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

Legal125

JCx wrote: »

Equity is meant to be one of the easier exams???? Why am I so overwhelmed then? Nothing's going right!

Easier in terms of the Qs only as in they repeat themselves - but I def felt that too. It's overwhelming in content. But it can so be done!!

JCx

Legal125 wrote: »

Easier in terms of the Qs only as in they repeat themselves - but I def felt that too. It's overwhelming in content. But it can so be done!!

I just have to flip the mentality back! I've spent the last two days wondering if this is really what I want to do. It's not a great rite of passage and its hard to see out the other side of qualification at times I think.

Mileyt

I feel the same Jx especially when this only half the battle, then it's getting a corporate traineeship or paying 16,000 Euro yourself if in small firm

Anybody out there doing eu law tomorrow???? If so, what you covering

saor19

Mileyt wrote: »

I feel the same Jx especially when this only half the battle, then it's getting a corporate traineeship or paying 16,000 Euro yourself if in small firm

Anybody out there doing eu law tomorrow???? If so, what you covering

Hi Mileyt, I noticed you've asked about topics for EU a few times and nobody has answered. I got it last time round but if I was you I'd be looking at the free movements (especially goods) as none came up in April. Equality and transparency haven't come up in a while either. The exam isn't predictable however and the best tip I could give you is know a little about a lot! The examiner seems to be a kind marker, 73% of people passed in April and 85% passed in March! Don't freak out at his long winded problem questions and don't waffle. Anyway I know I'm not up to date like people sitting this time but hope that helps a bit. Best of luck!

dashdoll

JCx wrote: »

I just have to flip the mentality back! I've spent the last two days wondering if this is really what I want to do. It's not a great rite of passage and its hard to see out the other side of qualification at times I think.

Same....dont know if I can put myself through this mental torture for a few years.

Thought of resitting first set again is unbearable and havent even worried about the traineeship aspect yet.

dashdoll

Hi guys,

Good luck to everyone sitting EU tomorrow.

Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on Equity.

Im thinking of covering the following but not sure if its enough:

Specific Performance
Rectification
Undue Influence
Estoppel
3 certainties
Strong v Bird
Purpose Trusts
Trusteeship
Tracing

With regards to injunctions I know a question is virtually guaranteed but its such a vast area so I dont think its really worth spending all the time it would take to cover it all for one qs so thinking of just covering Mareva and Departure from Campus Oil principles as it hasnt come up in a few years.

Any thoughts on this? Dont want to cut it too fine!

sunshine and showers

Midlecat wrote: »

Am I right in thinking last papers in constitutional have had nothing on protection of life in pregnancy bill/act or anything re savita case?

Similarly nothing re Marie fleming?

My manual has nothing re Pringle, McGowan, fried chicken cases so I'm afraid its too outdated. Anyone passed before on just manual?

I've a note from independent on the Pringle decision, so would say it's one to know!

They also tipped abortion as a possible question.

MJW5

Did they mention if expression, privacy, family or equality definitely need to be covered?

sunshine and showers

MJW5 wrote: »

Did they mention if expression, privacy, family or equality definitely need to be covered?

Definitely equality and recognising it as an issue in questions!

Will list most important topics according to Independent:

Institutions of state - Oireachtas, Courts
Principles of Judicial Review
Findings of Unconstitutionality
Separation of Powers
Due course of law and due process
Fundamental rights and JR (like Sinnott v Minister for Education, Tuhoy v Courtney)
Personal rights - privacy, right to life (Fleming)
Equality
Property right,
Abortion and the unborn
Inviolability of the dwelling
Freedom of speech
Religious freedom
Family and education

So...not much to leave out really!

MJW5

Also - Does anyone have a very short case note for Pringle? I don't have it in my manual.. thanks!

saor19

sunshine and showers wrote: »

I've a note from independent on the Pringle decision, so would say it's one to know!

They also tipped abortion as a possible question.

Thanks for sharing those tips! Would you mind telling me what topic pringle is under? I think my brain is melting!

Mileyt

Hi all, could anyone tell me is it frowned upon tojust turn up for exam but not sit it obviously writing something if I know aanything. I think people refer to it as ghost exam do law society penalise you for it. I actually couldn't answer anything on today's paper due to unforeseen circumstance so just going to turn up sign and leave

Midlecat

Mileyt wrote: »

Hi all, could anyone tell me is it frowned upon tojust turn up for exam but not sit it obviously writing something if I know aanything. I think people refer to it as ghost exam do law society penalise you for it. I actually couldn't answer anything on today's paper due to unforeseen circumstance so just going to turn up sign and leave

I don't know if its frowned upon but I sat contract and got 0% last time and there have been no implications to date. You paid for it you should be able to.

Bertie1986

dashdoll wrote: »

Hi guys,

Good luck to everyone sitting EU tomorrow.

Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on Equity.

Im thinking of covering the following but not sure if its enough:

Specific Performance
Rectification
Undue Influence
Estoppel
3 certainties
Strong v Bird
Purpose Trusts
Trusteeship
Tracing

With regards to injunctions I know a question is virtually guaranteed but its such a vast area so I dont think its really worth spending all the time it would take to cover it all for one qs so thinking of just covering Mareva and Departure from Campus Oil principles as it hasnt come up in a few years.

Any thoughts on this? Dont want to cut it too fine!

I'm not an expert by any means, but if you're cutting injunctions it might be worth looking at the 11 "topics for careful revision" from City Colleges.

They don't mention rectification or estoppel, so it might be worth swopping those two for resulting and constructive trusts? Even if you don't you're covering quite a bit above and will probably be fine.

