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

Arcturus2112

KMPT wrote: »

Can anyone tell me the two topics that came up as essay questions for Criminal in the last sitting, please? Thanks:-)

There was one essay question. It was on Omissions Liability.

RCFE15

Hey, anyone have an idea what to expect in criminal as essay question.. There's so much to learn. Thanks

S12b

RCFE15 wrote: »

Hey, anyone have an idea what to expect in criminal as essay question.. There's so much to learn. Thanks

It could literally be anything.....zero way to predict what topics he will choose for essays.

Dsalmon91

Quick Question, sorry if it sounds stupid...first time sitting the Fe-1's so not quite sure how things work. I am currently using tabs on my company legislation to make it easier for me to find sections on the day of the exam and i was wondering can i write headings on these tabs for example i have a tab sticking out on S150 of the 1963 Act can i write on this tab Restrictions to make it easeir for me to find this section on the day and differentiate it from other tabs or should i just leave the tab blank and not write anything on. Thanks

MissM89

Can anyone tell me a bit about the Pringle v Ireland decision for Constitutional? I may be going mad but I cannot find what chapter it is in in my manual!

maya_bb

Quick question re limitations of actions in tort: does discoverability u s3 SOL 91 only apply to personal injury claims? Or is it generally applicable with the exclusion of property damage cases?

sunshine and showers

Dsalmon91 wrote: »

Quick Question, sorry if it sounds stupid...first time sitting the Fe-1's so not quite sure how things work. I am currently using tabs on my company legislation to make it easier for me to find sections on the day of the exam and i was wondering can i write headings on these tabs for example i have a tab sticking out on S150 of the 1963 Act can i write on this tab Restrictions to make it easeir for me to find this section on the day and differentiate it from other tabs or should i just leave the tab blank and not write anything on. Thanks

No markings. Just blank tabs and highlighting.

dashdoll

Anyone have any thoughts on Criminal?

The last paper was quite straightforward so a bit worried about this one!

S12b

MissM89 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me a bit about the Pringle v Ireland decision for Constitutional? I may be going mad but I cannot find what chapter it is in in my manual!

+1 on this, I'm leaving this topic out but can anyone explain what chapter this comes under? I have all 3 manuals and I don't think any of the manuals actually have the Pringle case. Am I right in saying it's the chapter on "The Nation, the People and the State" with a bit from the chapter on International Law????

Is it also accurate to say it's a discrete topic i.e doesn't creep into other areas, not to a large extent anyway? And typically gets asked as "The Supreme Court's decision in Pringle v Ireland confirmed that the courts traditional view of national sovereignty, as demonstrated in cases like Crotty v Attorney General, is old-fashioned and no longer sustainable in the modern world".

sunshine and showers

Pringle v Ireland is a case on the constitutionality of the EU bailout fund, as it was not approved by referendum a là Crofty v An Taoiseach.

It's a national sovereignty question, namely about the transfer of it. Loads of decent fact summaries on Google.

Independent had it as a supplementary note to their manual from last year. I assume the other colleges did too.

TinkledPink

Does anyone know if there's a difference between inciting someone to commit a crime (Incohate offence) and being an accessory at or before the fact (Complicity)?

maya_bb

What are people's thoughts on the constitutional case note question this time? What came up the last few times?

missindigo123

maya_bb wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on the constitutional case note question this time? What came up the last few times?

To be honest, I would leave it if I were you. There is so much that has To go In to it and there is absolutely no way of guessing what will come up. The PG v HSE might come up (the recent case of the woman's body being used as an incubator for the baby's life), he seems to like John Grace fried Chicken case, McDonald v Bord na gCon, Pringle etc but they aren't always new cases they can be old ones, McGee came up recently too!! There is a list of cases on the Kings Inn syllabus that gets updated frequently, you could check that! I would say if you know the main cases from each chapter you might get lucky in being able to answer the question without and specific study for it!

missindigo123

Can anyone help with tort? I know this is the most basic question ever but if we get a Duty Of Care question - what is the final test we use? I understand if its an essay we go with Donoghue, then how the Uk and Ireland differed and then semi-reunited etc but if it was a problem question what exact test do I use?
Thanks a mill in advance!

