FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

kd28

vote4pedro wrote: »

is that the same with the EU treaties? So you can stick tabs in, but cant label the tabs "FMO Goods" or anything like that?

No you cannot write anything on them, just hightlighting in all of teh exams in which you can take legislation.

vote4pedro

Thanks!

mercury7

Hi everybody,

Im finding it really hard to identify the questions in the constitutional law papers. Does anyone know what topic Question 4 is about on April 09 paper?
Be really grateful if someone could help me !!!!

brian__foley

vote4pedro wrote: »

There's not usually a great deal of change in the manuals from one sitting to the next, as there simply won't be a huge change in laws across various issues in a 6 month period. This time EU manuals might change a bit, if Lisbon is passed it'll mean a bit of re-working to be done (and if I were you I'd put that off until the law becomes a little more settled and sit next Oct instead).

Nutshells are like Rapid Revision books for each Fe1 subject, available at Hodges Figgis or any college bookstore. And yeah, the first time you sit the exams you need to sit at least 4, and pass at least 3 of those. So if you do 4, and only pass 2, they don't count and you'll have to resit those exams next time and hope you pass 3 at the same time.
Once you pass the initial 3, you're allowed to 'keep' a subject if you passed one and failed the other 4 for instance.

I'd guess that our Company manuals would be changing with the new Act, but its nothing that freely available summaries of the Act wouldn't let you correct with older materials. I'm sure there will be dozens of these overviews of the Act available soon enough from solicitors firms (on their websites).

On nutshells, don't discount slightly out of date English case-books for subjects like contract and tort. They have a good deal on the English cases you'll need to know, and provided you don't get them very out of date (i.e. 2005 and onwards is usually 90% fine) you'll pick things up on amazon for very, very cheap - £3-£4 etc (second hand of course).

brian__foley

mercury7 wrote: »

Hi everybody,

Im finding it really hard to identify the questions in the constitutional law papers. Does anyone know what topic Question 4 is about on April 09 paper?
Be really grateful if someone could help me !!!!

Cabinet confidentiality etc. Whether the principles differ as between whether a Court wants the document or some other tribunal. Would be a good start there. Irish Press Case [2002] 4 IR 110 to be looked at re just what is caught by cabinet confidentiality (drafts, discussions, or documents etc). Maybe other issues of privilege under Article 15 could be raised, but discounted.

Brian (GCD)

C222

got an equity question- q4 april 2008 appears to me to be proprietary estoppel and the independent colleges grid seem to confirm that. however, i have a sample griffith answer and it talks extensively about promissory estoppel, not a mention of proprietary! bit confused about what is the correct interpretation of the question, any help much appreciated!

brian__foley

C222 wrote: »

got an equity question- q4 april 2008 appears to me to be proprietary estoppel and the independent colleges grid seem to confirm that. however, i have a sample griffith answer and it talks extensively about promissory estoppel, not a mention of proprietary! bit confused about what is the correct interpretation of the question, any help much appreciated!

Just on this, I don't know where you got that, since the Q4 I've loaded up from the database of sample answers deals entirely (and, indeed, only) with proprietary estoppel. I'm aware that questions were mixed up in the very early days of the exam bank, but the sample answer I'm looking at confirms what you think.

Dante09

brian__foley wrote: »

Just on this, I don't know where you got that, since the Q4 I've loaded up from the database of sample answers deals entirely (and, indeed, only) with proprietary estoppel. I'm aware that questions were mixed up in the very early days of the exam bank, but the sample answer I'm looking at confirms what you think.

Brian, I just want to say thanks for your contributions on this thread and on the FE1 google study group. Fair play to you for keeping an interest in the affairs of students that are not even your own. Im just out of college and emailed an old lecturer of mine (from 2 years ago), politely explaining that im about to sit the FE1 in a certain subject and that my notes are 2 years old and whether s/he was aware of any recent major case law. The reply I got was to read the annual bar review. Some people amaze me.

