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

sorchauna

chops018 wrote: »

I wouldn't leave anything out lads. That can be very dangerous. Well, leave very little out anyway. The topics that rarely come up and maybe one or two that didn't come up last sitting.

Anyway, I found when doing Const that if you have a decent knowledge of all the rights i.e. the enumerated, enumerated, personal rights etc. Then you are in a good position. Along with that be able to see if there is a balance struck with the right being affected and the state's right to limit that person's right. Know proportionality inside out. Also I found separation of powers can be brought into a lot more questions than you think. The other topics you will see how and what way they are asked, from what I remember there is only really 3 or 4 pure types of questions on SOP, and the first few topics are handy enough too.

It's really just having a decent knowledge of all the rights and knowing how to tackle them in a problem question.

Finally don't be afraid to use the actual Constitution and it's sections where needed. It can gain you a few marks here and there, especially if you're stuck.

Edit: EC is a tough, and odd, examiner. His paper last sitting was relatively 'easy' (to me anyway) compared to his other papers. He likes up to date stuff, and generally goes with what is topical. Be wary of that. Have an idea of his top ten cases from this year. They usually feature in some shape or form.

EC is one of those examiners that its all or nothing. If you don't know the area well and you attempt it your marked harshly. Also note he does a case note question which is usually done as a 5th last attempt question. It is marked hard and you should only do it if you know the facts of the case, why its famous, another smaller reason its famous. If its a new case, other cases that have impacted the decision of the judges or if its older other new cases that have citied it. Therefore most people don't do it and in fact you have only 7 questions to do your 5 in.

He likes to mix areas, he will have a min of 2 areas in a question and sometimes three. I passed it first time round hitting the 60's but I spend a lot of time on it and did a course. He is one of the few examiners that would give you lee way if you don't know it well.

Chops is also right on his top ten cases, usually around three will appear somewhere in his paper either has a case note or relevant to a problem question. Also the proportionality is something that can be hard to wrap your head around but invaluable when you understand it. It can be brought into any rights question and he likes it. However only do it if you understand it. Better to leave it out than do it and get it wrong, he will mark you harshly for getting it wrong.

It's not a bad paper as it's made out but one of the unpredictable ones where really you need to know most of the course. Once you know what can be mixed i.e. know right to property and livelihood together, it's actually a fine paper. I did it last sitting and it was the one I dreaded most, when in fact I sat worse papers (I'll never forget that EU paper last sitting).

chops018

sorchauna wrote: »

I did it last sitting and it was the one I dreaded most, when in fact I sat worse papers (I'll never forget that EU paper last sitting).

Haha, I think everyone in the room had the same collective feeling of "WTF is this paper!?".

I don't know how I passed it!

sorchauna

CRM1 wrote: »

Hi eggbert0707. I am in the exact same position as you, in saying that I completely agree with everything that chops018 has said. I think my approach was way too detailed for what is needed and I think I have my masters to blame for that. The answers can't be too theoretical as we just don't have the time. So I'm starting from scratch again with a new approach basically what has been said above. Brief summaries, caselaw and "get it drilled into the brain". I haven't taken a course maybe it would have helped in my approach. But don't think that the previous five weeks have been wasted, view it as putting down a good base. I'm sitting five in Oct, Tort, Constitutional, Property, Equity and Contract. In saying that I have had a complete block the last two days, but new approach today!!

I understand where you are coming from with the masters and too much detail. I was the same! But since most the paper is problem questions, the easiest way to approach these exams is remember your asked to advise a client. Who is a lay person. Therefore they don't need to much detail (also in the sense that you imagine they would not understand the complexity of the area), just the sections of legislation that affect them if there is one, the cases that are in their favour, any grey areas that might go against them and in the end your conclusion and if you think have a case or have a defence. Its 35mins per question. Yes you will know so much more than you will ever get the chance to write down but get the important parts in and your fine.

sorchauna

chops018 wrote: »

Haha, I think everyone in the room had the same collective feeling of "WTF is this paper!?".

I don't know how I passed it!

Yes the was a massive "WTF" thought!! All I will say is that examiner is the nicest of the all. I'm pretty sure I was writing the complete wrong areas in my answers and he must have felt pity to pass me!

