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

southcounty

Passed constitutional...so happy!! Don't know how to be honest as it was a horrendous paper. It just goes to show answering 5 questions is essential!! I really only had 2.5 questions on that paper that I felt confident in answering so I bluffed the rest and got 52. I really believe answering 5 is what got me over the line so I can't emphasise enough how important it is to attemp 5 questions even if you have to bluff! You'll have paid for the exam anyway so why leave early. Sit there and give it your best shot!!!

dandadub

From a non law background how difficult is Company and EU law? Will I need to go to the prep courses or would getting the manuals be more than enough?

dandadub

prettylamp wrote: »

Equity. I would love to get it. Such a waste of a summer if not

Don't worry sure it took me 4 attempts to get Equity

Legal125

dandadub wrote: »

From a non law background how difficult is Company and EU law? Will I need to go to the prep courses or would getting the manuals be more than enough?

Eh both are quite technical and large in terms of the volume of material. No denying it.

But that said. both are very doable though. And are def not the toughest subjects overall. I used the manuals(2nd hand) and supplementedthat with the exam reports as my focus.

While I do have a law degree - I would have studied both subjects 6 years ago so remembered very little for the fe1 process and it was fine.

ellie88

Legal125 wrote: »

Eh both are quite technical and large in terms of the volume of material. No denying it.

But that said. both are very doable though. And are def not the toughest subjects overall. I used the manuals(2nd hand) and supplementedthat with the exam reports as my focus.

While I do have a law degree - I would have studied both subjects 6 years ago so remembered very little for the fe1 process and it was fine.

Irishangler18 wrote: »

Finally got the 8 under my belt! Failed Tort twice and equity once. Got 51 in Tort this time around so im delighted.

Personally I found these exams to be extremely difficult. The only way to pass them is through sheer hardwork and exam technique. It is vital that you attempt 5 questions on the exam paper. Those who tell you they passed answering 2.5/3 questions are filling you up with crap.

It is also important to cover every aspect of the course, especially with subjects like Tort and Criminal where the problem questions usually cover various aspects of the course.

Those who didnt pass keep the head up and make it your business to pass next time. With hard work and belief you WILL get these exams. The overwhelming feeling of joy when you do get them is so worth it.

Best off luck everyone

Hey Guys,

A weird question from me - you know when you login to the results page? There isnt a percentage figure after the numbers.

So, I got a 54 54 55 and a 62, according to the law society results page. They are all passes, right? I know this is probably a stupid question but my Sunday fear is getting to me

Legal125

ellie88 wrote: »

Hey Guys,

A weird question from me - you know when you login to the results page? There isnt a percentage figure after the numbers.

So, I got a 54 54 55 and a 62, according to the law society results page. They are all passes, right? I know this is probably a stupid question but my Sunday fear is getting to me

Yes they are. Hope that relieves the fear.:)

ellie88

Legal125 wrote: »

Yes they are. Hope that relieves the fear.:)

Thank you - I just got an overwhelming panic that all of my celebration this weekend was mistaken

4 more to go now; EU, Constitutional, Property and Company. Any advice on those subjects? I am just about to start studying, course provider is Independent Colleges.

Legal125

ellie88 wrote: »

Thank you - I just got an overwhelming panic that all of my celebration this weekend was mistaken

4 more to go now; EU, Constitutional, Property and Company. Any advice on those subjects? I am just about to start studying, course provider is Independent Colleges.

I know I've rechecked the page multiple times myself as this set were my last four. I really want the letter that will be in the post tomorrow. Then I'll relax.

Property is fine. Read her recent reports though as to what she is looking for (self explanatory).
EU is just huge but I did well jut using a second hand independant manual only (it was the only subject where I didn't add to the manual really)

Constitutional again is just big but is def not a tough marker. I kept up to date with current issues with that one (slightly) he likes if you can draw on multiple areas in ur answer which is easier than it sounds. Just throw everything at him.

I know Company has a scary reputation. But it's fine. I scored 60s and used manual and really focused on his reports. His Qs are repeated in the same format and he repeatedly looks for the same cases (which the manuals sometimes don't have) I went back as far as 2006 and his older reports are more detailed and are very indicative of what he wants. As my answers in exam were all the cases he outlines in the reports.

Hope that helps.

ellie88

Legal125 wrote: »

I know I've rechecked the page multiple times myself as this set were my last four. I really want the letter that will be in the post tomorrow. Then I'll relax.

