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

oraghabd

Simplyliving04 wrote: »

s.409 - All charges must be registered, fixed or floating, to be enforceable versus the liquidator...I think

Think you're right, although the Act doesn't mention fixed and floating, it does say "every charge...". Unless, anyone else thinks otherwise...

Thanks

Hunchback

I am tempted to start a new 'FE1 whinge' thread where we can whinge all day about burnout, fatigue, dread and procrastination without clogging up this very worthwhile thread.

Hunchback

The timing of Liverpool v United in the Europe league at 20.00 the night before the EU exam is super problematic!

makemecrazy

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

The timing of Liverpool v United in the Europe league at 20.00 the night before the EU exam is super problematic!

Technically its EU related...

copious

Hi, does anybody have an up to date tort grid or knows the topics that came up in the last sitting? Thanks in advance!

fe1fml

Hi, is there anybody that would be able to advise of the essay questions that appeared on the last sitting of the Criminal Law FE1 exam? Anyone else finding it really difficult to learn this entire syllabus, it seems that pretty much nothing can be left out!! Any advise on what could possibly be left out??

clocks

fe1fml wrote: »

Hi, is there anybody that would be able to advise of the essay questions that appeared on the last sitting of the Criminal Law FE1 exam? Anyone else finding it really difficult to learn this entire syllabus, it seems that pretty much nothing can be left out!! Any advise on what could possibly be left out??

Griffith revision <s>grind>/s> seminar said that based on an analysis of past papers the only stuff you can really cut is :

*Offences Against the State--never examined,
*Infanticide, Suicide & Killing of an Unborn Life --examined only once, in 2005
*Sources of Criminal Law--never examined
*Summary disposal of offences and Trial on Indictment
*"Ordinary" courts system

I'd reccomend having at least a notion, ie read the chapter at least once, for your general knowledge if nothing else but they are never or almost never examined. Apart from these there's not that much that one can really cut completely. The exam has a large number of problem questions which tend to mix multiple offences with different defences and maybe issues surrounding Actus Reus or Mens Rea

fe1fml

Thanks clocks!!! I'm finding it really difficult to try and retain everything... at least with others you can eliminate some parts of the syllabus. But going on past exam papers anything could pop up anywhere! do you happen to know the essay questions that came up last time around as perhaps its unlikely for the same essay to appear two years running? I wonder how much detail is expected of these exams? I have been putting off doing them for 3 years because they just seem impossible!

Tyler Durdenn

clocks wrote: »

Griffith revision <s>grind>/s> seminar said that based on an analysis of past papers the only stuff you can really cut is :

*Offences Against the State--never examined,
*Infanticide, Suicide & Killing of an Unborn Life --examined only once, in 2005
*Sources of Criminal Law--never examined
*Summary disposal of offences and Trial on Indictment
*"Ordinary" courts system

I'd reccomend having at least a notion, ie read the chapter at least once, for your general knowledge if nothing else but they are never or almost never examined. Apart from these there's not that much that one can really cut completely. The exam has a large number of problem questions which tend to mix multiple offences with different defences and maybe issues surrounding Actus Reus or Mens Rea

Out of interest, do they give exam predictions at those Griffith College seminars?

clocks

Tyler Durdenn wrote: »

Out of interest, do they give exam predictions at those Griffith College seminars?

Not leaving certificate style predictions, no. The risk would be too great of leading people astray. One can divine some things with reasonable certainity, and the better lecturers do a more subtle analysis of the angles taken on topics. The seminars essentially just walk one through solutions to the past papers, garnished with titbits from the Examiners' Reports.

The famous "Exam Grids" really are just that simple; anyone could make one reading the past papers. Invest in a few sets of past papers and reports at the outset and you can use them for every subject. They cost a fraction of any course. The grind schools have no special access or information that candidates don't; their advantage is having been thinking about the topics & trends for longer.