Amre17

Hi all..

Are there any areas in constitutional that you could possibly leave out /
What areas do people consider to be essential?

sorchauna

Amre17 wrote: »

Hi all..

Are there any areas in constitutional that you could possibly leave out /
What areas do people consider to be essential?

Separation of powers, fundamental rights, due process, livelihood and property, fair procedure are a must. Then work your way until you run out of time. The institutions in some form can come up but that's three chapters to cover. Constitutional interpretation quick enough to learn and can be an a nice question but I don't think it comes up as often. Things like equality and proportionality are good ones to know as they can be used in a few areas. Then you have lessor ones people cover like freedom of expression, religion, good name and free speech.

Amre17

sorchauna wrote: »

Separation of powers, fundamental rights, due process, livelihood and property, fair procedure are a must. Then work your way until you run out of time. The institutions in some form can come up but that's three chapters to cover. Constitutional interpretation quick enough to learn and can be an a nice question but I don't think it comes up as often. Things like equality and proportionality are good ones to know as they can be used in a few areas. Then you have lessor ones people cover like freedom of expression, religion, good name and free speech.

Thanks Sorchauna.. Must get cracking!

CRM1

sorchauna wrote: »

I understand where you are coming from with the masters and too much detail. I was the same! But since most the paper is problem questions, the easiest way to approach these exams is remember your asked to advise a client. Who is a lay person. Therefore they don't need to much detail (also in the sense that you imagine they would not understand the complexity of the area), just the sections of legislation that affect them if there is one, the cases that are in their favour, any grey areas that might go against them and in the end your conclusion and if you think have a case or have a defence. Its 35mins per question. Yes you will know so much more than you will ever get the chance to write down but get the important parts in and your fine.

Yeah that makes a lot of sense, just seems like to have a very good organisation of information! On a separate note would you or anyone else happen to know if there is up to date caselaw on co-ownership. All I can find is a small number of cases and they are pretty old?!

sophya

Anyone have any recent cases that are essential to know? I'm working off manuals from a few years ago so don't wanna seem out of date or argue a point that's been overruled.

michelle2000

Hi all - i don't suppose anyone has a recent list of all the criminal legislation? working from an 09 manual and have a complete list of the legislation that was made in 2010 - but just wondering if there's much to be added since.

if anyone wants the dated one - let me know and i can send on!

FEBun

Hi

I have the October 2013 (this sitting) night before notes from independent for contract property tort and equity. Looking for criminal in exchange. Also willing to exchange for city colleges equivalents!

PM me thanks!

Milkypops

can anyone tell me what came up in the october 2012 sitting for tort please??

CRM1

Hey... for those of you doing constitutional are ye putting a major focus on abortion for an exam question? re recent legal developments?!

Lawstudent007

CRM1 wrote: »

Hey... for those of you doing constitutional are ye putting a major focus on abortion for an exam question? re recent legal developments?!

Na, just doing what's in the Manual... Behind as it is already just want to make sure i cover everything instead that way you can dodge that question if need be!

S12b

When will the results be out for the October exams?

rocksch2

S12b wrote: »

When will the results be out for the October exams?

Towards the end of November, you won't know a date until after the exams

Milkypops

does anyone have the exam papers for equity and company from march 2013....willing to swap for notes, grids, sample answers etc!

chops018

S12b wrote: »

When will the results be out for the October exams?

It's nearly always 6 Fridays after the last exam. I'm guessing Friday the 22nd of November for this year. They were out on Friday the 23rd of November last year.

Fe1exams

Can anyone recommend a hostel in Dublin for the exams - id like to be closer to the town center.

michelle2000

Fe1exams wrote: »

Can anyone recommend a hostel in Dublin for the exams - id like to be closer to the town center.

A hostel might be tough going during exams - not sure how quiet it would be - any hostels near the town centre will be busy with tourists and people not thinking in the slightest about exams? I would definitely recommend staying in a hotel!

the ibis hotel near the red cow is 50euro a night, otherwise the red cow itself b&b is 75ish.

if you want to be in the centre then id probably recommend any hotel/hostel on the red luas line - the aisling hotel is right by hueston or the generator hostel is close to luas line too.

hullaballoo

If you haven't seen The Shining, you could stay in the Gresham. Reasonable rates most of the time.