Property is fine. Read her recent reports though as to what she is looking for (self explanatory).
EU is just huge but I did well jut using a second hand independant manual only (it was the only subject where I didn't add to the manual really)

Constitutional again is just big but is def not a tough marker. I kept up to date with current issues with that one (slightly) he likes if you can draw on multiple areas in ur answer which is easier than it sounds. Just throw everything at him.

I know Company has a scary reputation. But it's fine. I scored 60s and used manual and really focused on his reports. His Qs are repeated in the same format and he repeatedly looks for the same cases (which the manuals sometimes don't have) I went back as far as 2006 and his older reports are more detailed and are very indicative of what he wants. As my answers in exam were all the cases he outlines in the reports.

Hope that helps.

Thank you!!! This is really helpful. I notice that everyone has a different view as to which topics are easy and which are difficult. I haven't really been able to focus on getting ready for the second set until I heard Friday's results. Now reality has hit! I have some notes and the manuals of course, as well as the videos online (I am not based in Dublin so dont attend the classes). A big part of Friday's results for me was seeing whether I had gotten the study formula right; hopefully this means that I have and its just a question of replicating it for the next time around.

Legal125

ellie88 wrote: »

Thank you!!! This is really helpful. I notice that everyone has a different view as to which topics are easy and which are difficult. I haven't really been able to focus on getting ready for the second set until I heard Friday's results. Now reality has hit! I have some notes and the manuals of course, as well as the videos online (I am not based in Dublin so dont attend the classes). A big part of Friday's results for me was seeing whether I had gotten the study formula right; hopefully this means that I have and its just a question of replicating it for the next time around.

I know I remember after I got my first set and I thought id feel great but really the fear just hit me for the second set which was good in a way. U have loads of time from now for march though.
Yeah when it comes to easy and difficult the whole thing is totally subjective as I'm sure u know having done four!
Funny to say this on a sharing thread but Block out the negative noise from other people as much as you can.

It is def a case of replicating what u have just done with ur first set. That's what I did after my first set and it will work for you too. Each of the subjects are very doable if u put the work in. ( I learnt off for 4 weeks solid for both sets. So I can never fathom the people learning off four/five topics the night before)

ellie88

Legal125 wrote: »

I know I remember after I got my first set and I thought id feel great but really the fear just hit me for the second set which was good in a way. U have loads of time from now for march though.
Yeah when it comes to easy and difficult the whole thing is totally subjective as I'm sure u know having done four!
Funny to say this on a sharing thread but Block out the negative noise from other people as much as you can.

It is def a case of replicating what u have just done with ur first set. That's what I did after my first set and it will work for you too. Each of the subjects are very doable if u put the work in. ( I learnt off for 4 weeks solid for both sets. So I can never fathom the people learning off four/five topics the night before)

Ah thanks for the response!!! I think this whole thing (FE-1s, applications, interviews) is so challenging when it comes to negative noise. I try and deliberately not listen to things that I know will *upset* me, but try to balance that with informing myself with the relevant info re: what other people are doing/thinking. I am also really private and dislike how exposed I am as a result of this process. Thats why I love this thread - the anonymity!

I completely agree with you; the last time around I had one month off work before the exams (have a great team at work and havent taken a holiday in nearly 2 years) and it seemed to work really well for me. I also found that thats when the "real" work got done. Im hoping to try and incorporate a little bit of that study style into the pre Christmas/early Jan study period.

Do you mind me asking, did you do 4 and 4, passing each set first time?

Legal125

ellie88 wrote: »

Ah thanks for the response!!! I think this whole thing (FE-1s, applications, interviews) is so challenging when it comes to negative noise. I try and deliberately not listen to things that I know will *upset* me, but try to balance that with informing myself with the relevant info re: what other people are doing/thinking. I am also really private and dislike how exposed I am as a result of this process. Thats why I love this thread - the anonymity!

I completely agree with you; the last time around I had one month off work before the exams (have a great team at work and havent taken a holiday in nearly 2 years) and it seemed to work really well for me. I also found that thats when the "real" work got done. Im hoping to try and incorporate a little bit of that study style into the pre Christmas/early Jan study period.

Do you mind me asking, did you do 4 and 4, passing each set first time?

No hassle at all!Resonates so much. I was doing all the interviews this time last year so Sounds very similar. It's all about balance.

Yeah i did. First Four in march and four in sept there and passed all ..

dandadub

Legal125 wrote: »

Eh both are quite technical and large in terms of the volume of material. No denying it.