maya_bb

missindigo123 wrote: »

To be honest, I would leave it if I were you. There is so much that has Togo I to it and there is absolutely no way of guessing what will come up. The PG v HSE might come up (the recent case of the woman's body being used as an incubator for the baby's life), he seems to like John Grace fried Chicken case, McDonald v Bord na gCon, Pringle etc but they aren't always new cases they can be old ones, McGee came up recently too!! There is a list of cases on the Kings Inn syllabus that gets updated frequently, you could check that! I would say if you know the main cases from each chapter you might get lucky in being able to answer the question without and specific study for it!

Okay good to know. Thank you! Fingers crossed. There just so much to cover!

jenspondolik

missindigo123 wrote: »

Can anyone help with tort? I know this is the most basic question ever but if we get a Duty Of Care question - what is the final test we use? I understand if its an essay we go with Donoghue, then how the Uk and Ireland differed and then semi-reunited etc but if it was a problem question what exact test do I use?
Thanks a mill in advance!

Reasonable foreseeability and proximity but now also just and reasonable and if there is precedent before ie incremental approach then any policy against finding against dofc. there is the policy considerations that will influence proximity and therefore finding duty of care through classifying the conduct of the act ie. third party act or omission or public authority liability. Then there are the policy considerations which influence finding dofc in the nature of the of the damage ie economic loss and nervous shock.

I can't see any new type of damage being in a problem question which will require a discussion of the new just and reasonable criteria just talk about reasonable forseeablility proximity mention the way ct will take incremental approach and apply the policy consideration cases ie curly v manion or whatever it is. I think...

missindigo123

Thank you so much!!!!

missindigo123

jenspondolik wrote: »

Reasonable foreseeability and proximity but now also just and reasonable and if there is precedent before ie incremental approach then any policy against finding against dofc. there is the policy considerations that will influence proximity and therefore finding duty of care through classifying the conduct of the act ie. third party act or omission or public authority liability. Then there are the policy considerations which influence finding dofc in the nature of the of the damage ie economic loss and nervous shock.

I can't see any new type of damage being in a problem question which will require a discussion of the new just and reasonable criteria just talk about reasonable forseeablility proximity mention the way ct will take incremental approach and apply the policy consideration cases ie curly v manion or whatever it is. I think...

Thanks so much!!! Im totally in panic mode now so cant even comprehend the most basic principles! Not a good sign!!

Troels Hartmann

Someone above asked if Q8 on the last Tort paper was on Vicarious Liability - the short answer is yes it was! I had no clue what it was about, despite the fact that VL was one of my "banker" topics (examiner seems to like it) so I was gutted later that night when I realised that it was VL and that I hadn't answered it. I was convinced that I would fail as a result but lo and behold I managed to pass relatively comfortably. The Tort and (especially) Criminal examiners are very fair markers.

On Consitutional - several people have put up lists of topics they've covered in the last week or so and to be honest if you covered all of those topics then you should have enough to cover 5 decent questions. If you don't, then it will have to have been an absolute stinker of a paper.

jenspondolik

missindigo123 wrote: »

Thanks so much!!! Im totally in panic mode now so cant even comprehend the most basic principles! Not a good sign!!

Don't talk to me I've probably done 6 hours over the last three days if even. Only looking at company today since I did it in September and then left it to go into to town because I couldn't face it. I was so motivated for last set and now can't face it

maya_bb

Getting totally confused by tort - in rylands v fletcher is the distinction between natural and non natural use still relevant? I thought following statement in Haneahan v Merck etc that it was just a thing that could do mischief but now not sure. Would really appreciate anyone's input. Working off the independent colleges manual and don't find it that great for Tort.

missindigo123

maya_bb wrote: »

Getting totally confused by tort - in rylands v fletcher is the distinction between natural and non natural use still relevant? I thought following statement in Haneahan v Merck etc that it was just a thing that could do mischief but now not sure. Would really appreciate anyone's input. Working off the independent colleges manual and don't find it that great for Tort.

