FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

CRM1

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Urgh.. I just want to cry ..
Spent the whole day yesterday just learning damages and discharge ! A whole day!! and I can't remember half of the cases today.. Still have all the other topics to go through for contract! So overwhelmed

Guys keep going!! Especially with contract. It might seem that there is very little time left but there is still a good bit!! I know it's easier said than done but don't let your stress eat into what precious time is left. I'm no expert at this I still have three left. But I have passed contract. Twice for good measure as well. Learn the main topics. Don't waste too much time on what you are already familiar with at this stage (eg offer, acceptance, consideration etc.) you know these. The biggest issue with contract is the mixing of topics. So while you may know eg consideration inside out, all very well but if it's mixed it might be only worth half the marks of the question. So my advice would be to cover as much as ye can. Not in depth. Like for damages even if you haven't covered it, it will take 20 mins to bullet point the most important points of that topic. Who knows might be the saving point between 45 & 50. And trust me it's better to be able to say to yourself in the exam 'well I know about 5sentences on that' as opposed to 'I'm screwed'. It can give you a lil boost as opposed to 5 seconds of doom!!!

As for case names/nothing is going in. Firstly stop telling yourselves that. It's a mental block just saying that over and over. As I've said relax and believe ye know a lot more than ye think. Secondly try acronyms for case names or something similar. Yday for company - conflict of interest (directors) I had R.I.M.P. written beside it = regal Hastings, idc v Cooley Macuara v northern assurance, peso silver mines. I find that to work for me because it's way easier for me to remember 4 letters and draft my answer though the points in the case law. Whatever works. If you feel a method isn't working, try a new one, don't give up, you have come too far to drop the ball now.

These exams are really difficult mentally and physically. I'm finding it impossible to sit down today and do anything. Pity there wasn't an FE 1 in procrastination. Keep ploughing through guys, it will be a difficult few days but I can promise you the feeling on the day that you open those results is the best feeling ever and makes it all worth it. Think of that feeling to keep going.

5mcdonag

hullaballoo wrote: »

Please don't do that. You know what the other user was asking for. You are also incorrect - there are a few other elements required to create a contract.

In any event, people are mid-exams and I'd imagine pretty stressed. It would be best to keep smartarsery to a minimum at the moment, non?

I beg your pardon but that was an honest answer. If it seemed smart arse it was not meant and, if you know what hidden message was in the question and how exactly there's more to a contract than what I listed it would be helpful if you shared it rather than unfairly read hidden meaning in my answer. I am mid exams and am also highly stressed so can perfectly understand that.

Daryl Strawberry

Is it too late to get a copy of the Succession Act? Where do you get them from?

Bertie1986

5mcdonag wrote: »

I beg your pardon but that was an honest answer. If it seemed smart arse it was not meant and, if you know what hidden message was in the question and how exactly there's more to a contract than what I listed it would be helpful if you shared it rather than unfairly read hidden meaning in my answer. I am mid exams and am also highly stressed so can perfectly understand that.

Offer, acceptance and consideration are likely to all appear in the same question, so there is a lot more to it. I reckon you should look at a few other topics (just trying to be helpful).

Bertie1986

Bertie1986 wrote: »

Offer, acceptance and consideration are likely to all appear in the same question, so there is a lot more to it. I reckon you should look at a few other topics (just trying to be helpful).

Sorry, sorry - I thought you meant to Contract (as a subject) not the formation of a contract....

LawCQ91

CRM1 wrote: »

Guys keep going!! Especially with contract. It might seem that there is very little time left but there is still a good bit!! I know it's easier said than done but don't let your stress eat into what precious time is left. I'm no expert at this I still have three left. But I have passed contract. Twice for good measure as well. Learn the main topics. Don't waste too much time on what you are already familiar with at this stage (eg offer, acceptance, consideration etc.) you know these. The biggest issue with contract is the mixing of topics. So while you may know eg consideration inside out, all very well but if it's mixed it might be only worth half the marks of the question. So my advice would be to cover as much as ye can. Not in depth. Like for damages even if you haven't covered it, it will take 20 mins to bullet point the most important points of that topic. Who knows might be the saving point between 45 & 50. And trust me it's better to be able to say to yourself in the exam 'well I know about 5sentences on that' as opposed to 'I'm screwed'. It can give you a lil boost as opposed to 5 seconds of doom!!!