_JOE_

Dante09 wrote: »

Brian, I just want to say thanks for your contributions on this thread and on the FE1 google study group. Fair play to you for keeping an interest in the affairs of students that are not even your own. Im just out of college and emailed an old lecturer of mine (from 2 years ago), politely explaining that im about to sit the FE1 in a certain subject and that my notes are 2 years old and whether s/he was aware of any recent major case law. The reply I got was to read the annual bar review. Some people amaze me.

And further his contributions on the google group...i know it's much appreciated by students...

sunnyside

Anybody know what the situation with handing in permitted legislation to the Cork Neptune centre is? Do you bring it there in advance of exams starting? Seems unlikely, there wouldn't be anybody there(It's the blue constitution book I'm talking about)

ElectricEyes

Does anybody know if the Company acts are available to buy in any shop in Cork? Do many people do the exam without bringing them in?

Would really appreciate any help with this. I am really scared about this exam.

Beeinmybonnet

sunnyside wrote: »

Anybody know what the situation with handing in permitted legislation to the Cork Neptune centre is? Do you bring it there in advance of exams starting? Seems unlikely, there wouldn't be anybody there(It's the blue constitution book I'm talking about)

You have to submit legislation the day of the previous exam, so if your exam is on a Wednesday, submit it on Monday. You can also hand it in the morning of the exam but by the time it is checked, it may be an hour into the exam.

Re the Companies Legislation, you can order paperback copies of the Companies Acts from the Government Publications Office - much cheaper than buying the consolidated version. Also they posted it to me when I ordered it which was handy. You can highlight it and put tabs on it as much as you want, but it cannot be written upon.

lockedin

I am sitting company, and have passed the other 7 exams. Company and me just don't get on! Think coz there's no room for my waffle! I cannot find anybody with current manual. The one I have is three sittings old. I have read threads about a new Act. Is this examinable. Can anyone who is in tune with current manual think of anything over past year and a half I should keep in mind? I would really really appreciate any advice.

legallad

hey, just a quick question for those of you doing land. My question is on freehold covenants, I know the answer is probably extremely straight forward but my brain isn't permitting me to use any sort of logic at the moment!

Ok so take the scenario where there are a group of people in what appears to be a local scheme of development under equity and there are a number of covenants. Say Pat is an owner of a plot of land within this scheme and wants to enforce certain covenants against successors in title of other plots within the scheme. He has no problem enforcing the restrictive ones however there are other covenants requiring affirmative action so they wont come under equitys protection.

Can Pat as a claimant enforce these other covenants against the successors in title at common law even though he never owned the other plots. These covenants benefit his land. Im aware of the rule is halsall v brizell concerning benefit and burden but can this apply to pat as he is not technically privy to the contract between the original owner and successor? Also if he can enforce these what must he prove?

Any help will be much appreciated!

Dante09

Guys, can I ask what people think of the consecutive exams this sitting? Im doing tort, company, constitutional (and EU the following week) which means I have exams wed,thur,fri. Im seriously worried about the lack of rest/revision time between these exams? Does anybody else feel similarly? What is the objective behind having consecutive exam days? Is it really to ensure that more people fail?

sunnyside

I'm studying this today and am feeling overwhelmed. I'm wondering would it be ok to leave out European ECHR cases? I'm thinking it should be ok. I know European law interacting with the Constitution is a possible question but it wouldn't be more than 1 question right?

If I know separation of powers really well that should be a few questions. I'm doing rights and trial in due course of law but the Europe cases keep turning up. I haven't done any EU law and it's too late for me to start on trying to understand that.

Somebody, I think it was Brian Foley posted a few pages back to just know a small amount about each article. I'm doing Constitutional Interpertation, Perogatives, President, almost everything really but no idea how much I'll remember on the day. I'm scared:(

Dante09

sunnyside wrote: »

I'm scared:(

Me too:(

ElectricEyes

BeeinmyBonnet- Thanks. I will check that out.

