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

tobeginbegin

Does anyone have an EU grid please?

<<deleted>>

Thank you!

Mod
Had to delete second sentence of your post. Forum cannot be used for trading[
Good luck in your exams/B]

The Talking Bread

tobeginbegin wrote: »

Does anyone have an EQUITY and/or EU grid please?

Thank you!

pm your email and ill send equity

ladadidadi234

Hi all,

I hope studying is going well..

Has anyone any tips in relation to constitutional ?
This is my second time sitting it and I missed out by 4% last time so I'm really trying to focus my last few weeks of study!

Any tips would be kindly appreciated

TheCrutzer

ladadidadi234 wrote: »

Hi all,

I hope studying is going well..

Has anyone any tips in relation to constitutional ?
This is my second time sitting it and I missed out by 4% last time so I'm really trying to focus my last few weeks of study!

Any tips would be kindly appreciated

I'm doing it aswell. No tips unfortunately, but I'm only really coming to terms with just how big it is. Are you planning on leaving anything out, or are you just going to cover everything but focus on certain topics?

letmcg

TheCrutzer wrote: »

I'm doing it aswell. No tips unfortunately, but I'm only really coming to terms with just how big it is. Are you planning on leaving anything out, or are you just going to cover everything but focus on certain topics?

To be honest I've picked 14 topics and the rest I'm just glancing over, there's no way we can learn 28topics by heart

letmcg

Does anyone have examiner's reports for Constitutional and Equity?

XxMCRxBabyxX

Just looking at the Permitted Legislation list. Were you always allowed bring in the LCLRA for Property?

sunshine and showers

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Just looking at the Permitted Legislation list. Where you always allowed bring in the LCLRA for Property?

No. That might have been useful. :rolleyes: I was only allowed the Succession Act last year. Bonus for you!

annmc882

letmcg wrote: »

Does anyone have examiner's reports for Constitutional and Equity?

Id have old ones if they are any good to u

XxMCRxBabyxX

sunshine and showers wrote: »

No. That might have been useful. :rolleyes: I was only allowed the Succession Act last year. Bonus for you!

It does worry me as to what kind of questions may be coming up though!

annmc882

SusieB123 wrote: »

Hi guys,

Does anyone have any ideas or tips on what to study for contract? Any tips would be really appreciated!!

Thanks!

she mixes topics alot so its hard but intention to create legal intentions , agency can be left out i think and just know few topics briefly like capacity .... thats my humble opinion after doing prep course and thrawling through papers myself

annmc882

jdbarry wrote: »

Would any kind soul fancy sharing the contract examiner report for the last sitting?

Would be much appreciated!

do u still need it?

nuac

letmcg wrote: »

To be honest I've picked 14 topics and the rest I'm just glancing over, there's no way we can learn 28topics by heart

It is a long time since I sat any exam, but I am amazed to see that preparation for a professional exam involves learning answers off by heart.

What happened to applying the appropriate statute and case law to the question posed?

annmc882

nuac wrote: »

It is a long time since I sat any exam, but I am amazed to see that preparation for a professional exam involves learning answers off by heart.

What happened to applying the appropriate statute and case law to the question posed?

Hence , very harsh remarks in some of the examiners reports ... They are hitting down hard on learning verbatim

jdbarry

annmc882 wrote:

do u still need it?

I got it thanks!

Yohnathan

Can someone please advise me as to what the relevant sections are for the topic on Consumer Protection for Contract.

I have stuff in my notes on the "Consumer Rights Directive" 2011/83/EC but my notes are a bit old, I initially planned on doing this exam a year ago. I know there was new law introduced early this year so I am a bit confused.

Anyone who went to a grind course that could shed some light on this topic and what areas within it to focus on, that would be great. I'm wasting serious time on this tonight

legalease2172

ladadidadi234 wrote: »

Hi all,

I hope studying is going well..

Has anyone any tips in relation to constitutional ?
This is my second time sitting it and I missed out by 4% last time so I'm really trying to focus my last few weeks of study!

Any tips would be kindly appreciated

Im in the same boat! Just missed it last time! It's my last one..

It's so vast! Vast and boring....

Tigerbalm1

ladadidadi234 wrote: »

Hi all,

I hope studying is going well..

Has anyone any tips in relation to constitutional ?
This is my second time sitting it and I missed out by 4% last time so I'm really trying to focus my last few weeks of study!

Any tips would be kindly appreciated

I think the most important thing is to try and have at least a vague knowledge most of the topics, last sitting there was a whole question on the AG, which is only very small part of the course but you can try and pad it up with random bits from other topics. I don't think you need the same depth of topics compared to other exams.