As for case names/nothing is going in. Firstly stop telling yourselves that. It's a mental block just saying that over and over. As I've said relax and believe ye know a lot more than ye think. Secondly try acronyms for case names or something similar. Yday for company - conflict of interest (directors) I had R.I.M.P. written beside it = regal Hastings, idc v Cooley Macuara v northern assurance, peso silver mines. I find that to work for me because it's way easier for me to remember 4 letters and draft my answer though the points in the case law. Whatever works. If you feel a method isn't working, try a new one, don't give up, you have come too far to drop the ball now.

These exams are really difficult mentally and physically. I'm finding it impossible to sit down today and do anything. Pity there wasn't an FE 1 in procrastination. Keep ploughing through guys, it will be a difficult few days but I can promise you the feeling on the day that you open those results is the best feeling ever and makes it all worth it. Think of that feeling to keep going.

Thank you so much ! That's very helpful, suppose I can only just try my best at this stage, you are right, it's prob better to know little bit about a lot of topics at this stage than trying to know a few ones in detail which might only be 1/2, 1/3 of a question..

5mcdonag

Bertie1986 wrote: »

Sorry, sorry - I thought you meant to Contract (as a subject) not the formation of a contract....

It's ok! Somebody asked earlier what is the bare minimum for a contract. I answered offer acceptance and consideration and was told not to be a smart arse! Somebody else since answered with the topics they were covering for the contract paper so I get now why it looked like I was being a smart arse! I guess in study-mode I misunderstood the question and got slated for it! Will try not to answer questions in the future!

Midlecat

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Is it too late to get a copy of the Succession Act? Where do you get them from?

Not too late at all. Try some college bookstore if near you or easons or such

hullaballoo

5mcdonag wrote: »

I beg your pardon but that was an honest answer. If it seemed smart arse it was not meant and, if you know what hidden message was in the question and how exactly there's more to a contract than what I listed it would be helpful if you shared it rather than unfairly read hidden meaning in my answer. I am mid exams and am also highly stressed so can perfectly understand that.

The question asked was not what's required to form a contract it was "What is the bare minimum needed for contract?!" The other person is asking what is the minimum that must be studied for the contract exam, not what are the minimum requirements for the formation of a valid contract.

As I said above, offer, acceptance and consideration are not enough to form a valid contract. However, it is for you people to decipher what other elements are required. Happily for me, I sat my last contract exam in 2004.

Daryl Strawberry

Midlecat wrote: »

Not too late at all. Try some college bookstore if near you or easons or such

Great thanks I was thinking it had to be ordered from some publications office or other!

5mcdonag

hullaballoo wrote: »

The question asked was not what's required to form a contract it was "What is the bare minimum needed for contract?!" The other person is asking what is the minimum that must be studied for the contract exam, not what are the minimum requirements for the formation of a valid contract.

As I said above, offer, acceptance and consideration are not enough to form a valid contract. However, it is for you people to decipher what other elements are required. Happily for me, I sat my last contract exam in 2004.

I figured that out now alright from another person's answer. But it is better to assume someone is trying to be helpful rather than what you did. Innocent until proven guilty and all that!
I disagree as to what's required for the formation of a contract. Those are the basic elements and although there are plenty of reasons why a particular contract may need other things, that is all that's required for a basic contract.
What a condescending response you give for "you people to figure out!" And I'm the smart arse!

Bayley1

Totally stressing spent most of my time up to now only other subjects. Didn't do any property last night as I was wrecked after company.
Total cram session today

LawCQ91

Can anyone tell me very simply,
What is the relationship between consideration and estoppel? Why is estoppel an exception to consideration?
I can't get my head around this, I am leaving out estoppel as a topic and I just read over it really quickly to know what it is , just incase ... but I can't understand the connection between it and consideration? Thanks in advance !

Midlecat

Daryl Strawberry wrote: »

Great thanks I was thinking it had to be ordered from some publications office or other!

I bought mine in UCC bookshop go six euro.

saor19

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me very simply,
What is the relationship between consideration and estoppel? Why is estoppel an exception to consideration?
I can't get my head around this, I am leaving out estoppel as a topic and I just read over it really quickly to know what it is , just incase ... but I can't understand the connection between it and consideration? Thanks in advance !

Ok this is directly from my manual so if you have the same one, sorry if it doesn't help!

Consideration is a creature of the common law, estoppel is one of equity. the presence or absence of consideration is the method by which the enforceability of agreements may be assessed. Estoppel threatens to undermine that certainty. It could be argued that under estoppel, one is enforcing a promise unsupported by consideration so the relationship is fraught and estoppel has strict conditions so as to not completely overthrow consideration.