But that said. both are very doable though. And are def not the toughest subjects overall. I used the manuals(2nd hand) and supplementedthat with the exam reports as my focus.

While I do have a law degree - I would have studied both subjects 6 years ago so remembered very little for the fe1 process and it was fine.

I'll have to get my hands on an EU and Company law manual soon so. What prep courses would everyone advise for EU and Company?

ellie88

Hi All,

I just got my letter in the post from the Law Society, with my marks, 54 54 55 and 62. I am a bit worried at something it says in the letter "Although you have not passed the examination outright, you may have secured exemptions under these rules". Does that mean that I havent passed all 8? I am trying to get through to the Law Society now but they are being as useful as ever.

Can anyone help?

Legal125

ellie88 wrote: »

Hi All,

I just got my letter in the post from the Law Society, with my marks, 54 54 55 and 62. I am a bit worried at something it says in the letter "Although you have not passed the examination outright, you may have secured exemptions under these rules". Does that mean that I havent passed all 8? I am trying to get through to the Law Society now but they are being as useful as ever.

Can anyone help?

Haha I did same thing with my first set. Completely panicked.To be fair that sentence is horribly worded. It means You are not deemed passed the fe1 outright but u are now most def exempt from those four u just sat. So U can Relax they are behind u!:)

sunshine and showers

Right, ladies and gents, if I sat four in September and, without a massive effort, got 41 (Constitutional), 41 (Equity), 47 (Contract) and 63 (Property), would I be totally insane to sit all eight in March?

Legal125

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Right, ladies and gents, if I sat four in September and, without a massive effort, got 41 (Constitutional), 41 (Equity), 47 (Contract) and 63 (Property), would I be totally insane to sit all eight in March?

It all depends on how familiar u are with the other four. If you are comfortable with the other four? and u know where u went wrong with first four - u could def give it a good go.

It's just the four u sat already are probably a more managing four than the other four u have yet to do but that doesn't mean it's in anyway impossible.

sunshine and showers

Legal125 wrote: »

It all depends on how familiar u are with the other four. If you are comfortable with the other four? and u know where u went wrong with first four - u could def give it a good go.

It's just the four u sat already are probably a more managing four than the other four u have yet to do but that doesn't mean it's in anyway impossible.

I'd be fairly comfortable with them, if a little bit rusty.

Ah feck it, I haven't really got a choice in the matter if I want my TC to go ahead, so eight it is!

Gonna have such fun the next few months. :rolleyes:

ellie88

Legal125 wrote: »

Haha I did same thing with my first set. Completely panicked.To be fair that sentence is horribly worded. It means You are not deemed passed the fe1 outright but u are now most def exempt from those four u just sat. So U can Relax they are behind u!:)

Thank you. God they dont half put you through it, do they! This is an emotional roller coaster of a week.

Legal125

King Ian wrote: »

Also I should say that I'm glad to have been re-admitted to this thread.

On the day of the Equity exam in October, I got a look at the paper afterwards and had the audacity to say that it was a very fair exam and that anyone who had done a decent and broad amount of work in advance of it could certainly aspire to passing it with a bit of luck. For making such a scandalous statement, I was banned from the thread for two weeks. I then wrote to the Moderator, and for doing that I got banned from Boards.ie for a month!

Apparently we're only allowed say that each and every one of these exams is awful, terrible, impossible, head-wrecking, etc etc. Which is just not the case at all. With a decent amount of consistent work, they can be passed – but not always on the first attempt.

No one has a problem with someone commenting that a paper was fair. But u saying a paper was easy (when u are not under stress nor sitting the paper nor will u ever be) when the day before you couldn't even spot what a problem Q was on was just really unnecessary and infuriating. Also u contradict urself.

We all know it's breadth vs depth, but you also told someone they were worrying too much about the detail relating to equity when the Q that the person asked was completely valid and not at all in too much detail.
As someone who has done all 8 first time I think I'm in a better position to say that any Q I have seen asked here over the past nine months pertaining to the exam papers has never been a Q which was concerned with too much depth in a topic area. The Qs asked and what people worry about are what a person needs to know. If you read a couple of exam reports you will see that so maybe climb down from your all knowing position of what the exams require given u have never sat them

