FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

coco13

Hi Folks..Only just recently came across this site and find it great to be able to talk to other people in the same boat sitting the FE1s. Tough sitting them on your own. Just wondering if anyone out there could give me some advice...Am currently working full time and studying for the FE1s. I have sat and passed four and have four to go. To be honest I have found these exams tough and really dont feel that I have adopted the correct approach to sitting them. Just wonder could anyone advise what is the key??I know everyone has a different system that works but I tend to start working between 6/8 weeks before the exams in a panic trying to get everything covered and I have studied as a distance learner with Griffith College, doing the various lectures online...What is the recipe for success that doesnt cause the massive unhelpful stress in the end.. Would really appreciate any advice re tactics as I am sick of these exams and how much they are consuming my life!!! Is it a fourteen week hard grind, doing sample questions etc etc etc.. I just seem to be making notes, rewriting books and not being hugely productive but at the same time it consumes alot of my time!!!! I find it very hard to get it all together in the end. Also find that when I am in the exams that I tend to pass the exam with a good high sixty or in the alternative fail it miserably!! (From past results) Would really appreciate any tips re getting a handle on these exams in an attempt to make make the sitting of my last four exams as pain free as possible..Anyone?????

JCJCJC

coco13 wrote: »

Hi Folks..Only just recently came across this site and find it great to be able to talk to other people in the same boat sitting the FE1s. Tough sitting them on your own. Just wondering if anyone out there could give me some advice...

Well, I did a LLB in UL and got a 2:1 and had high marks all along the way, frequently A's and topped the class one year - but I'm finding these very tough indeed, totally different style. I think in College when you know your lecturer there will always be tips and hints, and you'll know what they are 'hot' on anyway. Much emphasis was placed on reading several textbooks in each subject and also quoting journal articles, so you tended to go all over the place in an answer and it was what was wanted. By God, this is different! It's not academic law, it's advise your client to the standard a competent solicitor would deliver.
I did the Griffiths revision courses for the four subjects I'm attempting this time, would highly recommend them and I have no shares/interest/angles/relatives etc. Their exam analysis and grids are great, all the handout material is 100% focused on the exam, not citing learned authors for the sake of it etc. They hand out sample answers to the past papers, which really shows you how to tackle questions in a tight focused way.
I can only wish you all the best of luck after that, many people would be envious of your four in the hand, you must be doing a lot right as it is.

JC

Jicked

Last October's EU paper, q.6 part (iii):
A provision that allows a natural person living in Ireland to claim an exemption from income tax on dividends distributed in the form of shares in a subsidiary by companies established in Ireland

Anyone able to tell me what's going on there!?

steph86

hey,
just new to this site, was just wondering could someone give me advice. i'm planning on sitting my first four fe1 exams this oct. was thinking of sitting equity, land, tort and eu. should i stick to this or do a different combination? Amre17 advised that perhaps criminal and contract would be easier to do rather than eu and tort as there is less syllabus to cover and would be easier to get the 3 out of four required exams in the first sitting.
advice would be appreciated greatly.:)

lougem

Hogzy wrote: »

Good to hear, i did the EXACT same as you, thought it was a good question, didnt do it till the last because i didnt know which essay Q i was going to do. TUrned out to be my strongest question. Im really worried though about my cases. I forgot the names of aload but had the facts and points of law perfect. Apart from q4 my case names were really bad, think i had a total of about 10 named cases in 4 questions, just kept saying "in a previous case" for the rest. Think this might result in a fail for me, First time doing them though so i havnt got a clue?

I was wondering the same myself. There is no mention of any license, Looks like he is just a man with a fishing boat who goes out fishing.

In regards to Q 4- I stated by way of introductrion that the SOP was a 'democratic imperative' as judges are not elected etc, therefore is to the benefit of the individual, and then I did cases more or less in bullet-points (cos I ran out of time) and tried to show how they benefitted the individual every now and agian.

I approached Q 2 from completely the wrong way, by saying that his right to earn a livelihood had been breached, then talked for ages ab unenumerated rights. Overall the exam could have gone better for me.