Midlecat

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me very simply,
What is the relationship between consideration and estoppel? Why is estoppel an exception to consideration?
I can't get my head around this, I am leaving out estoppel as a topic and I just read over it really quickly to know what it is , just incase ... but I can't understand the connection between it and consideration? Thanks in advance !

Consideration is the method to which you assess enforceability of a promise let's say. Estoppel can undermine consideration as you may enforce promise without consideration. So which takes precedence? Consideration still does according to high trees case so estoppel only recognised in certain circumstances. Estoppel is a shield not a sword so not a cause of action but consideration as part of a contract can be used as a right of action. Consideration is strict like common law eg once it has a tangible value its irrelevant if the value is minimal as the law will not concern itself with fairness or adequacy of the bargain made. Estoppel is a creature of equity and conflicts with doctrine of considerations certainty traits. So consideration remains dominant and estoppel is only limited to specific circumstances where in its necessary to intervene to correct an injustice. As regards the sufficiency of consideration agreeing to do what one is obliged to do already is not good consideration BUT decision below casts doubt over all this.

In William Bros v roffey the defendants promised to pay extra money to the plaintiff to finish works the platiff was already obliged to finish and thus the plaintiffs had provided no new consideration. Yet they could use the promise as a right of action to have the contract enforced. So difficult to square this decision with the strict theory of consideration. Its a practical flexible approach to consideration.

Dunno if that is simple explanation but it serves to show the interelation of the two

dashdoll

Long night ahead too tonight for Property......will try get 3 hours sleep hopefully but will be resembling a homeless person again at the exam tomorrow!

sunshine and showers

Anyone else wavering between "this is not happening", "I can learn every law ever in a few hours" and "don't even speak to me or I'll cry"?

I'm losing it.

dashdoll

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Anyone else wavering between "this is not happening", "I can learn every law ever in a few hours" and "don't even speak to me or I'll cry"?

I'm losing it.

Yes.....all of the above.

Midlecat

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Anyone else wavering between "this is not happening", "I can learn every law ever in a few hours" and "don't even speak to me or I'll cry"?

I'm losing it.

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

kel.lynch

Midlecat wrote: »

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

At least he has gone to get you more!! The amount of "snack breaks" I'm taking...wouldn't be surprised if these exams make me put on weight!!!

hullaballoo

Midlecat wrote: »

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

In fairness, that's out of order from your boyfriend!

Mileyt

Midlecat wrote: »

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

Hahaha that made me lol freddo bars....my saviour is firelogs sitting by fire is relaxing and helping study

Midlecat

Mileyt wrote: »

Hahaha that made me lol freddo bars....my saviour is firelogs sitting by fire is relaxing and helping study

I'd fall asleep in saying that It wouldn't make a difference. I feel like just lumping it now and doing the five in march but maybe when I get my tea and freddo I'll be OK again. He better not get the caramel ones.

Bertie1986

Midlecat wrote: »

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

I actually can't stop laughing at the above!! I hope we look back at this week and laugh (in time). For now it is HORRENDOUS!

My boyfriend mysteriously happens to have "something on" the night before all of my exams. . . Must be a sign that I am a nightmare to be around at the moment!!!

laurenburne

hahaha... the freddo bars cracked me up... my boyfriend is a full time musician and really doesnt get how much study you have to do for these, cant stand to be around him when Im studying... I'll study for a half an hour and he'l be in my face saying "I think you've enough for tonight have you not?? lets take a break....ehhh NOOOOOOO

LawCQ91

Thanks saor19 and midlecat for the reply I think I better of just leaving estoppel out at this stage and hope it doesn't come up with consideration :I

sunshine and showers

Best description of estoppel I ever got was from my contract lecturer in first year: It's like a patronus in Harry Potter - a shield, not a sword!

LawCQ91

Midlecat wrote: »

Lol my boyfriend isnt speaking to me as he said I'm being irrational. I'm only starting into contract read it last march as ghost but never did it. On consideration so a long way to go. Anyways went down for tea and he'd eaten all the freddos so I lost the plot and started nearly crying saying he knew I bought Freddos to have when studying and now I'm going to fail. So ni w he's driven into town to buy more Lol.

Hahaha mine stayed a way this week .. I think he is a wise man I am impossible these days ! Bipolar Central here

Legal125

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Best description of estoppel I ever got was from my contract lecturer in first year: It's like a patronus in Harry Potter - a shield, not a sword!

Promissory. Shield.

Prop can be a cause of action