. Long time keeping an eye on this thread but first time posting!

I just wanted to say thanks to everyone on the site for all the helpful advice, it really has been a god send over the last few months to be able to click on here & see lots of other people are in the same boat with these lovely exams!

I've got most of the FE1s now and it's been tough going to say the least. I have to say though, switching to City Colleges after getting some of the night before notes outside one of the exams in the october sitting was one of the best decisions I made this year - it really was a huge help along the way for my last set. I've noticed various people on this thread are asking who to choose between in terms of doing an FE1 prep course & I feel compelled to post - having done various courses & used various FE1 materials to get this far, City were by far the best, for me anyway - manuals are much shorter and more concise than from the other FE1 course providers, lecturers really knew their stuff and were happy to speak to you after class & give feedback from the homework, and they were cheaper than the other colleges to boot! I'll def be going to them for my last set & just thought they deserved a bit of a plug on this considering how helpful they were throughout.

Anyway that's my two cents - well done to everyone who got through this set & commiserations to those who didn't - I imagine a lot of us in this thread have been there so keep the head up! Looking forward to finding some solace in this thread coming up to the october sitting!

Seriously?!

Just wondering how much of a chance a person stands of passing their first four exams while holding down a six day a week job??Have I left it too late to give myself a chance of passing at least 3 of them in October?! Since getting my law degree a couple of years ago I have been out of the studying game and right now with the start of all the prep courses just around the corner I am finding the prospect of studying for these dreaded exams VERY daunting! All advice appreciated!!

JCJCJC

Seriously?! wrote: »

Just wondering how much of a chance a person stands of passing their first four exams while holding down a six day a week job??Have I left it too late to give myself a chance of passing at least 3 of them in October?! Since getting my law degree a couple of years ago I have been out of the studying game and right now with the start of all the prep courses just around the corner I am finding the prospect of studying for these dreaded exams VERY daunting! All advice appreciated!!

Go for it of course. I was in your position a few years ago, graduated in 2007, worked for two years, - passed the first 3 in Oct 2010 and now I've them all passed. Plan to get the all-important first three at your first sitting at all costs and if time is scarce and you find you've forgotten a lot, just do a sacrificial fourth - you MUST sit four. If you get three next October, decide then when you are aiming to go to Blackhall. If it's Oct 2013, you'll then need five in March 2013. If it's Oct 2014, you have three sittings to get five exams, that's do-able. You could do 3 and 2, which leaves you a spare sitting in case you have any fallers. My personal recc is also to do the GCD one-day refreshers, I did all eight and found them very good and their materials are exactly what you need. There is a different style to FE1 exams than to college exams, GCD's sample answers will clue in to the type of thing that's needed.
Decide on subject choices based partly on what you were good at in college and also on complimentary subjects. If you did EU pre-Lisbon you'll really need the refresher, quite a lot changed, not least the article numbers. Get it done before the treaties change again. My own opinion is that equity, contract and tort sit well together with some cross-over to property, criminal and constitutional sit well together, and EU and Company each kind-of stand alone - other good contributors here will have other strategies and more luck to them - whatever works in your head but make a choice for a sensible reason, don't just do four at random.

Hope that helps

JC

Ned_led16

Just had a quick browse through the rules and this little extract got me thinking!

"The Board of Examiners shall consider the marks obtained by each candidate in each examination sat by that candidate and shall recommend to the Society’s Education Committee:
(i) the candidates who should be declared to have passed the Examination;
(ii) the candidates who should be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination; and
(iii) the candidates who should not be declared to have passed the Examination or should not be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination."

What the hell do they mean by individual examination with in the examination? Seems like a riddle to me, perhaps I am looking a little to much into this!
I get the feeling & my main concern is that they can say you sat a ghost 4th and mark you harder on the other three or is that not the really what they are trying to portray to candidates!?!

Its hard to define what the defenition of sit or attempt an exam is!

JCJCJC

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Just had a quick browse through the rules and this little extract got me thinking!

"The Board of Examiners shall consider the marks obtained by each candidate in each examination sat by that candidate and shall recommend to the Society’s Education Committee:
(i) the candidates who should be declared to have passed the Examination;
(ii) the candidates who should be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination; and
(iii) the candidates who should not be declared to have passed the Examination or should not be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination."

What the hell do they mean by individual examination with in the examination? Seems like a riddle to me, perhaps I am looking a little to much into this!
I get the feeling & my main concern is that they can say you sat a ghost 4th and mark you harder on the other three or is that not the really what they are trying to portray to candidates!?!

Its hard to define what the defenition of sit or attempt an exam is!

They're definitely out to get ya Ned, it's all a giant conspiracy. Worse than NASA pretending that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, when everybody knows it was his brother Louis who got there first with the russians of course.
When they say examination with a small e, it's secret law society code for 'subject'. When they use a big E, they mean the whole FE1 process. That's a secret, so tell no-one, will ya? A small e for a subject, a giant E for mankind...

relax ffs.

JC

valleyoftheunos

Ned_led16 wrote: »

Just had a quick browse through the rules and this little extract got me thinking!

"The Board of Examiners shall consider the marks obtained by each candidate in each examination sat by that candidate and shall recommend to the Society’s Education Committee:
(i) the candidates who should be declared to have passed the Examination;
(ii) the candidates who should be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination; and
(iii) the candidates who should not be declared to have passed the Examination or should not be deemed to have passed individual examination(s) within the Examination."

What the hell do they mean by individual examination with in the examination? Seems like a riddle to me, perhaps I am looking a little to much into this!
I get the feeling & my main concern is that they can say you sat a ghost 4th and mark you harder on the other three or is that not the really what they are trying to portray to candidates!?!

Its hard to define what the defenition of sit or attempt an exam is!

I don't know how the Law Society do Exam Boards but if they are anything like any of the exam boards I've sat on (and I'd imagine they aren't too different) then all the Examiners, some of the Externs and some administrators sit in a room for two days and go through each and every single result in every subject and check that they are correct and whether people can be deemed to have passed any of the examinations or the Examination as a whole.

Again if it is anything like the the ones I sat on it is dull and tedious with nothing so exciting as any sort of conspiracy. No one gets paid any extra to be there so everyone tries to get through it as quickly as possible.

Hope that clears up the mystery!