FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

Amre17

colonel1 wrote: »

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

Thanks for your reply colonel!

Interview was grand.. not holding out much hope though cause there seemed to be a big focus on the fact it's taking me a few years to get these exams - I basically have chipped away at the exams after getting the initial 3 rather than attacking them and I think this was an issue..

So to all of you setting out on your FE1 journey my advice to you would be not to dilly dally like I did!

chops018

Amre17 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply colonel!

Interview was grand.. not holding out much hope though cause there seemed to be a big focus on the fact it's taking me a few years to get these exams - I basically have chipped away at the exams after getting the initial 3 rather than attacking them and I think this was an issue..

So to all of you setting out on your FE1 journey my advice to you would be not to dilly dally like I did!

Sometimes that is hard when you have to keep a job and do the exams. Surely they should realise that.

JCJCJC

Amre17 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply colonel!

Interview was grand.. not holding out much hope though cause there seemed to be a big focus on the fact it's taking me a few years to get these exams - I basically have chipped away at the exams after getting the initial 3 rather than attacking them and I think this was an issue..

So to all of you setting out on your FE1 journey my advice to you would be not to dilly dally like I did!

Some of those sods didn't have to do the FE1s themselves, it's a fairly recent innovation.

chops018

JCJCJC wrote: »

Some of those sods didn't have to do the FE1s themselves, it's a fairly recent innovation.

Interesting, I didn't know that. How did one used to become a Solicitor? And when were the FE1's introduced?

leitrimjoe90

JCJCJC wrote: »

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.

thanks very much...i was at his most recent talk but think these two cases were from the one prior...had no clue how to answer up until i read that...shows the manuals are worth f-all for constitutional! thanks again

Amre17

JCJCJC wrote: »

Some of those sods didn't have to do the FE1s themselves, it's a fairly recent innovation.

And if you ask me a flick back through the exam papers of some of the subjects would show the exam questions have become more difficult and complex.. No more 'tell me what you know about..' style questions that feature in some earlier papers!

sorchauna

JCJCJC wrote: »

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.

I was just stuck on this question myself so thanks. I will be learning his ten cases of this year off no doubt, seeing on it randomly can come up anywhere on his paper!

colonel1

Amre17 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply colonel!

Interview was grand.. not holding out much hope though cause there seemed to be a big focus on the fact it's taking me a few years to get these exams - I basically have chipped away at the exams after getting the initial 3 rather than attacking them and I think this was an issue..

So to all of you setting out on your FE1 journey my advice to you would be not to dilly dally like I did!

Ah sausage, I can't believe there is yet another hurdle to jump with regard to finding a TC:mad: I am in the same boat as yourself Amre as after I got my first 4, I did the rest one at a time as I work FT [and for other reasons] and it was difficult to get time off (longer than a week) to do the rest of the exams. I am on my last one now!! I would strongly advise people not to do them 1 at a time though, as the waiting is absolute agony:eek:

Of course they may just have been testing your reaction to this line of questioning rather than being overly concerned with the length of time it took to get the exams...

...so you never know! When did they say they would let you know? Fingers crossed for you anyway:D

colonel1

chops018 wrote: »

Sometimes that is hard when you have to keep a job and do the exams. Surely they should realise that.

...they probably do realise it chops, but they don't have to care too much considering the sheer numbers of applicants they get to choose from;) As we all know, it is an employer's market out there...thanks again Recession:rolleyes:

...and of course the big firms select peeps who haven't even sat a single FE1...the rich irony of it all:p

colonel1

JCJCJC wrote: »

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.

JCJCJC, thanks for this. I haven't even looked at this question yet, but is it about suspended declarations of invalidity by any chance? EC wrote an entire paper on it??

JCJCJC

colonel1 wrote: »

JCJCJC, thanks for this. I haven't even looked at this question yet, but is it about suspended declarations of invalidity by any chance? EC wrote an entire paper on it??

Better put the question to LeitrimJoe, the terror of Bundoran beach, because he saw the actual exam question - I didn't. EC is making the point that there is a reluctance in the modern jurisprudence to make orders directing the executive even when unconstitutionality is proved, particularly if to do so would collapse the whole statutory scheme. Read the cases, it's all there.

leitrimjoe90

JCJCJC wrote: »

Better put the question to LeitrimJoe, the terror of Bundoran beach, because he saw the actual exam question - I didn't. EC is making the point that there is a reluctance in the modern jurisprudence to make orders directing the executive even when unconstitutionality is proved, particularly if to do so would collapse the whole statutory scheme. Read the cases, it's all there.

Thanks for your apt and true reference JC. I think, or what I have just learned is that one of the possible "other remedies" asked about in the question, it would be those which are set out the above mentioned two cases (bg and Kinsella) by JC; that it is possible for the court to grant a declaration as opposed to declaring the law invalid, as often by declaring the law invalid, there is no benefit to the person seeking relief. Have I got the basis of it? I have read EC's notes on those two cases but has he written an article on such remedies as well?