Dante- I am doing the same four as you and also feel really worried about the lack of breaks. I am going to be dead by that Friday after Constitutional. It will be really difficult to psych myself up again for EU. I am completely burnt out as it is.

Dante09

ElectricEyes wrote: »

I am completely burnt out as it is.

I know how you feel.

paulanthony

Dante09 wrote: »

Guys, can I ask what people think of the consecutive exams this sitting? Im doing tort, company, constitutional (and EU the following week) which means I have exams wed,thur,fri. Im seriously worried about the lack of rest/revision time between these exams? Does anybody else feel similarly? What is the objective behind having consecutive exam days? Is it really to ensure that more people fail?

Have Company on Thursday, Equity Monday - not too bad, but then Criminal, Property, Contract on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. Going to be wrecked after it. I'd love an extra day to cram in between as I find you get a lot done as you can focus your mind purely on the next exam.

Good luck

Jev/N

legallad wrote: »

Can Pat as a claimant enforce these other covenants against the successors in title at common law even though he never owned the other plots. These covenants benefit his land. Im aware of the rule is halsall v brizell concerning benefit and burden but can this apply to pat as he is not technically privy to the contract between the original owner and successor? Also if he can enforce these what must he prove?

Any help will be much appreciated!

Has this actually ever been asked?

C222

brian__foley wrote: »

Just on this, I don't know where you got that, since the Q4 I've loaded up from the database of sample answers deals entirely (and, indeed, only) with proprietary estoppel. I'm aware that questions were mixed up in the very early days of the exam bank, but the sample answer I'm looking at confirms what you think.

thanks a million brian for sorting out the confusion. I'll ignore it- just got a bit panicked about equity after that!

brian__foley

sunnyside wrote: »

I'm studying this today and am feeling overwhelmed. I'm wondering would it be ok to leave out European ECHR cases? I'm thinking it should be ok. I know European law interacting with the Constitution is a possible question but it wouldn't be more than 1 question right?

If I know separation of powers really well that should be a few questions. I'm doing rights and trial in due course of law but the Europe cases keep turning up. I haven't done any EU law and it's too late for me to start on trying to understand that.

I posted this last year.www.brianfoley.ie/A10ECHRBulletPoint.pdf

Re the ECHR cases issue, I assume you're getting bogged down in the Article 10 stuff? See above. You don't need to know EU law for ECHR cases and outside of Article 10 there are not that many of huge interest. MAYBE for Article 38.1 we all wheel out Steel & Morris on equality of arms, but not much more than that.

I wouldn't gamble on the separation of powers giving a few questions, but you sound like you are covering everything, so keep to that course and get every right covered.

kd28

Company quesion anyone?

In relation to a petition to have a company wound up on the grounds that its unable to pay debts, petition may fail for example if debtor disputes amount or has a counterclaim in relation to the debt Re Pageboy Couriers I think is the case,

presumably its only a counterclaim or a dispute in relation to that particular debt - whats the situation for example if you say my co owes you 1,300 but your co owes me 2,000 for something else will your petition on grounds that i cannot pay debt fail if i say i dont owe you that amount becuase you owe me for something else, I'm waffling i know...but i'm confused ,

I think it its the case that the Courts wouldnt grant the petition if there is any bona fide dispute over the amount or the debt but I think that its hardly bona fide if i am withholding payment because you owe me under another contract between us,

I'm just tired...any ideas though... or I will come to some sleep deprivation and spirit limitation induced conclusion ... I'm changing my name to Waffler!

Jamie-b

I'm doing 5- Equity Property Tort Constitutional and Contract. I don't know anything yet, I think I might fail them all... I always think I'll be able to do so much in a day but I can't remember anything right now!!!!!
(Ps: Nice to see you here Brian foley in our hour of need! )

page1

Hi im sitting criminal on Wed and property on Thurs. I was wondering is it permissible to hand in the succession act to be checked on the Wed. The rules state it must be 2 days beforehand so it would mean i would have to travel to the RDS especially for this which would be a huge hassle.

