FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

NoQuarter

The problem with decalration 17 is that it states " in accordance with well settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Treaties and the law adopted by the Union on the basis of the Treaties have primacy over the law of Member States".

It says it has primacy over the "law" of member states which is ambiguous in that it never clarifies whether that is all law including the Constitution or not. My feeling is that it didnt include the words "all law and member state's constitutional laws" because of the outcry it would raise and they didnt need that when trying to get the Treaty ratified.

So it raises the question as to what is superior, EU law or our constitutional rights. My guess is the constitutional rights would be set aside? Although that in itself oesnt sound like the Irish courts.

My exam days are over btw I asked in this thread because I know you guys are up on recent EU law.

KoukiKeith

NoQuarter wrote: »

The problem with decalration 17 is that it states " in accordance with well settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Treaties and the law adopted by the Union on the basis of the Treaties have primacy over the law of Member States".

It says it has primacy over the "law" of member states which is ambiguous in that it never clarifies whether that is all law including the Constitution or not. My feeling is that it didnt include the words "all law and member state's constitutional laws" because of the outcry it would raise and they didnt need that when trying to get the Treaty ratified.

So it raises the question as to what is superior, EU law or our constitutional rights. My guess is the constitutional rights would be set aside? Although that in itself oesnt sound like the Irish courts.

My exam days are over btw I asked in this thread because I know you guys are up on recent EU law.

That was the crux of Crotty, I believe. EU Law is supreme over constitution in areas that EU has conferred power. Therefore if a constitutional right conflicted with a relevant EU law or principle, it should have to be set aside.

It is possible to receive a derogation, however.

Lucky you. Would love to have these bloody things done & dusted!

NoQuarter

Well then do what I did and come to the bar!

spiralism

I sent my application in at the start of the last week of january, postal order, copy of degree and id...all that. I havent got a letter from Blackhall since confirming that im doing exams or any details...should i be worried? This is starting to bother me... I could be down a lot of money

chops018

spiralism wrote: »

I sent my application in at the start of the last week of january, postal order, copy of degree and id...all that. I havent got a letter from Blackhall since confirming that im doing exams or any details...should i be worried? This is starting to bother me... I could be down a lot of money

I was the same as yourself last week. I was wondering why I haven't got a confirmation letter yet. I had the receipt for my postal order, and emailed them, they never got back to my email but funnily enough I got the confirmation letter a day after sending the email, although, that could have been a coincidence.

Anyway, I'd send an email and/or give them a phonecall. It won't take long and it will give you some piece of mind.

spiralism

chops018 wrote: »

I was the same as yourself last week. I was wondering why I haven't got a confirmation letter yet. I had the receipt for my postal order, and emailed them, they never got back to my email but funnily enough I got the confirmation letter a day after sending the email, although, that could have been a coincidence.

Anyway, I'd send an email and/or give them a phone - call. It won't take long and it will give you some piece of mind.

Any ideas what to do if i've no luck? Lot of money gone for nothing, it does not sit well with me one bit

sorchauna

spiralism wrote: »

Any ideas what to do if i've no luck? Lot of money gone for nothing, it does not sit well with me one bit

That won't be the case. If they actually cashed your cheque or bank draft, you'll have your place. If on the odd chance they never received it, Im sure they won't turn down the money and will allow you apply late.

Gibbonw2

Why dont you just ring the law society? Couldnt be any more simple!

FEfuns

Hey all,

I'm sitting Tort, Constitutional, Criminal and Contract in March. Just seeking some general tips/critique of my studying plans:

- I've just begun reading through my notes (these are in Microsoft Word form, based on manuals; about 60-90 A4 pages per subject). This will take me 2 days per subject. I have previously read the source material twice (once for reading and highlighting, then going back and typing my own notes from them).
- After this I'm going to spend 1 day for each subject reviewing the examiner's comments and sample answers from the past 3/4 years.
- Then I'm probably going to go back to review my notes again, so another 8 days on this.
- The above plans will bring me to Thursday 7th March, with my first exam five days later on the Tuesday, allowing 1 day per exam for writing sample answers, doing up flow-charts once the information has hopefully settled into the memory.
- There is of course the days in between the exams, which will be used for cramming, writing sample answers.