Different topics link up with each other so it can be hard to isolate them. Also it can be tempting do focus on topical issues but the last paper was not very topical at all.

If you cut out topics you run the risk of not being able to answer a question. Some of the essay questions might focus on a specific case and you might not really know it but if you have at least an idea of the topic you can take a good stab at it and just manipulate the actual quote around a few times in the essay even if you're not 100% sure on the case and pad it out (while trying to avoid a "write all you know" approach - tailor it to the question!).

Think logically, don't panic if you don't know the case quoted in the essay, start out broad on the problem questions and a bit of BS can take you over the 50 in this exam!

XxMCRxBabyxX

I don't know what I'm at with Company at all. Still know the old act better so I'm just confusing myself! Was meant to be doing the one day revision course with Independent today but they emailed me on Friday to cancel it! 4 days notice!

Anyone know what's being tipped as the best topics to study?

The Talking Bread

not sure whats tipped but it would be good if you could devise a question on the reforms on the act, I would be nearly sure they would ask that, just google reform of companies act and go from there, learn about 4 or 5 changes into essay form. Came up in March at first sitting with new act and seems like something that would be likely to arise again to

Ultra vires due a question, never leave out Corporate personality, directors duties and restriction/disqualification (they are not that hard of topics if you spend a day or so just focused on them and get it ingrained into your head), obviously liquidation and disposition of assets and corporate borrowings and retention of title?

that is a nice amount to focus most of your time on and if you can fit it in receivership and shareholder protection in bullet point format to get you through would put your mind really at rest.

legallywrecked

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I don't know what I'm at with Company at all. Still know the old act better so I'm just confusing myself! Was meant to be doing the one day revision course with Independent today but they emailed me on Friday to cancel it! 4 days notice!

Anyone know what's being tipped as the best topics to study?

I'm fairly lost with company at the moment too. 4 days notice is bad form! did they reschedule it for this week or anything? If you're stuck I know Griffith have a one day course coming up on the 25th, very close to the exam but it's something at least!

XxMCRxBabyxX

legallywrecked wrote: »

I'm fairly lost with company at the moment too. 4 days notice is bad form! did they reschedule it for this week or anything? If you're stuck I know Griffith have a one day course coming up on the 25th, very close to the exam but it's something at least!

Nope, totally cancelled.

I've been trying to contact Griffith about their course with no luck!

hullaballoo

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I don't know what I'm at with Company at all. Still know the old act better so I'm just confusing myself! Was meant to be doing the one day revision course with Independent today but they emailed me on Friday to cancel it! 4 days notice!

Anyone know what's being tipped as the best topics to study?

I said it in advance of the last sittings that there would be a question on ultra vires because it is ostensibly the biggest change/upheaval under the 2014 regime. A question came up on it. Here are my posts in advance of the last sitting.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98818654

hullaballoo wrote: »

In relation to company, I would imagine that the apparent unlimited capacity for corporate contracts will be a hot topic for any examiners since the 2014 Act became live for exam purposes.

Although it won't have the same application, ultra vires is still an important doctrine and won't be simply legislated away. I would think that examiners will typically ask how the doctrine will apply under the new companies regime etc.

Also, the precise differences between company types and the means of changing from one to another is likely to come up, in my view.

I would always think that is a good tactic to cover what look like major changes because the impact is unknown as yet, so it provides an opportunity to make some arguments around what might happen. It also shouldn't take that long to cover study-wise as there are almost no cases on these points, just some observational articles from professionals and academics.

Another area that should be examined is the transitional provisions (or lack thereof, more so) in the Act. Think about constitutional issues that could arise regarding more stringent penalties under the new act and retrospective effect etc.

I could be wrong but I'd have thought that sort of thing should be relatively fishy barrelly shooty.

It was fairly fishy barrelly shooty, imo.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98862004

hullaballoo wrote: »

Further to the above reply, the difference is that prior to the 2014 Act, a company could only engage in business that was directly related to its objects - the document setting out what the company was about. Any act purported to be done by a company outside its objects was said to be ultra vires the company and could be set aside. (Then you have all of the Bell Houses stuff with independent objects clauses and that...)

Under the 2014 Act, such restrictions no longer exist in relation to company types that have unlimited capacity. Nothing that could be lawfully done by another person can be said to be ultra vires the company. So, a company that ostensibly is for the running and management of a sweet shop could also engage in hedge funds management, in theory. I think I read that the purpose of this change is to prevent people from unwittingly entering agreements with companies that do not have the capacity to enter such agreements and lose out as a result, should the things done by the company on foot of the agreement later be set aside.

All of the above said, it is clearly absurd to have a company that has a de facto objective, such as selling sweets, also running high-risk investment strategies, so it will be interesting to see what happens when the point is inevitably litigated.

