Undergrad Exam Thread

Procrastastudy

Undergrad exams are underway I thought it might be useful for us to have our own thread along the lines of the FE1 thread for asking questions and general reflection on exams.

Please note the discussions here are likely to be very focused on an area and not take into account "the real world" / "big picture". Please don't derail points with real world feedback - keep it to what would be in an exam answer. That's not to say general feedback on exam technique is unwelcome.

EDIT: Could we please also avoid discussion of this thread itself? If you don't find it useful please vote with your feet. The idea is to give a different thread for people who are confused by, or afraid to ask in the FE1 thread. Also it is to avoid what might be basic questions being asked in the FE1 thread. Please do note though the FE1 thread is an excellent resource.

Procrastastudy

Thought I'd kick off with a little nugget from Victor - got me thinking about the way I sometimes go about answering exam questions - especially the ones I consider poorly worded.

Victor wrote: »

BornToKill wrote: »

Oil ... from a sail boat?

The facts are the facts, you can't dispute them. You can however consider the foreseeability of material amounts of oil on sail boats.

BornToKill

Do some study.

chops018

My lecturer's used to give me FE1 questions for my undergrad exams (well similar ones anyway), or part of FE1 questions for the one's that contained numerous issues (some in criminal can contain 6 or 7 issues).

I reckon the FE1 exam thread would do you well enough if your lecturer uses past exam questions from the FE1's or types up their own questions with similar issues.

Use the search function for the thread and you will get answers to questions on almost anything - negligence, theft, section 4 rape, treasure trove etc etc. All relevant to your undergrad course, the syllabus to the FE1's is usually similar to that of undergrad I think, only thing is for the FE1's you have to know a lot more and in a lot more detail. I think the search function in the FE1 thread is your friend, and in any event throw up a question on the FE1 exam thread from an undergrad tutorial or exam question, I'm sure it will be similar to an issue that arose in the FE1 exams before and usually people will answer it, it seems to help with their study answering questions that other people have in relation to some issues, I know it helped me remember areas or cases better when I answered someone or if someone answered me.

So I suppose what I'm saying is I wouldn't agree with an undergrad exam thread especially when so much can be got from the FE1 thread. But that's just me, I already have my undergrad and postgrad stuff and there is already a thread for me aiming to get through the professional side of things. But again that's just me and this could take off and be hugely helpful to any undergrads coming on here.

chops018

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

EDIT: Could we please also avoid discussion of this thread itself? If you don't find it useful please vote with your feet. The idea is to give a different thread for people who are confused by, or afraid to ask in the FE1 thread. Also it is to avoid what might be basic questions being asked in the FE1 thread. Please do note though the FE1 thread is an excellent resource.

Saw your edit and we have every right to discuss the thread itself, I'm not trolling, I'm just giving my opinion and I feel it isn't really needed here, the FE1 thread is probably the only academic thread needed here in my opinion. There has even been requests to have the FE1 thread and such be given it's own forum which was unsuccessful. Don't be afraid to ask questions in the FE1 thread once they are academic and related to your course, and as such they will more than likely be related to the FE1's past questions.

If you don't want to do that may I suggest putting such an exam thread in the education forum, there you will get all academic answers/tips and no "real world/bigger picture" feedback. I see you're in GCD, well Griffith College has a forum in the "Edu" section.

Threads like this are started all the time whereby people are looking for answers to "homework" or "assignments", and are usually locked!

Procrastastudy

Chops I asked politely - I also sought permission from a mod before I opened this thread. You are absolutely entitled to you opinion and to post in any thread until a mod asks you not to. I'm simply asking you and others politely and without trying to back seat mod that if you don't like the thread not to hijack it.

I doubt very much if the FE1 candidates would like me and potentially others asking and talking about basics and undergrad exams, that derails their thread and is unfair to them. As I have indicated if there is no demand for this thread then it will die off naturally.

Tom Young

Actually, that's an interesting point. If an undergrad is up to scratch, then there is nothing that should really stop an undergrad passing the FE1 exams. So, it's overlap really. Though, I think the impetus on passing the FE1s means students study harder perhaps.

chops018

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

Chops I asked politely - I also sought permission from a mod before I opened this thread. You are absolutely entitled to you opinion and to post in any thread until a mod asks you not to. I'm simply asking you and others politely and without trying to back seat mod that if you don't like the thread not to hijack it.

