FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

JCJCJC

RandolphEsq wrote: »

haha I was only joking

Glad to hear it - use smileys the next time :):):):):):):):D:p

Strawberry Fields

frustratedTC wrote: »

Yea im near end of alphabet and mine is 199 less than it was in 2011. Hopefully it means less competition!

I'm down from regular 800s to 600s and my app was in last day.

frustratedTC

yeh im mid 200s too, but it is still 199 lower than it was in 2011!

frustratedTC

sorry im mid 700s, while previously i was mid 900s

odonohs2

Does anyone have exam grids and sample answers that from 2011 and 2012 that they would be willing to email me (EU, Constitutional, Contract, Tort)? Mine only go up to 2010, which is a particular nuisance for EU as most of my stuff is pre-Lisbon. Send me a PM if you can help.

ElleWoods

To anyone using the City Colleges manual for Constitutional, I have written out my notes from that but just realised there's way more cases on the slides Brendan uses. Is the manual on its own sufficient?

Secondly, I have the Succession Act but I bought it just BEFORE the 2009 act was enacted. Do it need to purchase an updated version?

Thanks!

leitrimjoe90

RandolphEsq wrote: »

Is anyone else's candidate number a lot lower than before? I have gone from high 70s down to 30s. This would indicate that there are 50% less people sitting Fe-1s this sitting from November! Competition shall be tough, don't help anyone sitting the same exam as you, mind games the morning of the exam are essential.

lmao yes i agree randolp, i walk in there like roy keane on patrick vier a

Happychicky7

Are you allowed tab acts that you bring in to exams? I saw someone handing in Companies Acts with coloured tabs before... Also I know these Acts have been updated to include CA 2012, my notes are a bit dated and I was going to bring in an older version of CA Acts, anything major in 2012 Act relevant to March sitting?? Dont want to buy new acts.... Thanks!

KoukiKeith

KoukiKeith wrote: »

Can anyone please tell me what the Competition Q's were from March & October of last year's EU papers? Just a rough outline would be brilliant.

Anyone? It'd be much appreciated!

dinemo6

Happychicky7 wrote: »

Are you allowed tab acts that you bring in to exams? I saw someone handing in Companies Acts with coloured tabs before... Also I know these Acts have been updated to include CA 2012, my notes are a bit dated and I was going to bring in an older version of CA Acts, anything major in 2012 Act relevant to March sitting?? Dont want to buy new acts.... Thanks!

I don't there is a "Student Edition" available for the updated to 2012 version yet...?

KoukiKeith

Happychicky7 wrote: »

Are you allowed tab acts that you bring in to exams? I saw someone handing in Companies Acts with coloured tabs before... Also I know these Acts have been updated to include CA 2012, my notes are a bit dated and I was going to bring in an older version of CA Acts, anything major in 2012 Act relevant to March sitting?? Dont want to buy new acts.... Thanks!

Strangely, on the permitted legislation section of the law soc it states that only until 2009 is acceptable. You are allowed to tab & highlight.

RandolphEsq

sally01 wrote: »

hate to burst your bubble but my number is in the mid 200s...perhaps it just depends on when you got your application in

Hate to burst YOUR bubble but they said they were 199 lower than before, not that they were candidate number 199 and were near the end of the alphabet. That would suggest there were slightly over 200 people doing the Fe-1s which is an absurdly low amount while it's still the same format.

leitrimjoe90

RandolphEsq wrote: »

Hate to burst YOUR bubble but they said they were 199 lower than before, not that they were candidate number 199 and were near the end of the alphabet. That would suggest there were slightly over 200 people doing the Fe-1s which is an absurdly low amount while it's still the same format.

it doesnt make a blind bit of difference how many do them there is no curve, its up to the examiner who passes at the end of the day really

Happychicky7

dinemo6 wrote: »

I don't there is a "Student Edition" available for the updated to 2012 version yet...?

I saw a Courtney and McCann (is that right?) version for 2012 in John Smiths bookshop today , thats what made me question it. Dont think its worth shelling out €165 for it though...cheaper to repeat!! :rolleyes: As KouliKeith says 2009 Act still on law soc site so will go with that...fingers crossed!

ShamblesB

Does anyone know if its ok to bring in the companies acts 1963-2013? It says on the website 1963-2009 but I'm after getting McCann & Courtney 1963-2013?

KoukiKeith

ShamblesB wrote: »

Does anyone know if its ok to bring in the companies acts 1963-2013? It says on the website 1963-2009 but I'm after getting McCann & Courtney 1963-2013?

AFAIK, there isn't a student edition for 1963-2012 so my guess is that you have the pract version which isn't permitted regardless. What colour is it?