I had suggested in a previous post that this is an area that could well be examined because of the dominance of the UV doctrine in Company Law matters previously. I don't think it will just go away.

The Talking Bread

not sure whats tipped for company but it would be good if you could devise a question on the reforms on the act, I would be nearly sure they would ask that, just google reform of companies act and go from there, learn about 4 or 5 changes into essay form. Came up in March at first sitting with new act and seems like something that would be likely to arise again to

Ultra vires due a question, never leave out Corporate personality, directors duties and restriction/disqualification (they are not that hard of topics if you spend a day or so just focused on them and get it ingrained into your head), obviously liquidation and disposition of assets and corporate borrowings and retention of title?

that is a nice amount to focus most of your time on and if you can fit it in receivership and shareholder protection in bullet point format to get you through would put your mind really at rest.

hullaballoo

There is also a potentially interesting change to the law on what were previously fraudulent preferences in that the wording is now "unfair preferences" and that strikes me as something that is highly examinable.

I don't know whether fraudulent preferences have made an appearance on the FE1s in the past but I would suggest that it's worth covering as an easy enough option if it does come up. Note that it almost always goes hand-in-hand with fraudulent disposals (or a disposal of assets the effect of which is to perpetrate a fraud on the company, its creditors or members.) The Act says that transactions that are subject to s. 604 cannot be subject to s. 608 and vice versa but they are alternate provisions in reality.

starbar91

Guys - what are you covering for equity? I'm getting really frustrated with it now.

So far I've covered; creation of trusts, formal requirements, complete constitution, secret trusts and halfway through injunctions. Can I leave out mareva injunctions as they came up in March?

What other sections would u recommend? What would you leave out?

Have you got any predictions on exam qs?

The Talking Bread

starbar91 wrote: »

Guys - what are you covering for equity? I'm getting really frustrated with it now.

So far I've covered; creation of trusts, formal requirements, complete constitution, secret trusts and halfway through injunctions. Can I leave out mareva injunctions as they came up in March?

What other sections would u recommend? What would you leave out?

Have you got any predictions on exam qs?

you would be mad to leave out Charitable trusts imo if you have done a good bit of trusts already. It wasnt on last paper so "probably" likely to be on this as its extremely popular question that has never been ommitted two papers in a row .

. If you could throw yourself at Specific Performance and the defences you would be covered then I would say, personally I think Undue Influence will come up given the way the past paper trend is. You could probably take a chance on ommitting Mareva, I have a feeling Quia Timet injunctions will come up, usually either or

Estoppel should also pop ujp but I just cant be arsed with it

starbar91

The Talking Bread wrote: »

you would be mad to leave out Charitable trusts imo if you have done a good bit of trusts already. It wasnt on last paper so "probably" likely to be on this as its extremely popular question that has never been ommitted two papers in a row .

. If you could throw yourself at Specific Performance and the defences you would be covered then I would say, personally I think Undue Influence will come up given the way the past paper trend is. You could probably take a chance on ommitting Mareva, I have a feeling Quia Timet injunctions will come up, usually either or

Estoppel should also pop ujp but I just cant be arsed with it

Thanks a mill, guidance much appreciated.

Yes; I think I'll keep ploughing on with the trusts considering the bit I've covered. Alt what are your thoughts on Trusteeship? Cover or no?

Would u also recommend covering specific performance, rectification, and rescission?

The Talking Bread

starbar91 wrote: »

Thanks a mill, guidance much appreciated.

Yes; I think I'll keep ploughing on with the trusts considering the bit I've covered. Alt what are your thoughts on Trusteeship? Cover or no?

Would u also recommend covering specific performance, rectification, and rescission?

ha, i didn't want to throw the whole syllabus at you, just what I thought were good shouts but, yeah, personally I am covering a couple of past questions on Rec and Res.

And, yes, I mentioned in the last post about SP, particularly the defences. Something on SP is due. I dont know if its the same examiner over the last few years but it appears to come up in 3/4 questions in a row, then a few sittings w/o it, then pops up again with another few sittings in a row. Came up 4 in the last 6 sittings but didnt come up last sitting so seems to be a popular one

Yohnathan

SORRY FOR THE REPOST

Can someone please advise me as to what the relevant sections are for the topic on Consumer Protection for Contract.

I have stuff in my notes on the "Consumer Rights Directive" 2011/83/EC but my notes are a bit old, I initially planned on doing this exam a year ago. I know there was new law introduced early this year so I am a bit confused.

Anyone who went to a grind course that could shed some light on this topic and what areas within it to focus on, that would be great. I'm wasting serious time on this tonight