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

shy-tall-knight

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

Does anyone have an examiner's report for the last sitting of contract or the sitting before (or is such a thing in existence)?

I am considering studying damages, but it has been on the last three papers so I am wondering if it will be left off this years paper. I thought it might make it easier to judge if I could look at the examiners report because if she said it was poorly answered by the majority I would be slightly more inclined to think that she would put in on the paper for the forth consecutive time.

Remedies come up every year according to my grid which goes as far back as 2008.

Hunchback

Okay, that decides that! Thanks

oraghabd

Does anybody else struggle to know when to talk about deference, locus standi, presumption of constitutionality, etc? Or even separation of powers? At this rate, feel like I'll be throwing half them in to every 2nd question just on the off chance they're relevant

Figsy32

Thoughts on EU?

FE1 EXAMS 2013

Figsy32 wrote: »

Thoughts on EU?

I don't really know what to make of it, it seemed like a fair paper but dunno did I do myself justice, got so confused half way through between different topics, the amount of info in my head it was just a big mess. How did people approach question 4 b?

dashdoll

Figsy32 wrote: »

Thoughts on EU?

Handy if you knew it. I didn't though. Did 2 decent qs and then 2 rubbish ones. ScribbleD a few lines on A110 then for my last question bit didnt remember anything on it!

Did qs 6 relate to FMOW and citizens directive?

FE1 EXAMS 2013

The thoughts of actually having to study now for constitutional, vomit!

Legalfarmer89

What are people taughts with Contract Law on Friday. Its not too long but the examiner mixing topics means you cant afford to leave too much out. Im doing offer and acceptance, consideration, mistake, misrepresentation, undue influence and Unconscionable bargain, Duress, Illegal Contracts(Common law and statute), Voidable Contracts, Discharge of Contracts (particularly frustration). I am going over damages at the moment( a popular topic and not overly boring in comparison the the large majority of the syllabus). I havent really done anything concerning Sale of Goods(1893 and 1980 act) even though its highly popular with the examiner and I have the two pieces of legislation I thing that i will go over the bullet points of it this evening just as a precautionary measure. I would be hoping to pass this exam as my equity was a disaster(just didnt do enough study/couldnt care less) so i would like to be comfortable walking out of the red cow on Friday.

So what are people hopes or concerns?

Offer and acceptance is probably guaranteed but can be extremely tricky(particularly with tenders and postal rule).

Mistake, misrep fairly straight forward. Either likely candidates to come up.

Duress and undue influence not likely to come up.

Frustration void and illegal contracts. Something out of these three is bound to come up if not more!

Would like consideration(fairly straight forward) to come up but not mixed with another topic.

dashdoll

FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: »

I don't really know what to make of it, it seemed like a fair paper but dunno did I do myself justice, got so confused half way through between different topics, the amount of info in my head it was just a big mess. How did people approach question 4 b?

I said 4b was direct Effect of Directives?

dashdoll

Legalfarmer89 wrote: »

What are people taughts with Contract Law on Friday. Its not too long but the examiner mixing topics means you cant afford to leave too much out. Im doing offer and acceptance, consideration, mistake, misrepresentation, undue influence and Unconscionable bargain, Duress, Illegal Contracts(Common law and statute), Voidable Contracts, Discharge of Contracts (particularly frustration). I am going over damages at the moment( a popular topic and not overly boring in comparison the the large majority of the syllabus). I havent really done anything concerning Sale of Goods(1893 and 1980 act) even though its highly popular with the examiner and I have the two pieces of legislation I thing that i will go over the bullet points of it this evening just as a precautionary measure. I would be hoping to pass this exam as my equity was a disaster(just didnt do enough study/couldnt care less) so i would like to be comfortable walking out of the red cow on Friday.

So what are people hopes or concerns?

Offer and acceptance is probably guaranteed but can be extremely tricky(particularly with tenders and postal rule).

Mistake, misrep fairly straight forward. Either likely candidates to come up.

Duress and undue influence not likely to come up.

Frustration void and illegal contracts. Something out of these three is bound to come up if not more!

Would like consideration(fairly straight forward) to come up but not mixed with another topic.

I was thinking Undue Influence might be likely as hasn't been on in a few sittings I think?

lawgirl23

dashdoll wrote: »

I said 4b was direct Effect of Directives?

Same. It definitely was.

FE1 EXAMS 2013

dashdoll wrote: »

I said 4b was direct Effect of Directives?

Ah thank god, I did direct effect and Ms liability but I wasn't sure if that was right, it was seriously all over the place though. FML

FE1 EXAMS 2013

dashdoll wrote: »

Handy if you knew it. I didn't though. Did 2 decent qs and then 2 rubbish ones. ScribbleD a few lines on A110 then for my last question bit didnt remember anything on it!

Did qs 6 relate to FMOW and citizens directive?

