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

Arcturus2112

sunshine and showers wrote: »

the guy beside me in Constitutional filled a booklet and had to get another one. I counted the pages, there are over 40 if you write on the front and back. What did he write?!?

Oh, that might have been me I was sitting in the front row. And, yeah, as dashdoll said, I was writing on one side of the page.

missindigo123

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Oh I'm not worried about that, I'm more concerned about the state of his hand!

My hand cripples after writing the date at the start of te book

missindigo123

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Lesson of this sitting: tips suck.

So true. The company, tort and constitutional papers had so many outliners I though

Arcturus2112

I do hand stretches beforehand. It helps!

MissM89

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

I do hand stretches beforehand. It helps!

Just out of interest - what did you think of the Constitutional paper?!

jenspondolik

sunshine and showers wrote: »

the guy beside me in Constitutional filled a booklet and had to get another one. I counted the pages, there are over 40 if you write on the front and back. What did he write?!?

Ha you might have been on the other side of me one guy also had to get another booklet and he was writing front and back book i look over and he was skipping lines between each sentence very odd.

jenspondolik

guys im starting EU from scratch this evening still cant face into in after yesterday. what should i focus on? any tips? Would i be better leaving competition given the size and just take it as a given it will come up. that would mean i have 6 excl case notes.

im stuck for time.

Paz-CCFC

jenspondolik wrote: »

Ha you might have been on the other side of me one guy also had to get another booklet and he was writing front and back book i look over and he was skipping lines between each sentence very odd.

Front row, red hoodie, by any chance?

I have atrocious handwriting, sometimes illegible even to me. Best tip I ever got re exams is to skip a line. Makes it much much easier for the examiner to read. Much handier for me to look back over, as well, and insert little bits without turning my script it a messy block of ink.

Thankfully the FE-1 scripts have plenty of pages. In university, we'd be given tiny booklets without about 8 pages (so, 4 for me, skipping lines). I'd be left with a load of booklets at the end, trying to put them in order!

jenspondolik

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Front row, red hoodie, by any chance?

I have atrocious handwriting, sometimes illegible even to me. Best tip I ever got re exams is to skip a line. Makes it much much easier for the examiner to read. Much handier for me to look back over, as well, and insert little bits without turning my script it a messy block of ink.

Thankfully the FE-1 scripts have plenty of pages. In university, we'd be given tiny booklets without about 8 pages (so, 4 for me, skipping lines). I'd be left with a load of booklets at the end, trying to put them in order!

ha yea. thats a good tip

amyeee

What are people planning on learning for contract?

Arcturus2112

MissM89 wrote: »

Just out of interest - what did you think of the Constitutional paper?!

Not at all easy. I immediately had to write-off questions 2 and 8. I had covered a lot yet wasn't in a position to answer them. I was highly surprised to see absolutely nothing on equality, property rights, family rights or abortion/rights of unborn.

I did the first essay question on McCrystal (that was fairly ok), then the problem question on medical professionals advertising (that was tricky in that its had at least several strands to it), then I did the 38.1 media publicity question which was more limited in terms of what was looking for (which was welcome), then the essay question on the Constitution vis-a-vis Catholic influence and secularism was grand, and lastly the case-note on Damache and the Buckley v AG.

I answered five questions but I have no idea if it will amount to a pass. I think so much depends on the examiner.. It's impossible to know.

lawbear

jenspondolik wrote: »

guys im starting EU from scratch this evening still cant face into in after yesterday. what should i focus on? any tips? Would i be better leaving competition given the size and just take it as a given it will come up. that would mean i have 6 excl case notes.

im stuck for time.

I will be starting eu basically from scratch too right after contract…Im studying for equity now…this week will be HELL. For eu Im just basically doing exam papers and just gona give it a shot.

I would love to hear from anyone who past constitutional before, what the examiner is like as a marker?

Anyone ever pass from four questions before?

