FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

RandolphEsq

conmo wrote: »

Thinking of doing a masters in october and 4 fe1s in october the other 4 the following october. Anyone any pointers?

Early to bed, early to rise. Eat lots of fruit and veg, and drink lots of water. Fit body, fit mind.

sorchauna

conmo wrote: »

Thinking of doing a masters in october and 4 fe1s in october the other 4 the following october. Anyone any pointers?

Very doable if you prepare most of the exams before Oct. As the few first weeks of a masters can be a bit hetic finding what classes you want to do, finding a lecturer for your thesis and figuring out what you'll write about as in UCC we had to have our lecturer and thesis title submited mid to end of oct. So Sept and Oct you cant dedicate that whole time to the fe's. Do the college work during the year, get your thesis written in the summer, usually its submitted at end of Sept so if you can that pretty much done by August your fine for the exams.

CClaw

Does anyone have any information regarding revision courses?
Heard good things about City college and Independent college
any one have experience with the two? which is better ?

MoneyMilo

In regards the William the Traveller question from October 2011, can anyone confirm if it's about socio-economic rights, equality, or both? There seem to be differing views; I recall JCJCJC on here stated that it involved discussion of socio-economic rights, and not equality, yet the Griffith sample answer for this question doesn't discuss socio-economic rights or separation of powers, but discusses equality. If JCJCJC is right, what is in this question that merits discussion of socio-economic rights, but not Q8 from October 2012? They both involve constitutional challenges to provisions of housing/accommodation.

Carolan in his Oct 2012 report says that socio-economic rights in that question is not at issue.

leitrimjoe90

I know the question your are talking about...the question is about equality and socio economic rights. You firstly should discuss the limited provisions of the equality guarantee in the constitution, and then move on to whether or not there is a constitutional socio economic element and whether or not going by the caselaw the courts will entertain such a claim. I think Carolan in his exam report was saying that there was a misunderstanding of the socio economic element to the question (people just bluntly said no one has a right which has a socio economic dimension; whereas this is not the case)- so for example, in many cases there is a statutory socio economic right- and even the constitutional case law on socio economic rights from Costello's famous judgment right down to TD and Sinnot- does not specifically prohibit claims which have a socio economic right- so therefore both Carolan and JC are correct on this- and also- the sample answer, which is quite poor, does cover the two main issues of the question.

Do people agree?

Also would anyone have Eoin Carolan's top 20 cases from the 2010 lecture gave?

MoneyMilo wrote: »

In regards the William the Traveller question from October 2011, can anyone confirm if it's about socio-economic rights, equality, or both? There seem to be differing views; I recall JCJCJC on here stated that it involved discussion of socio-economic rights, and not equality, yet the Griffith sample answer for this question doesn't discuss socio-economic rights or separation of powers, but discusses equality. If JCJCJC is right, what is in this question that merits discussion of socio-economic rights, but not Q8 from October 2012? They both involve constitutional challenges to provisions of housing/accommodation.

Carolan in his Oct 2012 report says that socio-economic rights in that question is not at issue.

JCJCJC

MoneyMilo wrote: »

In regards the William the Traveller question from October 2011, can anyone confirm if it's about socio-economic rights, equality, or both? There seem to be differing views; I recall JCJCJC on here stated that it involved discussion of socio-economic rights, and not equality, yet the Griffith sample answer for this question doesn't discuss socio-economic rights or separation of powers, but discusses equality. If JCJCJC is right, what is in this question that merits discussion of socio-economic rights, but not Q8 from October 2012? They both involve constitutional challenges to provisions of housing/accommodation.

Carolan in his Oct 2012 report says that socio-economic rights in that question is not at issue.