I doubt very much if the FE1 candidates would like me and potentially others asking and talking about basics and undergrad exams, that derails their thread and is unfair to them. As I have indicated if there is no demand for this thread then it will die off naturally. Please don't try and kill it because you don't like it.

Fair enough. Good luck with the thread, I hope it kicks off like the FE1 thread did and everyone can get good pointers and answers to problems they are having with questions. But personally I don't feel it will. Good luck with it anyway and to anyone contributing in future.

I'll keep my nose out of it from here on out regarding giving opinions on the actual thread itself. Might pop in now and again for a look to see what questions people are asking or what people are saying if it takes off alright. But no doubt we will meet again in other threads GCDLawStudent haha.

Procrastastudy

I realise I might be hijacking my own thread here but it's my understanding that the current FE1s are much harder than they have ever been in an effort to stem the numbers of people entering the profession. I could honestly take a stab (not a very good one) at some of the past Inns papers but wouldn't know where to start with the FE1s.

The other issue is if you look at the FE1 thread there is a lot of chat which is just that. I have asked over there but I honestly don't think they want me and my ilk in there discussing when the trinners law ball is on. I could be wrong.

Please do drop in and answer questions. The most efficient way for that to happen may be linking the FE1 answer which will no doubt me more developed. I know I personally wouldn't feel comfortable asking people in the FE1 unless I'd asked if I could ask (if that makes any sense).

Honestly if there is no call for this it'll just die so no bother either way.

jblack

Long time since I was an undergrad, but I'll throw this in for you. If you want to gain a high level of understanding of concurrent duties, assumption of responsibility, negligent misstatement and most importantly, recoverability for economic loss the analyse then decision in Robinson v PE Jones.

It runs nicely through development of recoverability and the rise and fall of Anns, and many other topics that are bankers for FE1s and undergrad exams.

If you study it properly you will probably, and really understand be just as equipped as your lecturers.

Procrastastudy

Possibly and odd and poorly phrased question; but does anyone have any articles / opinions on where the Israeli Supreme Court would be placed in any kind of persuasive authority in the common law countries?

I refer specifically to Nachmani v Nachmani 50(4) P.D. 661 in reference to dispositional contracts relation to embryos.


Any pointers are most welcome as its just a short extract in an Enright Article.

Procrastastudy

Is it fair to say that D v S establishes Lord Atkin's 'Neighbourhood Principle' and that Caparo v Dickman establishes the need for a 'Proximate relationship' or are the two used interchangeably?

Is it fair to say that post Glencar the proximity can be inferred, in a physical injury scenario, by the the proof a plaintiff's damage was reasonably foreseeable? (In Ireland)

Thanks in advance

NoQuarter

D&S and Caparo arent used interchangeably, Caparo is a development on D&S.


Saying that "proximity can be inferred, in a physical injury [ANY] scenario, by the the proof a plaintiff's damage was reasonably foreseeable" is merging the two limbs of the test and is not how the test should be considered.

If your statement was true, it would put an onerous burden on everyone in society by saying that if they see an impending accident, they have a duty to stop an injury, whether they know the person or not. So, they see a loose block of a pavement, they walk on (obviously no proximate relationship to the next paerson walking past) but because they could reasonably foresee damage, the proximate relationship should be inferred? And thus they are liable for the next passer by through an inference. No!

"Floodgates" argument and the third limb of the test - public policy! Ward v. McMaster is the case to go on today for DOC, always come back to that case.

Procrastastudy

Thanks NQ - I was reading though Healy and it's a bit choppy on how its explained.

I'm more wondering about the Terminology used rather than the cases themselves although I think I'm clearer now.

D v S Establishes the Neighbourhood principle AKA Proximity
Anns Restates it
Caparo is the English rejecting Anns as its been interpreted in the onerous way you describes (YHY v AG of Hong Kong)
Ward v McMaster is the court here essentially saying - this Caparo thing is all well and good but it's unfair - Ireland interprets Anns as a simple repetition of D v S
Glencar come along and it needs to be clarified - hence the adoption here

We then get cases like W v Ireland and (That case where the guy leaves his keys in the ignition) etc backing it up.

