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

j80ezgvc3p92xu

Objective recklessness - Caldwell v Metropolitan Police Commissioner - reasonable man standard
Subjective - R v G overruled Caldwell, now England is back to subjective

Ireland - DPP v Murray - subjective recklessness only but in RE Heffron Kearns (I think) objective standard used

Sorry this is very brief but off the top of my head. Im sure someone can do a better synopsis.

sunshine and showers

There's so much in Tort! Does anyone have a final list of topics yet?

missindigo123

sunshine and showers wrote: »

There's so much in Tort! Does anyone have a final list of topics yet?

I just learned an essay off for Res Ispa Loquitor and passing off, then Negligence,
Vicarious Liability,
Employers Liab,
Defamation (I think it came up in the last sitting but don't want to risk it), Trespass to the person
trespass to land,
Occupiers Liability
Sketch knowledge of damages and limitations.

left out defective products, defective premises, professional neg, miscellaneous and fatal

FEar1

genuinely55 wrote: »

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

EU
1. Essay - General Principles OR Right to access documents held by EU institutions
2. Essay - Supremacy in Irish legal system (Constitution, Crotty, Pringle)
3. Essay - Making MS comply with obligations OR preliminary references
4. Problem - Citizenship
5. Problem - FMOG
6. Essay - Discrimination on basis of sex and pay OR international law
7. Problem - Competition and A101 TFEU OR Essay - Commission's leniency policy in A101
8. Case Note Q- Simmenthal, Airtours, Altmark Trans, Microsoft, Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats & ors v Council (2011), Zambrano, Pringle, McDonagh v Ryanair, Google Spain data protection case, Digital Rights Ireland case

PROPERTY
1. Essay - Registration of Land
2. Problem - Succession (formalities/proper provision/revocation)
3. Essay - Landlord and Tenant Law
4. Problem - Adverse Possession
5. Essay - Succession (extrinsic evidence)
6. Problem - Proprietary Estoppel
7. Essay - Contractual Licences
8. Problem - Easements (rights of way and rights to light)

jenspondolik

Will a day be enough to study company? Ihave notes from last time and passed the questions I did I just ran out of time. Leaving company to tomorrow any suggestions or tips what might come up?

Thinking of covering ;

Directors
Restriction (though this has come up a bit lately he might skip)
Minority protection (popular and didn't come up last time)
Share transfer same.
Borrowings (charges as ROT came up Oct)
Dispositions (Oct) or maybe winding up due instead?
Authority

Then a quick run over SLP (Oct) and consequence of inc.

What do people think?

add727

jenspondolik wrote: »

Will a day be enough to study company? Ihave notes from last time and passed the questions I did I just ran out of time. Leaving company to tomorrow any suggestions or tips what might come up?

Thinking of covering ;

Directors
Restriction (though this has come up a bit lately he might skip)
Minority protection (popular and didn't come up last time)
Share transfer same.
Borrowings (charges as ROT came up Oct)
Dispositions (Oct) or maybe winding up due instead?
Authority

Then a quick run over SLP (Oct) and consequence of inc.

What do people think?

Pretty much what I'm doing, but I'm throwing Examinership in there too.

jenspondolik

add727 wrote: »

Pretty much what I'm doing, but I'm throwing Examinership in there too.

Cheers thanks. I didn't cover that last time at all might try get it covered tomorrow looks though it may be due a run.

amyeee

Any sign of Criminal Night Before Notes?

sunshine and showers

The Criminal reports are so detailed. Are we supposed to be able to tell him the exact section of a specific law someone could be charged in he problem questions?!

jenspondolik

sunshine and showers wrote: »

The Criminal reports are so detailed. Are we supposed to be able to tell him the exact section of a specific law someone could be charged in he problem questions?!

That came up the year I did it as a four parter and trust me it was probably the worst exam I sat didn't do all five questions and for that question I did 2 out of th four parts saying what a person could be charged with in a very general way. Looking back now its funny how terrified I was of his reports he's such a decent marker and I wrote nothing like the reports infer you should. I had him for my masters and he marks good. Gave me my first. Constutional on other hand looks like he expects the volume kilcommins writes in his report but then doesn't even throw a few lines on what he actually expects. I've a real gripe considering the questions can be so open ended and you can choose to hone in on the relevant one or give an overview. Half tort half constitutional today and company tomorrow. Good luck with your 8!

genuinely55

FEar1 wrote: »

EU
1. Essay - General Principles OR Right to access documents held by EU institutions
2. Essay - Supremacy in Irish legal system (Constitution, Crotty, Pringle)
3. Essay - Making MS comply with obligations OR preliminary references
4. Problem - Citizenship
5. Problem - FMOG
6. Essay - Discrimination on basis of sex and pay OR international law
7. Problem - Competition and A101 TFEU OR Essay - Commission's leniency policy in A101
8. Case Note Q- Simmenthal, Airtours, Altmark Trans, Microsoft, Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats & ors v Council (2011), Zambrano, Pringle, McDonagh v Ryanair, Google Spain data protection case, Digital Rights Ireland case

PROPERTY
1. Essay - Registration of Land
2. Problem - Succession (formalities/proper provision/revocation)
3. Essay - Landlord and Tenant Law
4. Problem - Adverse Possession
5. Essay - Succession (extrinsic evidence)
6. Problem - Proprietary Estoppel
7. Essay - Contractual Licences
8. Problem - Easements (rights of way and rights to light)

Thanks so much that's great!

I'm so worried about EU. Anyone have any tips from the colleges?

add727

jenspondolik wrote: »

Cheers thanks. I didn't cover that last time at all might try get it covered tomorrow looks though it may be due a run.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. It's a handy enough topic also.