Yeah I think so that what I answered it on anyway

codoherty16

dashdoll wrote: »

I said 4b was direct Effect of Directives?

Same

PorthawGlen

For contract are people using the same notes for undue influence as equity? In the manuals the cases they use are different but surely the same principles apply?

Lawstudent007

lawgirl23 wrote: »

Same. It definitely was.

And damages - Kobler

OfficeGirl2015

PorthawGlen wrote: »

For contract are people using the same notes for undue influence as equity? In the manuals the cases they use are different but surely the same principles apply?

I can't imagine it would make much difference but I am doing the caselaw for the specific subject for the sale of full disclosure ...spent all morning on Contract - none the wiser! - off to revise constitutional now.....2.5more days and we're done!!!!

Lawstudent007

Question 5a - FMOG - quantative restriction or Art110. I put everything down but said it was a selling arrangement justified on public health grounds. Hope I won't lose too many marks if I have all the law down but applied it incorrectly!

coco97

Another one bites the dust!! Hope everyone was happy with EU! I had 3 good qs and 2 dodge but hey it's over! 1 to go :-)

Simplyliving04

Lawstudent007 wrote: »

Question 5a - FMOG - quantative restriction or Art110. I put everything down but said it was a selling arrangement justified on public health grounds. Hope I won't lose too many marks if I have all the law down but applied it incorrectly!

I think it had to be 34 and a MERQ as you said as there is no monetary charge involved. I answered it the same way as yourself as a restriction with a public health justified derogation except I said it was a characteristic according to the Keck test...same overall conclusion though

Lawstudent007

Simplyliving04 wrote: »

I think it had to be 34 and a MERQ as you said as there is no monetary charge involved. I answered it the same way as yourself as a restriction with a public health justified derogation except I said it was a characteristic according to the Keck test...same overall conclusion though

I also threw keck in there happy days!

Lawstudent007

What did everyone write for q1 b? I threw in proportionality, cooperation, subsidiarity and supremacy. It was my last question and a pure stab in the dark!

stilk08

Lawstudent007 wrote: »

And damages - Kobler

I didn't really see how direct effect was relevant to the claim against the State, I thought it was just MS liability, as it asked if she could get compensation. Since you can establish MS liability with or without direct effect I didn't really go into whether the directive had direct effect or not, just said it wasn't implemented so sufficiently serious breach. Also thought all that rubbish about Graham was looking for stuff on causation..ie state liability. But very worried now that everyone seems to have gone for DE..

Figsy32

Lawstudent007 wrote: »

What did everyone write for q1 b? I threw in proportionality, cooperation, subsidiarity and supremacy. It was my last question and a pure stab in the dark!

Yeah that's what I had too plus conferral.

For 4b I did the first part on horizontal direct effect and the second on MS Liability.

OscarBN

First time on the fe1 train, and feel like my memory is seriously waning.
In my naivety I thought I would be able to answer five q's across the board, almost every exam I've had a seriously ropey question, can someone more seasoned tell me is this normal!!
Eyes wide open for March anyway......cover everything (almost)😵 😭

Lawstudent007

Figsy32 wrote: »

Yeah that's what I had too plus conferral.

For 4b I did the first part on horizontal direct effect and the second on MS Liability.

Question 6 on citiznehip articles 21,20,18- bidar case, grezybzuck, FMOW art 45 and also art 24(2) of directive which allows ms to refuse assistance during first three months. Also added a few other articles of the directive but conclusion of my question was based on grezybzuck case or whatever it's called. Was a messy question for me..

missindigo123

Can anyone please explain the importance of Pringle in Constitutional law? Is it just to show how difficult it is for a citizens to challenge the acts of the government? In light of Crotty it appeared that the Courts might get involved with decisions that the executive makes where they are unconstitutional but in Pringle the court stepped back from this approach?

Constitutional :mad:

missindigo123

OscarBN wrote: »

First time on the fe1 train, and feel like my memory is seriously waning.
In my naivety I thought I would be able to answer five q's across the board, almost every exam I've had a seriously ropey question, can someone more seasoned tell me is this normal!!
Eyes wide open for March anyway......cover everything (almost)😵 😭

Dont be too hard on yourself and dont be over-analysing! I passed my first round with relatively good marks and only so so answers. I went to a revision course for my next two and failed and got 50% in the other! They are so horrendously unpredictable, just do your best and forget about them then! You have probably done way better than you think!

vickyplumx

For eu I ducked up on q 1 and answered a based on the treaty and direct effect and all that. Didn't see it was And part b what a tit. Did I answer the first part right?

smeal

Felt it wasn't the worst paper but I struggled to fit in case law that I had learned to fit the questions without word vomiting everything about the topic!! Made a mistake by covering the general bits of everything but not focusing in on areas so kinda messed up my Art 45/ Citizenship question on not having anything more than the bare bones..

Also didn't like that Parliament question!

Anyways, freeeeeedom (until March!)