Also, a friend of mine spoke directly to the law soc, and they told her that the point of law is much more important than the name of the case, and thats what they allocate most of the marks to. I hope this is true cos I often forget the full names of cases and never put in the year! So if u remember the details u should be OK.

carojane

Hi I was just wondering if anyone did Q6 in today's constitutoinal law exam, I think it was an emergency powers issue however I mentioned that it was also an unauthorised delegation of legislative power issue with regard to the powers given to the minister in this case, I think it was probably wrong though.

brian__foley

steph86 wrote: »

hey,
just new to this site, was just wondering could someone give me advice. i'm planning on sitting my first four fe1 exams this oct. was thinking of sitting equity, land, tort and eu. should i stick to this or do a different combination? Amre17 advised that perhaps criminal and contract would be easier to do rather than eu and tort as there is less syllabus to cover and would be easier to get the 3 out of four required exams in the first sitting.
advice would be appreciated greatly.:)

Some find it beneficial to cross equity and contract in the one sitting. There is quite a bit of cross over (undue influence, rescission, mistake, estoppel) etc, and I think any time saving / energy saving is important in these exams.

Hogzy

lougem wrote: »

In regards to Q 4- I stated by way of introductrion that the SOP was a 'democratic imperative' as judges are not elected etc, therefore is to the benefit of the individual, and then I did cases more or less in bullet-points (cos I ran out of time) and tried to show how they benefitted the individual every now and agian.

I approached Q 2 from completely the wrong way, by saying that his right to earn a livelihood had been breached, then talked for ages ab unenumerated rights. Overall the exam could have gone better for me.

Also, a friend of mine spoke directly to the law soc, and they told her that the point of law is much more important than the name of the case, and thats what they allocate most of the marks to. I hope this is true cos I often forget the full names of cases and never put in the year! So if u remember the details u should be OK.

I was speaking to the Examiner of the Kings Inns exams (He's my cousin :pac:) and he said the same thing. The point of law was the most important part (for Kings inns anyway but he said he wouldnt see any different for FE-1s) In relation to having the years Griffith have told us numerous times that they really dont matter. In fact they may look down on you if you get the year wrong. IMO its just more stuff to go wrong so your best bet is to leave the years out unless you KNOW 100% that your right.

jacko1

legallad wrote: »

Does anyone know whether the Bupa v VHI case re risk equalisation scheme with regard to art 106 tfeu (ex 86 ec) has been decided? In my manual which is a couple of years old it said the decision is pending and I cant seem to find anything on the net.

Thanks

decided in feb 2008

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62003A0289:EN:HTML

Antrop is more recent and perhaps more important

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62007J0504:EN:HTML

legallad

Jicked wrote: »

Last October's EU paper, q.6 part (iii):
A provision that allows a natural person living in Ireland to claim an exemption from income tax on dividends distributed in the form of shares in a subsidiary by companies established in Ireland

Anyone able to tell me what's going on there!?

art 63 (ex art 56) free movemnet of capital question. Then apply art 65 (ex art 58) or objectively justify it on an overriding public requirement.

Cases of relevance: D case and M Bovanich case (spelt that incorrectly!).

Hope that helps.

littlemac1980

tony28 wrote: »

Also on question 3 i see people talking about a licence but we arent told of any licence , i made the mistake i think of approaching this as a breach of the delegated powers , the fact that the minister banned the fishing as opposed to limiting it pushed me in this direction so i dunno how thats gonna work out

Did that Ques too, and came to same conclusion.... incorrectly it seems.... what about Legitiamte Expetation - any relevance?

Jicked

legallad wrote: »

art 63 (ex art 56) free movemnet of capital question. Then apply art 65 (ex art 58) or objectively justify it on an overriding public requirement.

Cases of relevance: D case and M Bovanich case (spelt that incorrectly!).

Hope that helps.

Ah yeah, free movement of capital...which I'm not doing! Phew, I was wondering why I didn't recognise the issue. The chances of it arising again so soon must be pretty slim, unless he mentioned something particular about it in the reports?

2ndtimer

legallad wrote: »

art 63 (ex art 56) free movemnet of capital question. Then apply art 65 (ex art 58) or objectively justify it on an overriding public requirement.

Cases of relevance: D case and M Bovanich case (spelt that incorrectly!).

Hundope that helps.