Midlecat

No one has any problem with someone voicing their opinion on a forum that's what its for. My concerns lie in the fact that certain people were patronising and condescending towards others during exam time when valid questions were posed. Indeed these questions were posed as a result of looking at past papers and were in no way overly detailed. What I find worrying is that someone who has absolutely no experience in these exams is voicing opinions masquerading them as gospel which are wholely ungrounded in any actual knowledge of doing the exams and then putting others ill at ease. Those who sat the exams and found it easy know who they are and by all means should say so and give tips on technique etc to others. PERSONALLY I would rather if someone who NEVER sat the exam didn't come on here and state how doable it is and how people were panicking too much etc. We all think they are doable outside the exam hall hence the reason we have ventured down this path. I have seen many people come out of the exams saying how glad etc they were and found the paper easy only to have later failed miserably and I wonder if certain posters on this forum would fall into that category if they did not benefit from the good fortune of qualifying before these exams were introduced. Moreover to come back on here voicing grievance when results are out is also questionable to say the least.

chops018

King Ian wrote: »

Apparently we're only allowed say that each and every one of these exams is awful, terrible, impossible, head-wrecking, etc etc. Which is just not the case at all. With a decent amount of consistent work, they can be passed – but not always on the first attempt.

The last time you got banned I didn't agree with it, but we are not allowed to comment or backseat mod, so I left it alone. Plus, I did agree at a stressful time people shouldn't be commenting in a manner on how easy they thought the paper was till after - although we can all be guilty of it.

I've been through all angles of these exams - failing to passing, it took me over a year and a half to get all 8.

I found my best way of study was to go through the topic in the manual, go through some notes I got from a friend on that topic, then read some sample answers. After that's done I would make up a 2-3 page summary of the important cases. We all understand the topic, it's just the case names we forget was my point.

But everyone has their own way of studying. There is no "set in stone" way of studying.

Personally I don't know how anyone sits there for hours compiling notes on a topic from the manual. The manual is short enough, you can read a topic in an hour, go through some sample answers the next hour and spend 15 mins making a quick summary at the end. But obviously there is some people who feel the only way it will stick is if they compile their own notes.

Others mind map things. Again, I couldn't study that way as the map would confuse me and Id hate making it.

Many subjects don't have a pattern - Constitutional for example, I found if I had a decent grasp of all the topics I could do a half decent attempt at 5 questions and it got me the pass. For others like Property (when I was doing it) there was a pattern in what usually came up and how a question was asked, but I heard a couple of sittings later it all was changed up and no one had a clue because they went on studying what usually came up the last 8 sittings. You never know what will be thrown at you on the day or how you will feel. I went into Company before feeling confident that I knew the core topics and had a decent knowledge on the others, and then I left some bits out, then what do you know, lots of niche questions came up on the big topics, and smaller areas were asked, and not only that, but I blanked on the most simple case names.

What I'm saying is it's fair enough to explain your study method and how you feel about the exams. But there is no need to keep posting saying this is the only way to study or this is the only way the exam is marked or this is the only pattern. Many subjects don't have a pattern - Constitutional for example, I found if I had a decent grasp of all the topics I could do a half decent attempt at 5 questions and it got me the pass. For others like Property (when I was doing it) there was a pattern in what usually came up and how a question was asked, but I heard a couple of sittings later it all was changed up and no one had a clue because they went on studying what usually came up the last 8 sittings. You never know what will be thrown at you on the day or how you will feel. I went into Company before feeling confident that I knew the core topics and had a decent knowledge on the others, and then I left some bits out, then what do you know, lots of niche questions came up on the big topics, and smaller areas were asked, and not only that, but I blanked on the most simple case names.

These exams are passable with hard work, and I always said that some people can do 8 topics and get pox lucky on the day but I advised that you should try study at least 90% of the syllabus and attempt 5 questions to give yourself the best chance of a pass. If you study most of the syllabus you will be alright.

My view was that for each topic I wanted to be confident enough that I could explain it to a friend or a relative over lunch. If I was happy with doing that then I would just drum case names into my head for each heading in the topic rather than constantly reading over a topic.

There is LOADS of different approaches to studying. A lot of the time it is trial and error finding what's best for you and getting the material stuck in your head and have a good understanding of it.

On a final note, I don't agree with anyone saying "that exam was very passable if you studied like this or that". It may be true, but as I said above, some people have bad days, others just can't wrap their head around some subjects. Everyone on here when I was doing these exams seemed to hate Constitutional and EU, I did both together and flew through them but I struggled with Tort and Company, both which a lot of people would see as the easier options.