FoxReal

I have a company manual from 2011 which I'm ok with answering past papers with. Will the fact that this is an old manual make a big difference with the exam seeing as a new companies act is coming in in June?

jenspondolik

FoxReal wrote: »

I have a company manual from 2011 which I'm ok with answering past papers with. Will the fact that this is an old manual make a big difference with the exam seeing as a new companies act is coming in in June?

Don't think so syllabus says you can answer of old or new companies acts so I'd imagine not. That's what makes me think ultra vires won't come up again.... Or else questions will be super vague

FoxReal

jenspondolik wrote: »

Don't think so syllabus says you can answer of old or new companies acts so I'd imagine not. That's what makes me think ultra vires won't come up again.... Or else questions will be super vague

Thanks for the quick reply. Best of luck in the exams!

add727

Can anyone help clarify something for me about Corporate Authority in Company please?

I'm a bit confused about the applicability of s8 of the 1963 Act - that assists people dealing with a company in situations where the company didn't actually have the authority to enter the contract in did with that person. I understand that you're deemed to have constructive notice of the company's memo & arts, and so of their capacity to enter into contracts. However, s8 and the Northern Bank v Quinn & Achates case seems to allow that person rely on said contract, regardless of the fact the company couldn't enter it, if they can show they weren't actually aware of the M&As....even though they have a responsibility to read them, and are deemed to have constructive notice of them. Is this right? Surely not!

genuinely55

add727 wrote: »

Can anyone help clarify something for me about Corporate Authority in Company please?

I'm a bit confused about the applicability of s8 of the 1963 Act - that assists people dealing with a company in situations where the company didn't actually have the authority to enter the contract in did with that person. I understand that you're deemed to have constructive notice of the company's memo & arts, and so of their capacity to enter into contracts. However, s8 and the Northern Bank v Quinn & Achates case seems to allow that person rely on said contract, regardless of the fact the company couldn't enter it, if they can show they weren't actually aware of the M&As....even though they have a responsibility to read them, and are deemed to have constructive notice of them. Is this right? Surely not!

This may not be of much help but I'm covering Corporate Authority for the exam and not UV (which is Corporate Capacity). So maybe just make sure you don't mix them up in the exam. Other than that I havent a clue about UV.

jenspondolik

genuinely55 wrote: »

This may not be of much help but I'm covering Corporate Authority for the exam and not UV (which is Corporate Capacity). So maybe just make sure you don't mix them up in the exam. Other than that I havent a clue about UV.

I'm the same but I actually came across an old college problem question which had elements of both mixed in and you kind of had to know both because of rolled steel or something. So it asked about authority and capacity. I hope Courtney will say how has rule in turquand and s 6 of regs impacted doctrine of constructive notice ha ha. I need to disconnect net seriously distracted.

maya_bb

Thought city colleges would have night before notes up now - but nada

Arcturus2112

maya_bb wrote: »

Thought city colleges would have night before notes up now - but nada

Yeah me too. I guess they are really taking the literal approach!

add727

jenspondolik wrote: »

I'm the same but I actually came across an old college problem question which had elements of both mixed in and you kind of had to know both because of rolled steel or something. So it asked about authority and capacity. I hope Courtney will say how has rule in turquand and s 6 of regs impacted doctrine of constructive notice ha ha. I need to disconnect net seriously distracted.

I might just leave out any reference to it, for fear of mixing in UV as I know he hates when people do that. Yes, that Q would be lovely!

Bayley1

smeal wrote: »

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 😊

Had my handwritten notes done, hoped for inspiration this morning but woke up sick nothing going in since. I feel an all nighter coming on

MissM89

Does anyone have any detail on Quinn v IBRC for the separation of powers in Constitutional? I know its relevant for Justiciable Controversies just not sure how!

Also on the Night Before Notes Im pretty sure they are the same every sitting, they are not tailored to predictions or anything like that, they are just general short notes on the whole course, but they are helpful! They can be found here: http://www.citycolleges.ie/wp/uncategorized/fe1-night-before-notes-2/

j80ezgvc3p92xu

Any last minute exam technique tips?

sunshine and showers

Alma Tight Nitty-gritty wrote: »

Any last minute exam technique tips?

READ THE QUESTION. Then read it again.

Remember for problem questions: issue, law, application, conclusion. Do not forget to apply the law to the facts!

If you are told to advise your client, actually advise them at the end.

Highlight every case name you use.

Don't forget to bring legislation you need for an exam to the venue the day before to be checked.

Breathe. It'll be ok.

Troels Hartmann

MissM89 wrote: »

Also on the Night Before Notes Im pretty sure they are the same every sitting, they are not tailored to predictions or anything like that, they are just general short notes on the whole course, but they are helpful! They can be found here:

Some are the same but some (eg Equity and Tort) are tailored to the particular sitting

dashdoll

Can anyone explain something v quickly ?

I dont understand the difference between common design and conspiracy?

Are they essentially the same thing but not?!

Thanks.

chunkylover4

Conspiracy is an inchoate offense where you plan with others to commit a wrong on another but don't necessarily have to go through with it. It doesn't have to be a criminal wrong (R v Parnell and SPUC v Open Door Counseling) but usually is.

Common Design is where one person is tried based on an act committed by another as they went in with a common intention to do wrong (regardless of the extent of the intention to do wrong). For example DPP v Doohan. It is a defense to say the party who ultimately committed the act went beyond the Common Design (R v Anderson and Morris). Withdrawal requires a minimum of informing the other party (R V Bercerra).

dashdoll

Thanks a mil!

TheCrutzer

Would I be mad to leave out Practice,Procedure, Detention and Bail?