Using that manual too - useless, in fact its actually confusing!
My understanding of Rylands is that you need to show an accumulation of something on the land, which has escaped, and you have to show that the thing which has escaped was on the land in a non-natural way, this has caused confusion as its not applied consistently by the courts and there is no real guidelines as to what non-natural use is. and Lastly, show damage.(must have been reasonably foreseeable consequence of the escape).

I think the distinction is still relevant, I think Haneahan just supports that you can use Rylands in a personal injury claim whereas previously you couldn't (Hunter V Canary Wharf) and that you don't have to be a land owner to bring a case - can be a tenant.

The application of 'non-natural use' is a little all over the place in the courts and any place where the land is used commercially could indicate a non-natural use. Being capable of mischief I think goes more to support the reasonable foreseeability of damage.

I am horrifically bad at tort but thats my understanding. Could be completely wrong!

maya_bb

missindigo123 wrote: »

Using that manual too - useless, in fact its actually confusing!
My understanding of Rylands is that you need to show an accumulation of something on the land, which has escaped, and you have to show that the thing which has escaped was on the land in a non-natural way, this has caused confusion as its not applied consistently by the courts and there is no real guidelines as to what non-natural use is. and Lastly, show damage.(must have been reasonably foreseeable consequence of the escape).

I think the distinction is still relevant, I think Haneahan just supports that you can use Rylands in a personal injury claim whereas previously you couldn't (Hunter V Canary Wharf) and that you don't have to be a land owner to bring a case - can be a tenant.

The application of 'non-natural use' is a little all over the place in the courts and any place where the land is used commercially could indicate a non-natural use. Being capable of mischief I think goes more to support the reasonable foreseeability of damage.

I am horrifically bad at tort but thats my understanding. Could be completely wrong!

Thank you so much, that's so helpful! Yes the manual is really crap!

j80ezgvc3p92xu

My criminal law study has been conducted entirely from a nutshell and two very outdated textbooks. If I pass this exam there is hope for everyone (:

Also does anyone know is R v Marjoram good law in Ireland? Seems very onerous considering how the Irish judiciary love subjective tests for everything.

missindigo123

Alma Tight Nitty-gritty wrote: »

My criminal law study has been conducted entirely from a nutshell and two very outdated textbooks. If I pass this exam there is hope for everyone (:

Also does anyone know is R v Marjoram good law in Ireland? Seems very onerous considering how the Irish judiciary love subjective tests for everything.

Honestly, you will probably do just fine. With all of the fe1s a little bit of knowledge about everything is much better than in depth knowledge, especially criminal. there can be several issues in a question so you might not need more than a few paragraphs per topic! I did criminal like a year ago so not sure about the case, sounds familiar!

missindigo123

jenspondolik wrote: »

Don't talk to me I've probably done 6 hours over the last three days if even. Only looking at company today since I did it in September and then left it to go into to town because I couldn't face it. I was so motivated for last set and now can't face it

Im the exact same, I sat my first four last April and just completely lost motivation and interest in doing them. I'm doing them now but so undisciplined! Feel like a child having to get my mum to take my phone away just to remove the distractions ha!

FE1 student

Oh FFS . I can't do this anymore been sitting in front of a constitutional law manual for hours . Nothing is happening. I am hopping back between chapters but getting nothing constructive done. These exams will be the death of me. Can't take a break because I have nothing actually done.

genuinely55

Has anyone any idea what came up on the October 2014 sitting of EU or Property?

smeal

Have my criminal notes diluted down to my own handwritten notes.... Still nothing is going in... Hoping that I'll wake up tomorrow with some sort of magical burst of motivation!

Final Criminal study list:

Actus Reus/ Mens Rea
Complicity in Offences
Homicide
Sexual Offences
Non Fatal Offences Against the Person
Property Offences
Defences (Provocation, Duress, Intoxication, Insanity, Lawful use of force, necessity)
Practice Procedure & Bail

Good luck to all 😊

TheCrutzer

For Criminal Law.. can anyone elaborate on subjective and objective Recklessness?