Also where is the best place to buy the Succession Act, i have checked in Easons but the only book they have is €145 :eek:

Many thanks.

brian__foley

Jamie-b wrote: »

I'm doing 5- Equity Property Tort Constitutional and Contract. I don't know anything yet, I think I might fail them all... I always think I'll be able to do so much in a day but I can't remember anything right now!!!!!
(Ps: Nice to see you here Brian foley in our hour of need! )

Well, term hasn't started yet, and I'm spending far too much time obsessing over fantasy football right now so why not post a bit of rubbishy advice every now and then? Now...back to Gerrard, Kuyt or Torres for today's captain...

brian__foley

kd28 wrote: »

Company quesion anyone?

In relation to a petition to have a company wound up on the grounds that its unable to pay debts, petition may fail for example if debtor disputes amount or has a counterclaim in relation to the debt Re Pageboy Couriers I think is the case,

presumably its only a counterclaim or a dispute in relation to that particular debt - whats the situation for example if you say my co owes you 1,300 but your co owes me 2,000 for something else will your petition on grounds that i cannot pay debt fail if i say i dont owe you that amount becuase you owe me for something else, I'm waffling i know...but i'm confused ,

I think it its the case that the Courts wouldnt grant the petition if there is any bona fide dispute over the amount or the debt but I think that its hardly bona fide if i am withholding payment because you owe me under another contract between us,

I'm just tired...any ideas though... or I will come to some sleep deprivation and spirit limitation induced conclusion ... I'm changing my name to Waffler!

You have a point in the sense that counter-claims do tend to inflame strong opinions. Like, "if you really had a claim, you would have brought it before now".

That said, it is a legally permissible way of defence to defend by counter-claim and set-off - i.e. I claim X by counter-claim and in the event that you succeed against me for Y, I ask the Court to set off X against your claim (Y). In fact, you wouldn't really have a counter-claim in relation to a specific debt because...well, its not really possible in the vast majority of cases (unless it was a counter-claim to, maybe, rescind a contract on which the debt was based for misrep/mistake etc). Rather, the counter-claim is an entirely separate action (and, indeed, incurs a seperate set of costs).

So, it is bona fide, in the sense that the overall balance of payment due isn't really what the petitioner claims it to be. I think also that a petition to wind up is a bit of a nuclear way to deal with a debt (and the High Court agrees with that), so if there is any dispute over the amount actually owed, the petition shouldn't be granted, and a good counter claim is just that kind of dispute. I think (from memoy) the WMG Toughening case is all on this point. Maybe.

paulanthony

page1 wrote: »

Hi im sitting criminal on Wed and property on Thurs. I was wondering is it permissible to hand in the succession act to be checked on the Wed. The rules state it must be 2 days beforehand so it would mean i would have to travel to the RDS especially for this which would be a huge hassle.

Also where is the best place to buy the Succession Act, i have checked in Easons but the only book they have is €145 :eek:

Many thanks.

Government Publications Office on Molesworth St - €7.63 I think.

kd28

Brian many thanks for your direction, I'm happy now and incase anyone else is interested:


The courts have also considered whether the existence of a valid or legitimate counterclaim against the petitioner which equals or exceeds the petitioner’s claim can ground a refusal to grant a winding up order or an order restraining the presentation or advertisement of the petition. In other words, notwithstanding that the company does, in fact, owe the debt claimed to the creditor, whether the court should refuse to wind up the company, where the creditor itself owes an equal or greater amount to the company.

It was held in Malayan Plant (PT) Limited .v. Moscow Narodny Bank Limited [1980] MLJ 53 which is approved in Re WMG (Toughening) Limited [2001] 3 IR 113 that:-

“There is no serious distinction in principle but in cross claim of substance and the serious dispute regarding the indebtedness imputed against a company, which has long been held to constitute a proper ground upon which to reject a winding up petition.”

The cross claim must be “genuine, serious and have substance”. (See Ryan Media Marketing Limited .v. Media Brook Limited & Anor. [2002] 1BCLC 184).