I just seen the article- it can be found by googling its title...if suspended declaration of invalidity is one possible alternative form of relief...what others would there be? are injunctions applicable to that question?

Maurice Levy

Hope the study is going well for everyone. Does anyone have sample answers for question 8 of the company law exams for April 12 and April 11? They are both winding up questions.

I feel for Amre17, it will end up taking me five goes to pass all eight exams. The first time I only studied for a month and on the second go I passed two and failed two.I passed three last time out and am more hopeful about the rest but I regret not working hard enough the first two times.

lbcoconut

Just wondering if anybody would have an up to date company exam grid or be able to give a brief overview of what came up in October 2012. Thanks

colonel1

JCJCJC wrote: »

Better put the question to LeitrimJoe, the terror of Bundoran beach, because he saw the actual exam question - I didn't. EC is making the point that there is a reluctance in the modern jurisprudence to make orders directing the executive even when unconstitutionality is proved, particularly if to do so would collapse the whole statutory scheme. Read the cases, it's all there.

Thanks JCJCJC, I have the cases in question now. Just have to get around to reading them;)

leitrimjoe90

What would you discuss in question 6 october 2012 paper for constitutional...refers to the "individual personally of the citizen..." anyone have a sample answer for that paper? can swap with anything else! cheers

leitrimjoe90

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

What would you discuss in question 6 october 2012 paper for constitutional...refers to the "individual personally of the citizen..." anyone have a sample answer for that paper? can swap with anything else! cheers

Also, staying on constitutional, would anyone be able to link me to a recent case, the people v AD? its on due process! cant seem to find it online at all!

JCJCJC

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

Also, staying on constitutional, would anyone be able to link me to a recent case, the people v AD? its on due process! cant seem to find it online at all!

No sign of it on courts.ie Joe, cases sometimes appear there before they do on bailii.org. Have you any more info - what court, which judge, dates, etc? the Irish Times law reports can cover cases that aren't reported elsewhere too,

Eyespy

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

Also, staying on constitutional, would anyone be able to link me to a recent case, the people v AD? its on due process! cant seem to find it online at all!

linky http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/597645521f07ac9a80256ef30048ca52/fd3e76704e6c716080257a0e004f7473?OpenDocument , I think this is the one you're looking for .

mackerf

Does anyone have an up to date Equity grid? Would be very very much appreciated.

Also, is anyone cutting anything obvious from their Equity study plan?

rickety cricket

Hey all, am wondering if there are any topics that one could cut from Constitutional? I know its a subject that has a lot of mix questions but really struggling to keep all of it in the head?

-splatto-

In desperate need of a contract law exam grid if anyone can help me?I seem to have lost mine...

JCJCJC

Good recent case on S150 on bailii this morning.

leitrimjoe90

rickety cricket wrote: »

Hey all, am wondering if there are any topics that one could cut from Constitutional? I know its a subject that has a lot of mix questions but really struggling to keep all of it in the head?

there are not really any topics you can safely cut from constitutional, elections, proportional rep, constitutional interpretation have not come up in a while and the echr comes up on an infrequent basis but id advise you to know a broad knowledge of every chapter, then know the others in depth like SOP, Due Process, Personal Rights etc

footlose

I see from the exam reports that the stability treaty is on the course this time around? Are people covering this?

rickety cricket

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

there are not really any topics you can safely cut from constitutional, elections, proportional rep, constitutional interpretation have not come up in a while and the echr comes up on an infrequent basis but id advise you to know a broad knowledge of every chapter, then know the others in depth like SOP, Due Process, Personal Rights etc

thanks leitrimjoe, yeah I was thinking the same but hoped maybe i could be wrong! i guess i just have to suck it up and learn it all!

LegalCity

footlose wrote: »

I see from the exam reports that the stability treaty is on the course this time around? Are people covering this?

Wasn't planning on doing it. Was there a full question on it on last years paper?

mackerf

Does anyone know if there has been a quite recent case on undue influence and third parties in relation to the bank's notice in transactions involving husbands and wives?

Thanks!

redscan

mackerf wrote: »

Does anyone know if there has been a quite recent case on undue influence and third parties in relation to the bank's notice in transactions involving husbands and wives?

Thanks!

http://www.staredecisishibernia.com/2012/06/01/ulster-bank-ireland-ltd-v-roche-2012-iehc-166-high-court-clarke-j-29-march-2012/

This is probably the one.

conmo

Irbc v quinn
Roche & buttimer case
national.. v zone
Ge woodchester homeloans v
Davies v aib

English case of hewett v first home financial group.. How will it effect ireland