Is that, in a colloquially put nutshell, about right?

Lockstep

Generally:

Use around 10 cases for each topic. Only some of them will be relevent to the question (due to the question being on a subsection of a larger topic) Give a brief synopsis in the Relevent Case Law section and in the Analysis section reference back to each case to explain how it's relevent. A lot of your learned cases won't be relevent so only bring in the ones that are close to the question asked.

Use academic commentary. Even if you can only reference a couple of authors or academic, it goes a long way.

IRAC (introduction, relevent case law, analysis, conclusion) is key for problem questions, it's also a useful way of anchoring yourself in an essay question although it's not as important as in a problem question.

Read carefully over each question. Lecturers will often add in small asides which often seem throwaway but which can completely change the answer to the question. They'll often seemingly mirror an existing case but subtly change one aspect to change things.
For example, they might change the severity of the crime so it is different to an existing case requiring independent insight.

If you can reference current affairs, newspapers and contemporary legal disputes, it shows you're keeping up to date which is brilliant.

I got a 1.1 with the above so hopefully it helps.

Procrastastudy

Resurrecting this thread as I didn't feel this belonged in the FE1 thread.

When a statutory provision simply codifies as Common Law position are the previous decisions on the matter binding or simply or persuasive authority. Hanly notes they are 'useful in interpreting the statutory provision' but doesn't say if they are binding. The example given is S 18-20 of the NFOAPA 1997.

Is the same true in the Civil Law sphere?

Thanks in advance!

chops018

This is only my opinion but when common law principles are given a statutory footing I think it just reinforces the previous jurisprudence of that principle, and no doubt they should be still excellent resources to the current law. I would say they are not necessarily binding (the cases that it) but I'm sure a judge would still point to such cases in his judgement as approval for his reasoning on interpreting the act etc. As you say they are persuasive more than anything, the new statutory footing it has been given would be the binding instrument for that area now but we certainly should not forget how we got there - the body of case law that developed the area over the years. Just my two cents on it, not 100% sure about the area so someone else can correct me, but I always assumed the legal provisions of an act were binding, and then case law that interprets that act can be referred to by the judge to strengthen his view. So it all is important really.

P.S. No case is ever binding on a judge, that's the beauty of the common law, he can change a rule of law or overturn previous decisions.

NoQuarter

chops018 wrote: »

P.S. No case is ever binding on a judge, that's the beauty of the common law, he can change a rule of law or overturn previous decisions.

He cant overturn a decision of a higher court, unless he distinguishes the case before him from the precedent.

To answer your question, it doesnt matter if the cases are binding or not as the legislation that now exists is the authority for whatever it is you are relying on. To then go on to argue to the court that this and that case also says the same is overkill. As Chops said, the previous cases merely explain the law.

So for s18-20, the staute came in in 97, and so the authority for self defence is now s18-20. BUT, if you want to explain the term "reasonable force" that is mentioned in the Act, you then turn to the previous case law to define it. You dont say self defence is contained in s18-20 AND this case AND that case etc etc, its overkill.

Similar to defamation, the Act came in, and it is now the source of authority, but to define some parts like identification, we turn to the Gogarthy case.

Tom Young

S.18 of the Defamation Act 2009, codifies common law qualified privilege. S.14, meaning jurisprudence, etc.

The_Morrigan

OP I just spotted this thread now as it showed up on the first page - my undergrad exams were well and truly over in May 2012 so your thread was a little late for anyone in other colleges doing law.

Maybe it will be of use for the coming year though - I've always found it great to brainstorm with my classmates as we all seem to take a slightly different angle to every question presented to us, we would always have the main cases from the core texts and the lecture notes, but it was the extra reading, random google hits and flukes on some journals that showed up interesting arguments.

Procrastastudy

The_Morrigan wrote: »

OP I just spotted this thread now as it showed up on the first page - my undergrad exams were well and truly over in May 2012 so your thread was a little late for anyone in other colleges doing law.

Maybe it will be of use for the coming year though - I've always found it great to brainstorm with my classmates as we all seem to take a slightly different angle to every question presented to us, we would always have the main cases from the core texts and the lecture notes, but it was the extra reading, random google hits and flukes on some journals that showed up interesting arguments.

The idea is for this to be a perpetual thread like the FE1 - however there is significant overlap.