ShamblesB

KoukiKeith wrote: »

AFAIK, there isn't a student edition for 1963-2012 so my guess is that you have the pract version which isn't permitted regardless. What colour is it?

It's light pink, it says 1963-2013 I'm pretty sure... I don't have it to hand though so it could be 2012

dinemo6

Happychicky7 wrote: »

I saw a Courtney and McCann (is that right?) version for 2012 in John Smiths bookshop today , thats what made me question it. Dont think its worth shelling out €165 for it though...cheaper to repeat!! :rolleyes: As KouliKeith says 2009 Act still on law soc site so will go with that...fingers crossed!

Do you know if that version you saw was a "Student Edition"? It says on Amazon the student Edition won't be published until 31st March 2013.

Im just after buying the 2009 - sickened as the 2012 one will prob be acceptable by Oct. For this sitting in March though its only the 2009 edition that will be allowed in. A friend of mine said she saw people being stopped taking in different versions last Oct so looks like they are strict on this.

sally01

ShamblesB wrote: »

It's light pink, it says 1963-2013 I'm pretty sure... I don't have it to hand though so it could be 2012

I have the 1963-2009 one, which is also light pink. It says student edition on the front. Hope this helps.

KoukiKeith

ShamblesB wrote: »

It's light pink, it says 1963-2013 I'm pretty sure... I don't have it to hand though so it could be 2012

Student ed is pink alright. Strange one. I rang the usual book shops before I bought & all said that there was no student ed of new version nor were there plans to release one in the near future.

I'd email the Law Soc.

ShamblesB

Now I'm thinking that I might be mistaken and it could be 2009 after all! Oops! I'll check when i have the book tomorrow before I start to worry!

mackerf

What are the options for bringing legislation into the company exam? mccann & courtney $$$$!!! :eek:

leitrimjoe90

mackerf wrote: »

What are the options for bringing legislation into the company exam? mccann & courtney $$$$!!! :eek:

def get mc cann and courtney well worth the money...a girl sold me some dud legislation without even the 2009 amendments only realised a few days before and ndeeded it as examinership was on...well worth the money

leitrimjoe90

Constitutional

Folks...problems with constitutional and help is lacking...

Q1 October 2011 is a question about part-time lawnmower salesman who has a home business selling from his home...the local authority stops him from putting signs up by a local by-law which prohibits all form of advertising on private property and seeks the removal of the sign at once. you have to advise him as to how to resist the councils application?

What are the issues here? I know livelihood but what else? Does the presumption apply also to a local by-law of the council? Surely its not a free speech issue with those signs for the business? Cheers in advance.

RandolphEsq

leitrimjoe90 wrote: »

it doesnt make a blind bit of difference how many do them there is no curve, its up to the examiner who passes at the end of the day really

Completely disagree. The PPC fees are a big revenue stream for the Law Society. If the numbers passing Fe-1s was a bit low they would be shooting themselves in the foot by losing out on those fees. They do have an interest in passing a certain, minimum number of people to secure PPC fees.

Robbo

mackerf wrote: »

What are the options for bringing legislation into the company exam? mccann & courtney $$$$!!! :eek:

Holy ****, I couldn't believe the price when I looked it up.

I bought it for about €30 in 2010 in Hodges Figgis.

If someone wants to borrow mine (this 1963-2009 edition) and can collect in Dublin City, they can have it if they buy me a pint. I do want it back though after.

Procrastastudy

RandolphEsq wrote: »

Completely disagree. The PPC fees are a big revenue stream for the Law Society. If the numbers passing Fe-1s was a bit low they would be shooting themselves in the foot by losing out on those fees. They do have an interest in passing a certain, minimum number of people to secure PPC fees.

That assumes that anywhere near the number that pass can find training contracts, though.

frustratedTC

Or maybe they think we wouldn't be mad enough to do these exams without a TC, considering how expensive they end up being.

RandolphEsq

Procrastastudy wrote: »

That assumes that anywhere near the number that pass can find training contracts, though.

They are aware of that so will have a minimum no. of students they need to pass if statistically x amount of those who complete their fe-1s in the spring train in September.

sin0city

frustratedTC wrote: »

Or maybe they think we wouldn't be mad enough to do these exams without a TC, considering how expensive they end up being.

Yup. Cost me over 2 grand between preparatory courses and exam fees.
Still no training contract because I hadn't grown up enough to realise the importance of your leaving and college results down the line. Didn't fail any FE1s though so hopefully that'll count for something.

RandolphEsq wrote: »

They are aware of that so will have a minimum no. of students they need to pass if statistically x amount of those who complete their fe-1s in the spring train in September.

Maybe I'm being naive but I'd have thought if you do well enough you'll pass and if you don't...well, you won't.

It'd undermine the integrity of the exams and profession if you could pass based on numbers.