The rates seem to be quite high during the two weeks of exams. You might get a deal from one of the deal sites like trivago etc.

Lawstudent007

It seems impossible to remember so much work for these exams not in a good place right now, feeling swamped!

cooper1234

Does anyone know for company law can you bring in the McCann and Courtney student edition 1963-2012. I can't find the 1963-2009 edition anywhere

michelle2000

Hi all; quick criminal question; does anyone know if you could be charged with assault causing harm (S3 NFOAP 1997) or serious harm (S4 FFOAP 1997) AND assault with intent (s18 Criminal Justice Public Order Act 1994) at the same time? Amounting to two counts?

If you have intent to cause harm, and cause minor harm (which doesnt have MensRea element) are you charged with two counts under both s18 CJ 1994 and s3 NFOAP1997?

Failing to grasp where assault with intent comes into play/why there is a need for it as NFOAP seems to cover it anyway?
Thanks

CRM1

Lawstudent007 wrote: »

It seems impossible to remember so much work for these exams not in a good place right now, feeling swamped!

Know how you feel, I'm the same think I've a good bit done then I realise how much I haven't done!:(

LostOutForeign

cooper1234 wrote: »

Does anyone know for company law can you bring in the McCann and Courtney student edition 1963-2012. I can't find the 1963-2009 edition anywhere

I spoke to them on the phone today and they said it doesn't matter which edition it is

Also it is crazy hard to get through to them - I'd already emailed them two days ago and tried ringing yesterday. I know they're probably swamped with queries at the minute but with the amount of money we're paying to do these exams you'd think they could at least make an effort to respond promptly.

Lawstudent007

CRM1 wrote: »

Know how you feel, I'm the same think I've a good bit done then I realise how much I haven't done!:(

Well it got to that stage where I probably won't have time to focus on everything and I'm doing roughly 8-10 chapters for each of my subjects... Hope it will be sufficient.

Tom Young

michelle2000 wrote: »

Hi all; quick criminal question; does anyone know if you could be charged with assault causing harm (S3 NFOAP 1997) or serious harm (S4 FFOAP 1997) AND assault with intent (s18 Criminal Justice Public Order Act 1994) at the same time? Amounting to two counts?

If you have intent to cause harm, and cause minor harm (which doesnt have MensRea element) are you charged with two counts under both s18 CJ 1994 and s3 NFOAP1997?

Failing to grasp where assault with intent comes into play/why there is a need for it as NFOAP seems to cover it anyway?
Thanks

You can include them all yes.

The prosecutor usually select the highest.

You know S.2 is summary but imported to S.3, then S.4 is different as it is not assault - but causing serious harm. Now, it is often the case than the extent of injury is unclear - see S.1 for the causing harm and causing serious harm definitions.

18.—(1) Any person who assaults any person with intent to cause bodily harm or to commit an indictable offence shall be guilty of an offence.

Do you know what an indictable offence is? .... starting point. You should for the FE1s as the Classification of Offences is asked almost every second sitting.

Treason, Felony and Misdemeanor [Now replaced by CLA 1997];
Summary v Indictable & Hybrid;
Minor v non-Minor;
Arrestable v Non-Arrestable (CLA 1997 - Would be required to be know also for a CJ TFA 2001 S.12/13 question of a CL(D&TD) 2011 - Barnes/Nally type question - along with S.18 Self-Defence);
Serious v Non-Serious (Bail Act).

Nothing wrong with including S.18 if the fact pattern allows for it.

Differences: S.2/3/4 are result offences with intention and reckless inbuilt. S.18 would appear to be slightly different, also evaluate the toll and the Act it comes in.

Hope this helps.

michelle2000

Tom Young wrote: »

You can include them all yes.

The prosecutor usually select the highest.

Tom thanks a million - very helpful! I have just pulled together a note on the different types of crime - hoping that might make an appearance as definition of a crime came up in March?

Anyway - appreciate the response thanks.

On a side note; does anyone have the criminal (or equity) independent college 'guide to the syllabus' that they offer which shows the analysis/likelihood of certain areas coming up? I have property/contract and would be willing to swap.

Tom Young

Definition but no the pure Classification type of question.