If? If??? what do you mean, if? I passed that feicin' exam!!! Totally from memory, and I haven't seen EC's report - I thought the equality issue didn't ever arise simply because there was no comparator. Therefore there was no grounds to argue that Willie received unequal treatment just because he was a traveller, we had no given evidence to say anyone else fared any better. ECHR-based acrobatics were no good to Willie, he wanted a house, not a small cheque in the post, so forget about European law, this was a 100% sep of powers question, pure and simple - will a court interfere in housing allocation, ie allocation of state resources?
The fact pattern struck me first and foremost as a very strong hint that McCarthy v Limerick Corporation was in play - travellers on the edge of town seeking housing, court said 'no' to McCarthy on his day. Willie's facts were crucially differentiated by the imminent birth of a child, into squalid and hazardous housing conditions, if nothing changed. That added an urgency. I based my main arguments on an article by Paul Anthony McDermott SC which you can get on Westlaw, where he discussed a case called Frawley and a few other cases involving minors in detention - I've forgotten their initials. My conclusion was that the old view was McCarthy/Frawley - no judicial interference, no matter what. However, in light of the other cases cited by PA McD, there may be a discernible shift, where the executive inaction has been gross, and/or where undertakings previously given in court turned out not to have been honoured. The baby lent additional significant weight to the invitation to depart from McCarthy. Willie's five-year wait was the gross inaction.
I don't see an equality issue, and I don't see any need to dive into the murky waters of socio-economic rights. In my humble, it was a clean-cut sep of powers question that gave you a chance to show you knew the case law and the principles. It isn't an arithmetic exam, it's not a matter of saying that Willie may or may not get assistance from court - make a call and back it up soundly.

JCJCJC

conmo wrote: »

Thinking of doing a masters in october and 4 fe1s in october the other 4 the following october. Anyone any pointers?

Give up the drink after the August weekend.

Your plan adds a year to your becoming a solicitor. Why not do four in October, and Four in March, with a view to Blackhall the following October?

JCJCJC

Was anybody at the Public Interest Law Alliance seminar in the Morrison Hotel yesterday? The topic was ‘Using the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU - from theory to practice’ , they had a British barrister called Jonathan Cooper OBE as the main speaker, with Dr, Suzanne Kingston BL after him. For anyone doing EU in the FE1s, it would have been very good, I thought, especially in relation to the justiciability of the charter in any court or tribunal - I got a better understanding of it than I've ever had (which wasn't a lot).

It was some swishy hotel, and there was even a free glass of wine afterwards.

Look out for PILA freebie events on www.pila.ie

leitrimjoe90

I must check out that article- but surely discussion of socio economic caselaw would be relevant to your argument about cases where the state would and can intervene in a matter which is reserved for the legislature? so in this case you argue that if the breach is serious the courts can intervene, does that not then require the state to spend money and effectively become a socio economic issue?

Also would the different treatment between Willie as traveller (if its the question from memory where he is put on the list for a halting site) and non-travellers- would that not be an equality issue- if even only to dismiss it under the current restrictive approach to the doctrine followed by the Irish SC?

JCJCJC wrote: »

If? If??? what do you mean, if? I passed that feicin' exam!!! Totally from memory, and I haven't seen EC's report - I thought the equality issue didn't ever arise simply because there was no comparator. Therefore there was no grounds to argue that Willie received unequal treatment just because he was a traveller, we had no given evidence to say anyone else fared any better. ECHR-based acrobatics were no good to Willie, he wanted a house, not a small cheque in the post, so forget about European law, this was a 100% sep of powers question, pure and simple - will a court interfere in housing allocation, ie allocation of state resources?
The fact pattern struck me first and foremost as a very strong hint that McCarthy v Limerick Corporation was in play - travellers on the edge of town seeking housing, court said 'no' to McCarthy on his day. Willie's facts were crucially differentiated by the imminent birth of a child, into squalid and hazardous housing conditions, if nothing changed. That added an urgency. I based my main arguments on an article by Paul Anthony McDermott SC which you can get on Westlaw, where he discussed a case called Frawley and a few other cases involving minors in detention - I've forgotten their initials. My conclusion was that the old view was McCarthy/Frawley - no judicial interference, no matter what. However, in light of the other cases cited by PA McD, there may be a discernible shift, where the executive inaction has been gross, and/or where undertakings previously given in court turned out not to have been honoured. The baby lent additional significant weight to the invitation to depart from McCarthy. Willie's five-year wait was the gross inaction.
I don't see an equality issue, and I don't see any need to dive into the murky waters of socio-economic rights. In my humble, it was a clean-cut sep of powers question that gave you a chance to show you knew the case law and the principles. It isn't an arithmetic exam, it's not a matter of saying that Willie may or may not get assistance from court - make a call and back it up soundly.