I have three passed already, doing the remaining 5 so hopefully I can't start my training contract and blackball in sep.

lawbear

Anyone hear that phone alarm go off the other day ha

missindigo123

MissM89 wrote: »

Just out of interest - what did you think of the Constitutional paper?!

I hated it!

missindigo123

Any tips for equity! Overwhelmed.com ! Do express trusts come up often ?!

MissM89

missindigo123 wrote: »

I hated it!

I really didnt like it either - I know there was the Article 38 question and the essay on unenumerated rights, but other than that there was very little of the rights based questions, i.e. family, education, good name, equality etc. I thought the question on parliamentary privilege, the religious one and that problem question which could really have been a number of things were unfair, and designed to catch people out. I hear this guy is a hard marker so I am just really disappointed to think that I studied more for Constitutional than any other subject and literally about 80% of what I studied was irrelevant for the exam!

missindigo123

MissM89 wrote: »

I really didnt like it either - I know there was the Article 38 question and the essay on unenumerated rights, but other than that there was very little of the rights based questions, i.e. family, education, good name, equality etc. I thought the question on parliamentary privilege, the religious one and that problem question which could really have been a number of things were unfair, and designed to catch people out. I hear this guy is a hard marker so I am just really disappointed to think that I studied more for Constitutional than any other subject and literally about 80% of what I studied was irrelevant for the exam!

I am the exact same, I studied really hard for constitutional, u honestly thought it would be my best paper, I do a revision course and never had any issues with work handed up etc but this paper really wasn't great.

I had a question enough to kinda answer the paper. I mean the church and state question, that reminded me of something from leaving cert history. In his papers he always says that students need to keep up with legal developments and yet when we do by taking an interest in what's happening in te news etc he moans and says that students shouldn't try predict the exam. I mean when will a client ever say, us the constitution influenced by the church?! I took a stab at that question but could have answered that without study and by kinda guessing

LawCQ91

Those exams are not good for my mental health!!
I took last night off after cons and find it hard to get back to study today... still so much to do for the next subject

I know there is no point to think about the exam yesterday. But as missM89 said above, I too had studied for more than 80 % of the cons course (with great difficulties and many tears in between because I just don't like the subject.. )

I struggled with the paper, Had four questions, and I was only 'happy' with two of four I did, the other two was fairly averag and a pathetic attempt of a 5th Q which hopefully get me 2-3% to get me over the line! I just pray I had done enough.. It's just a bad feeling that you know you have worked so hard for something and still might not get it!

I really admire people who are mentally stable and calm throughout this whole thing, may be i am just weak ha! I am usually very good at handling stress, and I am usually a happy positive person, must admit those exams so emotionally and physically draining! I am so sick of studying

missindigo123

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Those exams are not good for my mental health!!
I took last night off after cons and find it hard to get back to study today... still so much to do for the next subject

I know there is no point to think about the exam yesterday. But as missM89 said above, I too had studied for more than 80 % of the cons course (with great difficulties and many tears in between because I just don't like the subject.. )

I struggled with the paper, Had four questions, and I was only 'happy' with two of four I did, the other two was fairly averag and a pathetic attempt of a 5th Q which hopefully get me 2-3% to get me over the line! I just pray I had done enough.. It's just a bad feeling that you know you have worked so hard for something and still might not get it!

I really admire people who are mentally stable and calm throughout this whole thing, may be i am just weak ha! I am usually very good at handling stress, and I am usually a happy positive person, must admit those exams so emotionally and physically draining! I am so sick of studying

You absolutely aren't weak. I don't think people who don't do fe1s really get it, these are soul destroying. You can work really hard for 6 months and still fail or cram for a weekend and pass... There is no consistency. When I did my first 4, I honestly cried so much. I cried if I spent five mins too much in the shower or if I was on facebook! Oh the guilt! And the cabin fever and lack of fun and human contact with non fe1 people all add up. I'm so much calmer now for these two , I felt more confident doing them until yesterday. I also can't understand why the law society recommend courses to people then every examiner continues to penalise students for giving grind school answers. If they don't want us to go then don't suggest it. Also, the kings inn syllabus sets out what cases are required too. That would be a great help especially when working from a manual. It would also help if they would let us see our papers or issue general guidance so that we can understand exactly what they want. I thought the exams were supposed to prepare students for practise yet they continue to put things on the paper that will never ever be asked by a client. I'm sure if we were counsel in constitutional and started ranting about the church and state we would be considered deranged !!!!!
Rant over! Deep breaths!