I know grind schools don't always get it right so just a thought.

INJUNCTIONS:

Does anyone know what came up in the last sitting/ what may be likely in this sitting? Mareva??

dashdoll

Bertie1986 wrote: »

I'm not an expert by any means, but if you're cutting injunctions it might be worth looking at the 11 "topics for careful revision" from City Colleges.

They don't mention rectification or estoppel, so it might be worth swopping those two for resulting and constructive trusts? Even if you don't you're covering quite a bit above and will probably be fine.

I know grind schools don't always get it right so just a thought.

INJUNCTIONS:

Does anyone know what came up in the last sitting/ what may be likely in this sitting? Mareva??

Thanks for that.

I did a revision course with Independent and the only topics they really tipped for the exam were Donatia Mortis Causa and possibly an essay on situations were the cts will depart from the Campus Oil principles!

Who knows!

Bertie1986

dashdoll wrote: »

Thanks for that.

I did a revision course with Independent and the only topics they really tipped for the exam were Donatia Mortis Causa and possibly an essay on situations were the cts will depart from the Campus Oil principles!

Who knows!

Cheers for that. I hate injunctions but might do half of it (Campus Oil and Mareva) and hope to get lucky!

The only "tips" I've heard so far are constructive trusts - liability of strangers as it's well overdue a run and trusteeship as a full question as it only came up as a note last time.

Hope that helps, but as you said who knows!

Right, I better get the head down. Haven't looked at my equity notes in about three weeks!! Fear.com

Midlecat

I am shocked at the so called exam reports for constitutional when you look at how comprehensive some of them are. They provide no guidance whatsoever

sunshine and showers

saor19 wrote: »

Thanks for sharing those tips! Would you mind telling me what topic pringle is under? I think my brain is melting!

National sovereignty and findings of unconstitutionality, I should think. It was in a similar vein to Crotty, in asking if a referendum was needed for the European Bailout Fund and related ESM Treaty.

Two case notes:

http://humanrights.ie/international-lawinternational-human-rights/pringle-v-ireland/

http://www.bloomsburyprofessionalonline.com/applib/newsitem/216/case-summary-pringle-v-government-of-ireland-and-others-

Midlecat

sunshine and showers wrote: »

National sovereignty and findings of unconstitutionality, I should think. It was in a similar vein to Crotty, in asking if a referendum was needed for the European Bailout Fund and related ESM Treaty.

Two case notes:

http://humanrights.ie/international-lawinternational-human-rights/pringle-v-ireland/

http://www.bloomsburyprofessionalonline.com/applib/newsitem/216/case-summary-pringle-v-government-of-ireland-and-others-

Also relevant re separation of powers the executive powers. SCT affirmed decision to refuse challenge to esm on grounds that the government had not abdicated its power as the executive organ of the state. So kond of contradicts crotty I think..

sunshine and showers

Midlecat wrote: »

Also relevant re separation of powers the executive powers. SCT affirmed decision to refuse challenge to esm on grounds that the government had not abdicated its power as the executive organ of the state. So kond of contradicts crotty I think..

I don't think it contradicts Crotty. I think the difference is that Crotty concerned a treaty that involved giving up a degree of sovereignty, but Pringle didn't.

Midlecat

sunshine and showers wrote: »

I don't think it contradicts Crotty. I think the difference is that Crotty concerned a treaty that involved giving up a degree of sovereignty, but Pringle didn't.

Yes great thanks. I should have said crotty reinterpreted in the advent of Pringle regarding review of the executive power in 29.4.1

saor19

Thanks guys! Just write all that in the exam and you are sorted! ;-)

Midlecat

Hey guys. Is it possible to not sit an exam which you are registered for? There is no issue with not signing in - just forfeiting the fee? The exam rules are silent. I want to know if it will affect me doing the remaining ones. I know you have to sign in for first four but what if you've passed first set...

kel.lynch

Any thoughts on EU today??

OJ4

hey guys im studying injunctions atm and jst wondering should i leave out thw stuff on perpetual....does it ever come up...theres like 2.5 pages on it in the griffith manual thanks

Legal125

OJ4 wrote: »

hey guys im studying injunctions atm and jst wondering should i leave out thw stuff on perpetual....does it ever come up...theres like 2.5 pages on it in the griffith manual thanks

If you are advising on inty or QT in prob Q.You should then go on and advise of looking for perp inj if my memory serves me.

Legal125

Midlecat wrote: »

Hey guys. Is it possible to not sit an exam which you are registered for? There is no issue with not signing in - just forfeiting the fee? The exam rules are silent. I want to know if it will affect me doing the remaining ones. I know you have to sign in for first four but what if you've passed first set...

I don't think there is. And if u got a doctors cert u could poss recoup the fee.
But I'm not 100%.

Midlecat

Legal125 wrote: »

I don't think there is. And if u got a doctors cert u could poss recoup the fee.
But I'm not 100%.

Thanks Im not too bothered with the fee. Was nuts to think I could do Constitutional in two days from scratch-just don't want to travel up to sign in.

I might email law socs to be sure.

JCx

Has anyone any thoughts on Donatio Mortis Causa? It came up as a problem q in spring 2012 and spring 2013 only...

kel.lynch

Midlecat wrote: »

Thanks Im not too bothered with the fee. Was nuts to think I could do Constitutional in two days from scratch-just don't want to travel up to sign in.

I might email law socs to be sure.

Maybe try calling the law society - you might get an answer quicker??? They're really helpful with things like that!!