JCJCJC

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

I must check out that article- but surely discussion of socio economic caselaw would be relevant to your argument about cases where the state would and can intervene in a matter which is reserved for the legislature? so in this case you argue that if the breach is serious the courts can intervene, does that not then require the state to spend money and effectively become a socio economic issue?

Also would the different treatment between Willie as traveller (if its the question from memory where he is put on the list for a halting site) and non-travellers- would that not be an equality issue- if even only to dismiss it under the current restrictive approach to the doctrine followed by the Irish SC?

First off - only the examiner can say exactly what it was that he wanted, I'm only giving my opinion for what it's worth - yours is equally valid, full respect, ok?. I'm with Clint Eastwood when it comes to opinions, i.e. everybody has one. Willie applied for housing simpliciter (if I recall it correctly), and had his name put on a list for a halting site - true. You could argue that his remedy for that particular decision would be a judicial review of the decision to put him on the halting site list only, which at best might result in his name being put on a general housing list, or alternatively that the particular decision to put him on the HS list was one within the competence and expertise of the housing authority based on experience of matching needs to solutions and expert opinion from professional social workers etc and your case would get bogged down in the detail of that and could go either way. Even if Willie won - where does it take him? Nowhere he wants to be. Right now, he wants better accommodation for his family for the imminent birth of the child we are told is on the way.
Ask yourself what Willie wants - he is your client. I'd tend to say he wants a better place to live, and he wants it quickly. That requires a judicial trespass into executive territory - what else will deliver for him? That then compares with the case of the troubled teenager who required a special accommodation unit - was it TD or something? - the court ordered that it be provided for him, having considered that undertakings given under oath on previous occasions by officials on behalf of a Minister had not in the end been honoured. Therefore the court ordered the executive to allocate resources, which is not in accordance with strict seperation of powers but which reflects the ultimate supremacy of the courts in the judiciary/executive/legislature balance.
To my mind, socio-economic arguments fit more comfortably in cases concerning loss of livelihood or property, but as I've said it's just my slant, I'm just a FE1 student like your good self.

leitrimjoe90

thanks very much for this reply- indeed it has allowed me to look at the problem in a different way- i think your answer is very good and your approach is very practical and client focused and I think you are correct...so one final question, as regards remedies, what did you state that William should seek- some sort of court order requiring that housing be provided? i never even thought this far and i suppose its an area of law I am not entirely sure about- so I really was arguing for judicial review of the decision and this would not be effective? thanks for your help, you could teach this

JCJCJC wrote: »

First off - only the examiner can say exactly what it was that he wanted, I'm only giving my opinion for what it's worth - yours is equally valid, full respect, ok?. I'm with Clint Eastwood when it comes to opinions, i.e. everybody has one. Willie applied for housing simpliciter (if I recall it correctly), and had his name put on a list for a halting site - true. You could argue that his remedy for that particular decision would be a judicial review of the decision to put him on the halting site list only, which at best might result in his name being put on a general housing list, or alternatively that the particular decision to put him on the HS list was one within the competence and expertise of the housing authority based on experience of matching needs to solutions and expert opinion from professional social workers etc and your case would get bogged down in the detail of that and could go either way. Even if Willie won - where does it take him? Nowhere he wants to be. Right now, he wants better accommodation for his family for the imminent birth of the child we are told is on the way.
Ask yourself what Willie wants - he is your client. I'd tend to say he wants a better place to live, and he wants it quickly. That requires a judicial trespass into executive territory - what else will deliver for him? That then compares with the case of the troubled teenager who required a special accommodation unit - was it TD or something? - the court ordered that it be provided for him, having considered that undertakings given under oath on previous occasions by officials on behalf of a Minister had not in the end been honoured. Therefore the court ordered the executive to allocate resources, which is not in accordance with strict seperation of powers but which reflects the ultimate supremacy of the courts in the judiciary/executive/legislature balance.
To my mind, socio-economic arguments fit more comfortably in cases concerning loss of livelihood or property, but as I've said it's just my slant, I'm just a FE1 student like your good self.