jenspondolik

missindigo123 wrote: »

You absolutely aren't weak. I don't think people who don't do fe1s really get it, these are soul destroying. You can work really hard for 6 months and still fail or cram for a weekend and pass... There is no consistency. When I did my first 4, I honestly cried so much. I cried if I spent five mins too much in the shower or if I was on facebook! Oh the guilt! And the cabin fever and lack of fun and human contact with non fe1 people all add up. I'm so much calmer now for these two , I felt more confident doing them until yesterday. I also can't understand why the law society recommend courses to people then every examiner continues to penalise students for giving grind school answers. If they don't want us to go then don't suggest it. Also, the kings inn syllabus sets out what cases are required too. That would be a great help especially when working from a manual. It would also help if they would let us see our papers or issue general guidance so that we can understand exactly what they want. I thought the exams were supposed to prepare students for practise yet they continue to put things on the paper that will never ever be asked by a client. I'm sure if we were counsel in constitutional and started ranting about the church and state we would be considered deranged !!!!!
Rant over! Deep breaths!

Lol totally. My exam was awful everything was so vague and didn't even get five questions done I had read a sample answer before I went in for first time on unenumerated rights development couldn't recall it and I actually made up case names the shame. Onwards and upwards. I thought I'd fail it anyways so I can't feel to aggrieved what I covered never came up.

Bertie1986

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

I am doing:

1. Interlocutory and Mareva (because quia timet came up last time)
2. Specific Performance and Rectification
3. Undue Influence
4. Proprietary Estoppel (quite a short amount prepared for that)
5. Secret Trusts
6. Express Trusts
7. Resulting Trusts
8. Constructive Trusts

While Purpose Trusts is probably guaranteed, the content is vast so I'm happy to write that one off. I have a short note prepared for Trusteeship and also for Tracing which I will try to learn if I have time.

I am leaving out injunctions (except Mareva), resulting trusts as it is a lot of small bits for mostly note questions, and constructive trusts and the complete constitution of trusts (as they both came up on the last paper after a longish break.

So I'm doing a lot of the above with a few changes:

Mareva Injunctions
Specific Performance and Rectification
Rescission (just undue influence)
Proprietary Estoppel
Express Trusts (except for the complete constitution)
Purpose Trusts (charitable and non charitable)
Trusteeship
Tracing
Doctrine of Satisfaction

I'm not keen on secret trusts but thinking about throwing it in to be safe? Any thoughts/what are others doing?

Would cut it down more if possible...

saor19

Hey guys, saw a lot of people worrying about Constitutional. I was the same as you in the last sitting. I don't think there is ever an easy paper, the questions are designed to trick you. I really don't know of anybody who has ever come out of that particular exam happy!

I had two decent questions, 1 ok-ish one, 1 half answered problem and then I could only remember the Fleming case for the case note question so I was only working on half marks for that one. I still passed. Do not give up hope!

Don't let one exam ruin your chances for the next few. Easier said than done, but think of it as being part of the exam, it's not just about your knowledge but your endurance too. Constitutional is over now, you can't change your result, you do have the power to do better in the others though. Use it.

(I don't know if any of you watch Grey's Anatomy or not but apparently if you stand in a superhero pose for a while, you'll perform better at your task).

MissM89

saor19 wrote: »

Hey guys, saw a lot of people worrying about Constitutional. I was the same as you in the last sitting. I don't think there is ever an easy paper, the questions are designed to trick you. I really don't know of anybody who has ever come out of that particular exam happy!

I had two decent questions, 1 ok-ish one, 1 half answered problem and then I could only remember the Fleming case for the case note question so I was only working on half marks for that one. I still passed. Do not give up hope!