The main benefit for me was the motivation and confirmation that I wasn't totally on the wrong path (I'm studying on my own and any friends have been qualified for a couple of years already).

It cost €150 for a six-hour seminar (which included perhaps 45 minutes of breaks), with a booklet of sample answers to past papers included. There were about 10-15 people in the two I attended. That's not cheap, and with a good study group one could do exactly the same thing in one's sitting room, just as well if not better. If you're slogging away on your own however, it can be a good idea for the subjects you find trickier.

I went to the one day seminar, not the full prep course, which is just a bunch of law lectures I understand, and I doubt very worthwhile.

EthanSS

Hi guys,

I have a Q relating to Corp Authority.

Under the 4th step laid down by Dplock in Freeman & Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties, it must be proven that the memorandum and articles allowed the company to enter a contract of this kind, and delegate authority in this manner.

I am wondering, following on from the 2014 Act, would the above be changed to that it must be proven that the COMPANY’S CONSTITUTION allowed the company to enter a contract of this kind, and delegate authority in this manner.

I am wondering this for when giving advice in a prob Q, would I be referring to the Company’s Constitution or the Company's Memorandum & Articles.

Thanks in advance guys.

Mileyt

EthanSS wrote:

Under the 4th step laid down by Dplock in Freeman & Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties, it must be proven that the memorandum and articles allowed the company to enter a contract of this kind, and delegate authority in this manner.

EthanSS wrote:

I am wondering, following on from the 2014 Act, would the above be changed to that it must be proven that the COMPANY’S CONSTITUTION allowed the company to enter a contract of this kind, and delegate authority in this manner.

EthanSS wrote:

I am wondering this for when giving advice in a prob Q, would I be referring to the Company’s Constitution or the Company's Memorandum & Articles.

Yes the fourth step probably wouldn't apply to a private limited company unless it was a dac, you can mention that if answering a question on this

MartyMojo

Hey guys, I'm really getting stressed with Tort. can anybody give me some predictions as to what may be coming up? what is everybody covering? Im trying to do
Neg,
Econ loss
Nervous Shock
Occupier liab,
trespass to land
trespass to person
defamation
vicarious liab
maybe have a look at passing off.

dashdoll

Could anyone help with what topics came up in Oct 2015 tort paper?

I'm looking at it now but nit sure if I'm right?

Q1- Duty of Care/Causation?
Q2- Limitation of Actions
Q3- Employers Liability?
Q4- Defective Products
Q5- Damages
Q6- not sure? is this nuisance?
Q7-Defamation
Q8-not sure about this one either? is this on professional negligence or employers liability, can't figure it out.

If anyone could point me in the right direction, would really appreciate it.

Figsy32

dashdoll wrote: »

Could anyone help with what topics came up in Oct 2015 tort paper?

I'm looking at it now but nit sure if I'm right?

Q1- Duty of Care/Causation?
Q2- Limitation of Actions
Q3- Employers Liability?
Q4- Defective Products
Q5- Damages
Q6- not sure? is this nuisance?
Q7-Defamation
Q8-not sure about this one either? is this on professional negligence or employers liability, can't figure it out.

If anyone could point me in the right direction, would really appreciate it.

Don't have it in front of me but pretty sure there's an employers liability question and a vicarious liability question and Q6 is definitely nuisance. I'll double check in the morning for you.

beerose

Hey all

Thoughts on leaving out Competition for EU? I think I saw on here that someone was predicting a Q on it this sitting... It's just so long - or maybe I've just prepared to many irrelevant notes on it, I'm not sure?!
Any advice?

Also, what topics would be advised not to leave out for EU?