To conclude: there is no set rules for tackling these exams. They are passable yes, there is some subjects that some may find easy yes, but others may not find the same easy even if they studied just as hard. Lots of factors will come into play. They are horrendous exams. Writing 30 pages of answers and then having to go in again the next day to write another 30 the next day really takes it out of you, all while thinking pragmatically and actually answering the question rather than regurgitating material. These exams are a horrible slog. But there is no better feeling than all your study having paid off and you open a paper and see that you could attempt any question on it.

71fe1

Completely off the point, but I really didn't think the equity exam was all that fair.. I've passed it prior and found my paper much more manageable..

Midlecat

King Ian wrote: »

In fiairness, I did a BCL at college, the Kings Inns course, and subsequently qualified at Blackhall. So I've done my fair share of law exams. I don't think the fact that I never did the FE-1s should exclude me from having a view on these things. The same general principles apply across exams of what are effectively the same subjects, across all of these different examining bodies, so it's not as if I'm comparing apples with oranges here.

The vast majority of the Griffith/Independent/City lecturers have never done the FE-1s, and I don't see anyone here saying that their views shouldn't be listened to..........

You are more than entitled to your opinion like all of us however your posts have the tone of someone educating the ignorant masses. The fe1s are notorious as being the hardest exams to do. I have a bcl llm AITI and qfa and these are not like other exams and having all those other exams does not qualify me as an expert in these nor does it equate me with the prep course lecturers. What worries me is that you apparently are trying to help people with your posts but on a number of occasions asserted questions were on one topic when it was another. Additionally stating questions are 'clearly' this or that is simply not helpful. I presume your purpose being on this forum is to help people but you have obviously antagonised people whether intentional or not so I suppose I'm wondering why you feel the need to come back on. You obviously have the exams done so its rather pointless. That's the last from me on this issue as people here do not need the distraction of reading this when a new season is beginning.

Midlecat

Midlecat wrote: »

You are more than entitled to your opinion like all of us however your posts have the tone of someone educating the ignorant masses. The fe1s are notorious as being the hardest exams to do. I have a bcl llm AITI and qfa and these are not like other exams and having all those other exams does not qualify me as an expert in these nor does it equate me with the prep course lecturers. What worries me is that you apparently are trying to help people with your posts but on a number of occasions asserted questions were on one topic when it was another. Additionally stating questions are 'clearly' this or that is simply not helpful. I presume your purpose being on this forum is to help people but you have obviously antagonised people whether intentional or not so I suppose I'm wondering why you feel the need to come back on. You obviously have the exams done so its rather pointless. That's the last from me on this issue as people here do not need the distraction of reading this when a new season is beginning.

Correction I don't mean you have the exams done but rather never had to or will have to do them in the future.

Lawstudent007

On a side point, can anyone tell me which EU manual is the best one to use? Does anyone know from which college the moderator/examiner teach EU?

sunshine and showers

Lawstudent007 wrote: »

On a side point, can anyone tell me which EU manual is the best one to use? Does anyone know from which college the moderator/examiner teach EU?

I like the Independent Colleges ones, though I haven't gotten my hands on their EU one yet. Will have by the end of the week!

The examiner is a barrister called Noel Travers.

vid36

Does anybody think it is worth my while getting Tort rechecked? I got 43% in it and passed equity and contract.(I failed EU too but treated it as a ghost subject)I thought the tort paper was ok and attempted all 5 questions.It was my second attempt to get the first three and I put much more work into tort than my other subjects.I managed to get 47% in the April tort paper with a very poor fifth question so I was very surprised to drop back with a more "straightforward" Autumn paper.

Pat Mustard

Mod:

King Ian, let us be quite clear about this: you are not welcome to post on this thread at any time. If you post on this thread again when the period of your ban expires, all of your posts will be deleted and it is likely that you will be banned permanently.

No replies to King Ian please, as he cannot respond.

chops018, no backseat moderation, please. Please just use the 'Report Post' button.

Now, I would very much appreciate it if people would stay on topic.

sunshine and showers

vid36 wrote: »

Does anybody think it is worth my while getting Tort rechecked? I got 43% in it and passed equity and contract.(I failed EU too but treated it as a ghost subject)I thought the tort paper was ok and attempted all 5 questions.It was my second attempt to get the first three and I put much more work into tort than my other subjects.I managed to get 47% in the April tort paper with a very poor fifth question so I was very surprised to drop back with a more "straightforward" Autumn paper.

If you have the money to appeal it, then I would. Especially if you got fewer marks for a "more straightforward" paper.