JCJCJC

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

thanks very much for this reply- indeed it has allowed me to look at the problem in a different way- i think your answer is very good and your approach is very practical and client focused and I think you are correct...so one final question, as regards remedies, what did you state that William should seek- some sort of court order requiring that housing be provided? i never even thought this far and i suppose its an area of law I am not entirely sure about- so I really was arguing for judicial review of the decision and this would not be effective? thanks for your help, you could teach this

I couldn't teach cats to drink milk! Thanks for the kind words. Yep - Willie's application is for an order directing the housing authority to provide appropriate housing for his needs - leave it there for your exam purpose. Typically, a judgment like that will end with 'I will hear counsel as to the precise terms of the order' so we're all back out in the hall in a hugger-mugger haggling at that stage! The judge will indicate the overall direction he's inclined to go, and the Council side will have to offer something - probably an interim house with a promise of a better long-term solution. It's over as far as they are concerned at that stage, just to thrash out the details. Your job as an apprentice solicitor will be to switch off Metallica on your iphone, wake up for the first time in a week and explain to Willie what the barrister tells you, and see what will Willie settle for!

!LB21

Hiya everyone...

I did my LLB Bachelors in Dublin and currently back home in Sweden studying for the FE1 exams on my own so that i could do them in March.
I have done notes for Company, Contract, Criminal and Property... which went smoothly enough but now i am kind of in a panic because i really dont know how to study the notes in a smart way so that i could remember them all. ..Any tips ?

Would really appreciate any tips you may have...

Thanks in advance.

KoukiKeith

JCJCJC wrote: »

Was anybody at the Public Interest Law Alliance seminar in the Morrison Hotel yesterday? The topic was ‘Using the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU - from theory to practice’ , they had a British barrister called Jonathan Cooper OBE as the main speaker, with Dr, Suzanne Kingston BL after him. For anyone doing EU in the FE1s, it would have been very good, I thought, especially in relation to the justiciability of the charter in any court or tribunal - I got a better understanding of it than I've ever had (which wasn't a lot).

It was some swishy hotel, and there was even a free glass of wine afterwards.

Look out for PILA freebie events on www.pila.ie

I only found out about it afterwards.I Would've loved to attend, though. Much of my thesis was based on Suzanne's work. Was there any literature handed out?

JCJCJC

KoukiKeith wrote: »

I only found out about it afterwards.I Would've loved to attend, though. Much of my thesis was based on Suzanne's work. Was there any literature handed out?

Papers to follow by email. I'd say if you emailed them and asked to be added to their circulation list, they'd do it - they are keen to promulgate their materials and aren't hungry for revenue.

JCJCJC

!LB21 wrote: »

Hiya everyone...

I did my LLB Bachelors in Dublin and currently back home in Sweden studying for the FE1 exams on my own so that i could do them in March.
I have done notes for Company, Contract, Criminal and Property... which went smoothly enough but now i am kind of in a panic because i really dont know how to study the notes in a smart way so that i could remember them all. ..Any tips ?

Would really appreciate any tips you may have...

Thanks in advance.

Start reducing the notes to a minimum - aim for something like the City Colleges night-before notes which you can get anyway on-line, every FE1 student should have them. Study those, then walk away for a few hours and see if you can reproduce your lists of cases, Acts, sections etc without the notes. Come up with formulas, mnemonics, diagrams, colours, rhymes and so on to help you memorise the lists - whatever works for you. Read it aloud to yourself. Get a friend to read it to you, and to ask you random questions off your condensed notes. Practise old questions on an outline basis, and in full against the clock - 35 minutes or less per question.
The objective is to get the info written to the hard-disk between your ears in several different ways, which increases the likelihood of the info coming back off it on the day.
I used to read my notes into a dictaphone and play it to myself in the car. The process of reading slowly and speaking aloud helps, mentally it's very different from reading quickly and silently to yourself, and listening to your own voice back helps visualise the page of notes from which you were reading. On the days of the FE1s I had a 2.5-hr drive to the Red Cow, so I used to play my dictaphone recordings to myself about four times on the way - I found it really helped me.
If you want to know more about memory techniques and the like, look up Tony Buzan's books, he's a world authority on the subject.