Panic is starting to set in 😰

Dublad2012

clocks wrote: »

Griffith revision <s>grind>/s> seminar said that based on an analysis of past papers the only stuff you can really cut is :

*Offences Against the State--never examined,
*Infanticide, Suicide & Killing of an Unborn Life --examined only once, in 2005
*Sources of Criminal Law--never examined
*Summary disposal of offences and Trial on Indictment
*"Ordinary" courts system

I'd reccomend having at least a notion, ie read the chapter at least once, for your general knowledge if nothing else but they are never or almost never examined. Apart from these there's not that much that one can really cut completely. The exam has a large number of problem questions which tend to mix multiple offences with different defences and maybe issues surrounding Actus Reus or Mens Rea

This is definitely a good strategy. Cannot stress enough not to cut out anymore than these topics for Criminal!

I took a chance with it last time and left out Practice, Procedure and the Introduction chapter and I failed by 4% - just couldn't answer a 5th question.

In general though once you cover yourself topics wise the problem questions are fine, and the essay questions if you look at his report aren't asking for fancy academic commentary, just know the topic, the manuals are enough.

Impossible to predict though so I'm hoping the safest option is to actually cover topics this time!!

fe1fml

Dublad 2012 can you remember which essay questions came up last time round in Criminal?

Dublad2012

fe1fml wrote: »

Dublad 2012 can you remember which essay questions came up last time round in Criminal?

Just checked the paper and there were 3 essay questions;

1. A 2 part essay type on criminal negligent m/s and sexual relations persons with disability;
2. Essay question on the defence of mistake; and
3. Essay on the law on contempt of court.

fe1fml

Thanks for that! Finding it so hard to retain the entire criminal course!! seems impossible!!

sunshine and showers

Where would peoples' final focus for company be?

EthanSS

Sunshine and Showers, I'm covering:
1 Borrowing
2 SLP
3 Corp Authority
4 Incorporation
5 Shareholder Protection
6 Transfer and Transmission of Shares
7 Restriction, and
8 Directors.

I hope hope hope HOPE this will have me covered!!

Have you any predictions for the directors Q and what it could be? It's such a vast topic. I really need to narrow it down. Which do you think would be more likely: (1) A Q on the different types of directors - shadow and de facto etc. Or, (2) A Q on the general power of management and delegation of directors and s. 158. Which one of these arises more frequently? I am covering all other aspects of the topic, I just have to decide which of those two topics to cover as I only have time to cover one of the two.

Thanks in advance.

Kcookies2015

Independent course covered the possibility of an essay question on shadow/de facto directors in the last tutorial as one not to be left out of revision.
They also covered conflict of interest problem question October 2012 Q4, When do members resume control October 2012 Q5, Substantial property transactions March 2013 Q3.

Kcookies2015

Looking at notes from Independent course for Company Law the lecturer went through last years paper -

Directors - essay on shadow/de facto
Share transfer - essay possibility
Winding Up - not likely
Define a Share essay - less likely
Soloman v Soloman essay - Seperate legal entity element a possibility
Receivership - not likely to appear on its own
Borrowing - ROT clause possible essay

jdbarry

Did Ciaran Patton do the Independent Equity course this time around does anyone know?

Fe1r

Constitutional is killing me....I'm covering the courts as an institution of the state, I've learned off the judiciary etc but do I really need to know the jurisdictions of the different courts, minor offences etc?

fe1chancer

It's that time again when am sat here studying and every two minutes I ask my "Do I really want to be a solicitor?"

EthanSS

Do you guys feel as a final topic for Company would I be better off cover Ultra Vires or Shareholder Meetings?

Thanks.

PS I'm also having the why do I want to be a solicitor again thoughts!!

kd2121

Fe1r wrote: »

Constitutional is killing me....I'm covering the courts as an institution of the state, I've learned off the judiciary etc but do I really need to know the jurisdictions of the different courts, minor offences etc?

I'm just learning the Special Criminal Court

Hunchback

Off chance -

Doing an EU case note on ERTA.

If you had to put it into a bracket, what word would best describe the principal in this case ?

I know it is about exclusive competence, but what is the 'EU SPEAK' that I should use to describe this?