Also, I'm not leaving stuff out as such. I'm covering everything in a good level of detail while hoping certain topics come up which I'll have prepared a bit better.

Thoughts on the above plans from anyone who's gone through the process before?

Have reviewed the FE1 syllabus and this seems in line with my notes (which we taken from 2009/2010 books). Aside from obvious stuff like the Criminal Acts since 2009 (the Defence and the Dwelling amendment seems like a major one, for example), the Constitutional referendum on Children's Rights and in the news cases like Ms. Flemings' right to die challenge, the Garlic man's case etc. am I missing out on any truly landmark cases from the past three years or so? My college isn't keeping up to date with McMahon & Binchy's annual reviews so this is a matter I'm a bit concerned with.

Best a luck for those sitting them! Not too long to wait now.

IrishLad2222

Does anyone have an up to date Criminal Law exam grid they could e-mail me please. Thanks a mil.

KoukiKeith

Speaking of Criminal .... Are there any other areas that specifically lend themselves to Essay Qs other than characteristics/classification of crime?

Tom Young

In Criminal that tends to be a stand alone question - Treason, Felony, Misdemeanor; Criminal Law Act 1997; Arrestable/Non-Arrestable; Serious/Non-Serious - Bail Act 1997; Criminal/Civil.

Characteristics of Crime: Melling, etc.

Constitutional:

1. Doherty v Referendum Commission [2012] IEHC 211;
2. McCrystal v Minister for Children and Youth Affairs [2012] IESC 53;
3. Pringle v Ireland [2012] IESC 47;
4. Mallak v MJELR [2012] IESC 59;
5. Donegan v Dublin City Council [2012] IESC 18 - See also Kelly v Dublin City Council;
6. Damache v DPP [2012] IESC 11 - See aso Ted Cunningham Case from CCA;
7. DPP v Devins [2012] IESC 7;
8(a). MD v Ireland [2012] IESC 12;
8(b). GC v DPP [2012] IEHC 430;
9. Cornec v Morrice [2012] IEHC 376 - See also Walsh v Newsgroup Newspapers [2012] IEHC 353;
10. Farrell v Governor of Bank of Ireland [2012] IESC 42.

I also think look at Sullivan v Boylan [2012] IEHC 389.

It is necessary to highlight the following cases in terms of criminal law: 6., 7. and 8.

Freedom Expression - 9. and Sullivan v Boylan.

It would be remiss to leave out Article 40.5 and right of access to the Courts re. Farrell.

That's what I think.

chops018

I learned the hard way guys, don't leave anything out, that's the only way. Sure you may know some topics better than others, but leave nothing to chance, cover 90% of the grid/syllabus at least.

rickety cricket

Hey all, I would be truly grateful if anyone has a sample answer for Company Q.8 March 2011 and could pm me? or any Disposition of company assets questions in general? i have several sample answers from GCD for several subjects.
Thanks

Amre17

This is a little off topic and I hope nobody minds.. Does anyone have experience in interviewing with a medium sized firm and what sort of questions did you get??

Thanks..

IrishLad2222

Anyone any idea what Defences are 'tipped' for Criminal this sitting, or due an appearance at the very least. Thanks.

cuunna_90

Hi Guys,
Just wondering does anyone know of any one day revision seminars? Besides the ones that are ran by Griffith.
Thanks

chazbanger

Anyone got any predictions for company?? Struggling to cover the material !

MoneyMilo

March 2010 Q7 - Laura being accused of theft

Incident occurred Nov 2000. Case referred to DPP June 2001. Decision to prosecute Sept 2001. Laura finally charged Jan 2009.

Does anyone know at what point should Laura's solicitor or Laura herself be aware of the case?

frustratedTC

Not sure money milo, I'd focus on the fact that there is a large delay and that Laura could argue evidence has lost its probative value, so trial wouldnt be in due course of law.

What is everyone focusing on for eu and constitutional?

mcgarnicled

Sorry in advance:

Tort:

Actionable per se: You do not need proof of damages and you do not need to prove fault
Why does trespass to the person, talk about intention and negligence.
e.g for Battery, you have to show intention or negligence touches a person.

valleyoftheunos

chazbanger wrote: »

Anyone got any predictions for company?? Struggling to cover the material !