Don't let one exam ruin your chances for the next few. Easier said than done, but think of it as being part of the exam, it's not just about your knowledge but your endurance too. Constitutional is over now, you can't change your result, you do have the power to do better in the others though. Use it.

(I don't know if any of you watch Grey's Anatomy or not but apparently if you stand in a superhero pose for a while, you'll perform better at your task).

Thanks a mill for this - def is reassuring to hear that someone actually passed Constitutional as both his papers and the examiner seem awful!

I do watch Greys - maybe we should all take 5 mins before each exam out at the Red Cow to stand like a superhero and we will all ace these exams!?

dashdoll

Quick qs on Proprietary Estoppel if anyone can help.

Wheb answering a qs on estoppel is it necesary to go through each of the 3 types of PE; Imperfect Gift PE, Common Expectation PE and Unilateral Mistake PE?

So many case names

missindigo123

jenspondolik wrote: »

Lol totally. My exam was awful everything was so vague and didn't even get five questions done I had read a sample answer before I went in for first time on unenumerated rights development couldn't recall it and I actually made up case names the shame. Onwards and upwards. I thought I'd fail it anyways so I can't feel to aggrieved what I covered never came up.

Onwards and upwards is right!! At least we are nearly finished with them!

Arcturus2112

dashdoll wrote: »

Quick qs on Proprietary Estoppel if anyone can help.

Wheb answering a qs on estoppel is it necesary to go through each of the 3 types of PE; Imperfect Gift PE, Common Expectation PE and Unilateral Mistake PE?

So many case names

I think in all likelihood it would be based on Imperfect Gift PE and Common Expectation PE. I think they often tend to intermesh, so definitely worth having the two. On them, I have:

Imperfect Gift: Dilwyn v Llewlyn, Cullen v Cullen, Smith v Halpin

Common Expectation: Ramsden v Dyson, Haugh v Rutledge, Inwards v Baker, Crabb v Arun District Council

dashdoll

Thanks, really appreciate that. Will leave out Unilateral Mistake PE.

Iv spent the day on Mareva, Tracing and Estoppel so far. Will be RAGING if none come up! 😂

QUOTE=Arcturus2112;94687033]I think in all likelihood it would be based on Imperfect Gift PE and Common Expectation PE. I think they often tend to intermesh, so definitely worth having the two. On them, I have:

Imperfect Gift: Dilwyn v Llewlyn, Cullen v Cullen, Smith v Halpin

Common Expectation: Ramsden v Dyson, Haugh v Rutledge, Inwards v Baker, Crabb v Arun District Council[/QUOTE]

TinkledPink

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

I think in all likelihood it would be based on Imperfect Gift PE and Common Expectation PE. I think they often tend to intermesh, so definitely worth having the two. On them, I have:

Imperfect Gift: Dilwyn v Llewlyn, Cullen v Cullen, Smith v Halpin

Common Expectation: Ramsden v Dyson, Haugh v Rutledge, Inwards v Baker, Crabb v Arun District Council

I'd agree with this. For a problem question on estoppel what you're looking for is whether there was an imperfect gift or the creation of a common expectation re an interest in land. You're looking at the actions/words of the promisor/representor so to find an assurance and then the way in which the promisee detrimentally relied on that promise/expectation. You'll distinguish any detriment that happened before the alleged promise/expectation from any detrimental reliance that happened afterwards, the later of which could ground a claim. Also remember to identify the content of the estoppel as well as the right in need of protection.

I'd also keep an eye on a question like whether or not there should be a test based on unconscionability. Estoppel comes up usually as a problem question but it's no harm to think a little about what you might say if an essay on that came up.

missindigo123

Can anyone help with charitable trusts? The legislation has been enacted so (I think !) so do we still need those cases like for poverty should I be using the likes of Re Gardom and Brett v AG etc etc or just focusing on the act. My manual is 2013 so worried it's not in date

sunshine and showers

What do you guys reckon about EU? It's such a big course!