See also old art 43- establish self in ms under same conditions and; aberdeen property finivest alpha and commision v germany; both on this exact point. Germany case is very recent

JCJCJC

Hogzy wrote: »

I was speaking to the Examiner of the Kings Inns exams (He's my cousin :pac:) and he said the same thing. The point of law was the most important part (for Kings inns anyway but he said he wouldnt see any different for FE-1s)

Lads - be careful here. See Dr Jack Anderson's report April 2009:

..an increasingly large number of candidates are using references such as "in a decided case", "in a recent case" followed by a rambling and vague version of the facts in the "stated case". This approach is meaningless. ( his emphasis) In a common law jurisdiction, the proper and accurate use of case law is of the utmost importance, and so it is for this exam,,,

Not much room for the bare point of law there, and Dr Jack reads this board! Know your cases, do anything you can to remember them - list the horse cases, the ship cases, anything to fix the names in your head. Make sketches - I have one of three little ships, the Eurymedon, the New York Star and the Mahkutai, imagine yourself walking along a pier passing three ships in that order. Imagine Harvey Smith (famous showjumper) making a rude gesture, which he did one time, in your Facey, Harvey v Facey - famous horse case, whatever makes your brain process the data in different ways.

Good luck to all - one last look at the notes and on for Cork at 7.00am ;-)


JC

macy9

I literally give up! Bah, these exams. Im going to rent a flat in Dublin City centre, cut off all communication from everyone and study solidly all day every day until the end of september. If anyone wants a roommate let me know. We can have an FE 1 house share. Cover the place in flash cards and have no social lives. Grrreeeaaatttt.

I'll still fail Tort, wait and see. :pac:

The papers get harder every year.

Hogzy

JCJCJC wrote: »

Lads - be careful here. See Dr Jack Anderson's report April 2009:

..an increasingly large number of candidates are using references such as "in a decided case", "in a recent case" followed by a rambling and vague version of the facts in the "stated case". This approach is meaningless. ( his emphasis) In a common law jurisdiction, the proper and accurate use of case law is of the utmost importance, and so it is for this exam,,,


JC

Well if this is true then I know doubt failed Constitutional. I most certainly do not have enough named cases to back up my points

randomchild

Imagine Harvey Smith (famous showjumper) making a rude gesture, which he did one time, in your Facey, Harvey v Facey - famous horse case, whatever makes your brain process the data in different ways.

Good luck to all - one last look at the notes and on for Cork at 7.00am ;-)


JC

I always remember that case because Harvey Dent is two-face's real name...(Batman comes to the rescue once more):D

Ruby83

What did ppl think of contract? I thought it was a pretty fair paper. Didn't like the mistake question but essays were fine. Wasn't too sure about Q3 in case it raised issues of proprietary estoppel. Q1 and 4 were like past questions. Q7 re illegal contracts was wayyy too long though. My second half was only about a page and a half!

tony28

thought it was fair enough did two essays and three problems, though the problem on mistake(i think ) was confusing, also i made a mistake in doing both a and b for q 8 ,anyone know how do they mark that, knowing the law soc they will probably pick my worst one, i was wondering why it took me so long.

dazman2251

I was going to do question 8(a) for contract but left it as i wasnt sure, was it asking about privity and its exceptions??

Ruby83

dazman2251 wrote: »

I was going to do question 8(a) for contract but left it as i wasnt sure, was it asking about privity and its exceptions??

Ya that's what I did it on anyway. Hope no one says otherwise!!

JCJCJC

Ruby83 wrote: »

What did ppl think of contract? I thought it was a pretty fair paper.

Yes, not too bad I thought, just letting my head get back to normal now for a while. Couldn't for the life of me think of Bannerman for the sulphur and hops question so I left it alone, but most of my other cases stayed in my head - did capacity of minors and managed them all, horse, cufflinks, boat, waistcoat, car, legal advice etc!. I'll scan the paper soon and send it to Dr Brian Foley and we'll see what he thinks in due course maybe.
What did people think about the prop estoppel question - did it only arise for the latter few years from when the purported promise was made, giving Jimmy only an interest commensurate with his inputs from that point to Peter's death? That was the line I took anyhow.