hopefullegal

Hi

If anyone has an exam grid for tort please pm me. Thanks. Oh and has anyone been able to access the tort night before city college notes on their site? Haven't had any luck!

LegalCity

Hi,

Anybody got Oct 09 Company Law sample answers? If so pm what you want in return for them.

Thank you

pbonner

Hi all

Im in the middle of my fe1 studying... and am stuck on the family and children area... What kind of essays/articles are people looking at for this.

Can anyone please giive me some guidance?
It would be really appreciated.....

!LB21

Hiya JCJCJC...

Thanks a million for your help .. found the night before notes and they look very promising.

Again.. thanks a mill

Fe1exams

Hi there - would anyone be interested in setting up a study group for the last month before the exams in the Cork area? Please send me a Private message if you think it might be useful.

lisgal

Hi!

Would anyone mind telling me what topics came up for the company exam in October? Studying for 4 exams and hoping to be able to leave some topics out! (risky!) Thanks.

KoukiKeith

JCJCJC wrote: »

Papers to follow by email. I'd say if you emailed them and asked to be added to their circulation list, they'd do it - they are keen to promulgate their materials and aren't hungry for revenue.

Presentations are available here for anyone interested:
http://pila.ie/events/archive/pila-practitioner-seminar-using-the-charter-of-fundamental-rights-of-the-eu-from-theory-to-practice/

LegalCity

KoukiKeith wrote: »

Presentations are available here for anyone interested:
http://pila.ie/events/archive/pila-practitioner-seminar-using-the-charter-of-fundamental-rights-of-the-eu-from-theory-to-practice/

Thanks for posting that link. Do you know what the general principles/fundamental rights question was on the Oct 2012 paper?

KoukiKeith

LegalCity wrote: »

Thanks for posting that link. Do you know what the general principles/fundamental rights question was on the Oct 2012 paper?

IIRC, it was just a general essay Q. You could talk about any 3 gen principles. Maybe someone else can confirm as I don't have the paper to hand?

NoQuarter

Guys, whats the deal with supremacy now. What takes precedence, EU law or the Constitution? I read Craig & DeBurca yesterday and it seems like one big mess. Do your manuals simplify it?

KoukiKeith

NoQuarter wrote: »

Guys, whats the deal with supremacy now. What takes precedence, EU law or the Constitution? I read Craig & DeBurca yesterday and it seems like one big mess. Do your manuals simplify it?

EU law is supreme. Solange 1 & 2 are the important cases really. From Irish perspective Crotty & Meaghar cases.

NoQuarter

KoukiKeith wrote: »

EU law is supreme. Solange 1 & 2 are the important cases really. From Irish perspective Crotty & Meaghar cases.

Is it really that simple? Is there any resistance from the Irish side? Or is it simply the case that EU law isnt considered in general, and when it is and it conflicts, Irish legislation or constitutional provisions are set aside in that particular instance?

Strawberry Fields

EU law is supreme in the areas in which it has competence as assigned by the treaties. Article 29.4.1 constitution agrees but only in the areas aceeded to by treaties. Where there is a conflict national law is set aside.

KoukiKeith

NoQuarter wrote: »

Is it really that simple? Is there any resistance from the Irish side? Or is it simply the case that EU law isnt considered in general, and when it is and it conflicts, Irish legislation or constitutional provisions are set aside in that particular instance?

It was codified by Lisbon in Declaration 17.

There are some Q's as to the extent of the doctrine but it's only an issue where MS law conflicts with EU law anyway.

I wouldn't dwell on it too much. DE & MS liability are more important in terms of the exam.