Its not really possible to "Predict" questions but for all the subjects it is posible to identify the really important topics, the sort of stuff they have to ask you on a regular basis. You can focus on these topics in the knowledge that they have at least a good chance of coming up. after that you can start filling in the gaps in the syllabus leaving the really obscure stuff till last.

You might not cover everything but you will have maximsed your chances of gettign 5 questions in the Exam.

JCJCJC

There's an interesting 2013 case on bailii this morning here where the applicant, a lay litigant, argues for a constitutional right to swim in unpolluted sea water in Liscannor Bay, a place I know well myself. It should surprise no-one here to learn that he didn't get on very well with that one. However, it's the sort of attractive fact pattern that might catch an examiner's eye, so look out for something like that in future, maybe as part of a problem question.

leitrimjoe90

JCJCJC wrote: »

There's an interesting 2013 case on bailii this morning here where the applicant, a lay litigant, argues for a constitutional right to swim in unpolluted sea water in Liscannor Bay, a place I know well myself. It should surprise no-one here to learn that he didn't get on very well with that one. However, it's the sort of attractive fact pattern that might catch an examiner's eye, so look out for something like that in future, maybe as part of a problem question.

what a strange case to take! could have taken that case on many a summer in bundoran

leitrimjoe90

staying on constitutional, does anyone have an idea of how to answer the problem question on the last paper on findings of unconstitutionality and when they apply from? Its question 7...I know how to answer the most of it but I am confused on "the circumstances in which the court may decline to make an order that an act be invalidated immediately...and whether any alternative remedies..."


Cheers

leitrimjoe90

staying on constitutional, does anyone have an idea of how to answer the problem question on the last paper on findings of unconstitutionality and when they apply from? Its question 7...I know how to answer the most of it but I am confused on "the circumstances in which the court may decline to make an order that an act be invalidated immediately...and whether any alternative remedies..."


Cheers

JCJCJC

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

staying on constitutional, does anyone have an idea of how to answer the problem question on the last paper on findings of unconstitutionality and when they apply from? Its question 7...I know how to answer the most of it but I am confused on "the circumstances in which the court may decline to make an order that an act be invalidated immediately...and whether any alternative remedies..."


Cheers

Ah Joe. You didn't go to Dr Carolan's lecture a few weeks ago, Joe, did you? 'Cos if you did, you'd know the answer....I suppose you were skinny-dipping in Bundoran exercising your constitutional rights, apart from anything else ;-)

JCJCJC

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

staying on constitutional, does anyone have an idea of how to answer the problem question on the last paper on findings of unconstitutionality and when they apply from? Its question 7...I know how to answer the most of it but I am confused on "the circumstances in which the court may decline to make an order that an act be invalidated immediately...and whether any alternative remedies..."


Cheers

Joe - have a look at Kinsella V Gov of Mountjoy[2012] IEHC 235 and BG v DJ Murphy (No 2) [2011] IEHC 445, they are the cases EC used to discuss the point you're asking about and he quoted the judgments extensively.

colonel1

Amre17 wrote: »

This is a little off topic and I hope nobody minds.. Does anyone have experience in interviewing with a medium sized firm and what sort of questions did you get??

Thanks..

Well done on getting an interview Amre17:D

Has the firm got a website? If so have a look at their latest news section. Google the firm also. Firstly know your CV inside out. Secondly be able to answer the question why law? Thirdly...why law at your firm? Apologies if these answers are a bit trite/obvious! There is a thread on boards called Law Firm Milkrounds/Apps 2012 http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056742609 which might answer some of your questions.

I have only been at a group interview so far, so have never had a one on one interview with a firm, but I would presume they will ask you questions relating to their specialist areas e.g. commercial awareness, personal injuries, employment, family etc. They would probably ask you the usual interview stuff like strengths and weaknesses, dealing with difficult customers etc.

Interviews are horrid, but they are interested in you, so you have to take heart from that. Best of luck:D

frustratedTC

Hi could anyone give me a summary of Bauvale Developments case?