JC

Ruby83

JCJCJC wrote: »

Yes, not too bad I thought, just letting my head get back to normal now for a while. Couldn't for the life of me think of Bannerman for the sulphur and hops question so I left it alone, but most of my other cases stayed in my head - did capacity of minors and managed them all, horse, cufflinks, boat, waistcoat, car, legal advice etc!. I'll scan the paper soon and send it to Dr Brian Foley and we'll see what he thinks in due course maybe.
What did people think about the prop estoppel question - did it only arise for the latter few years from when the purported promise was made, giving Jimmy only an interest commensurate with his inputs from that point to Peter's death? That was the line I took anyhow.

JC

Ya I did capacity too. It took me so long to learn the God damn thing that I was delighted it came up! I also used ur three little boats tip from yesterday in the privity question which came in really handy so thanks for that!

NickDrake

JCJCJC wrote: »

Yes, not too bad I thought, just letting my head get back to normal now for a while. Couldn't for the life of me think of Bannerman for the sulphur and hops question so I left it alone, but most of my other cases stayed in my head - did capacity of minors and managed them all, horse, cufflinks, boat, waistcoat, car, legal advice etc!. I'll scan the paper soon and send it to Dr Brian Foley and we'll see what he thinks in due course maybe.
What did people think about the prop estoppel question - did it only arise for the latter few years from when the purported promise was made, giving Jimmy only an interest commensurate with his inputs from that point to Peter's death? That was the line I took anyhow.

JC

Well there is no distiction made in Irish law between promissory and prop estoppel. So you could argue both I would say.

Grand paper I thought. Capacity question was grand and she only wanted the common law.

JCJCJC

Ruby83 wrote: »

I also used ur three little boats tip from yesterday in the privity question which came in really handy so thanks for that!

Yes, my three little ships duly came in, the Eurymedon followed by the New York Star followed by the Mahkutai!! I counted 49 cases that I cited in my whole answerbook which means my brain isn't too fried after all, but couldn't think of the b*st*rd with the hops ;-) I'll have to associate Bannerman with County Clare where I have ingested a lot of hops in my time too, from here on.
I've now scanned the paper and sent it to Brian.
Incidentally I can email .doc files of the papers I'm doing - Tort, Contract, EU, Property to anyone who needs them in exchange for scans or photocopies of the other four. My scanner has OCR so it can read the text. PM me if you would like to set up an exchange.

JC

randomchild

Yeah I answered on the mistake question as I knew the cases related too mistake as to identity and figured few would attempt it. Really please with the paper and now criminal seems like a world of study time away...

coco13

Well done to everyone doing Contract today..Sounds like the paper wasn't too bad but then again sure it all depends on what you have studied..Apologies to raise the issue at this stage but any idea when the courses at Griffith and IC start back..Need to plan some form of a break in the interim period so I can commence working on time this time..Or so that's what I tell myself Ill do!!!!!!

JCJCJC

coco13 wrote: »

Well done to everyone doing Contract today..Sounds like the paper wasn't too bad but then again sure it all depends on what you have studied..Apologies to raise the issue at this stage but any idea when the courses at Griffith and IC start back..Need to plan some form of a break in the interim period so I can commence working on time this time..Or so that's what I tell myself Ill do!!!!!!

All you can do is monitor the Griffiths website and the'll put up the info in due course. Brian Foley's tips and forecasts came in very well on contract law this time.

JC

coco13

steph86 wrote: »

hey,
just new to this site, was just wondering could someone give me advice. i'm planning on sitting my first four fe1 exams this oct. was thinking of sitting equity, land, tort and eu. should i stick to this or do a different combination? Amre17 advised that perhaps criminal and contract would be easier to do rather than eu and tort as there is less syllabus to cover and would be easier to get the 3 out of four required exams in the first sitting.
advice would be appreciated greatly.:)

Steph,
From personal experience sitting the exams I would recommend that you do:
1 Equity
2 Contract
3 Criminal
4 Property

I personally would avoid Tort and Eu for my first set of exams. They wouldn't be as straight forward to learn but then again each to their own! The above courses aren't hugley vast either compared to Constitutional and EU.

coco13

JCJCJC wrote: »

All you can do is monitor the Griffiths website and the'll put up the info in due course. Brian Foley's tips and forecasts came in very well on contract law this time.

JC

Cheers JC.. Its great when you see some of the tips you want appearing when you open the paper!