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

starbar91

Property - am I ok having covered the following?
Finding,
Co-ownership
Adverse possession
Family property
Succession law
Landlord and tenant
Licenses and promissory estoppel

Also - what chapter does Treasure Trove fall under? Should I cover it?

Contract:
Offer/acceptance
Consideration
Estoppel
Intention Create legal relations
Consumer contracts
Mistake
Misrepresentation
Duress
Undue influence
Remedies

Is that sufficient?

Any guidance on the above is greatly appreciated. Thanks all!!

fe1fml

Treasure trove is under finding disputes i.e. ownership and possession. Could come up as an essay as has in past on that topic. Worth covering to have that topic complete. I am doing the same except instead of Landlord and Tenant doing Easements & Profits.

The Talking Bread

I really am taking a risk leaving out BOTH family property and Landlord and tenant law, amn'tg I!

Ive covered
Land Reg
Ownership/Treasure trove
Succession (2 questions)
Easements
Adverse Possession
Co ownership
Licences



May swallow my pride and do one. Hard to choose though.
FP came up every sitting up to a point and now it has only appeared once in last 5 sittings.......... but the last appearance was 3 sittings ago so surely will come up?

On the other hand L and T tends to come up every second sitting and has appeared in the last 2 sittings so surely due a break!

My point is I want to be very confident about choosing one as they are horrible topics and I am sitting 4 exams (not my first 4 so a small bit less pressure) and time needs to be spent wisely.
Hours learning a topic like FP just seems to not meet the cost/benefit analysis


Anyone want to reassure me?!!

fe1fml

Ok now I am doubting my decisions on topic choice!! Would you have an up to date exam grid I could look at? Family too a break for 3 sittings between Apr 08 and Apr 09 so maybe now its due a revival again?

The Talking Bread

fe1fml wrote: »

Ok now I am doubting my decisions on topic choice!! Would you have an up to date exam grid I could look at? Family too a break for 3 sittings between Apr 08 and Apr 09 so maybe now its due a revival again?

send me your email

The Talking Bread

let me know when/if you get that.

starbar91

Thanks guys. Think I'll leave it at that then with property and get cracking on exam q's. Do you think treasure trove/ownership will only be one part of a question? It's a very small topic...

Any thoughts on the contract topics??

Lindyloo 1

starbar91 wrote: »

Property - am I ok having covered the following?
Finding,
Co-ownership
Adverse possession
Family property
Succession law
Landlord and tenant
Licenses and promissory estoppel

Also - what chapter does Treasure Trove fall under? Should I cover it?

Contract:
Offer/acceptance
Consideration
Estoppel
Intention Create legal relations
Consumer contracts
Mistake
Misrepresentation
Duress
Undue influence
Remedies

Is that sufficient?

Any guidance on the above is greatly appreciated. Thanks all!!

You may want to do exclusion clauses also

Flamingo125

Hi everyone,

For company if I just cover -

Incoporation, disregarding SLP, & corporate authority from the first 5 chapters.

& then leave out chapter 14-capital maintenance & chapter 15-meetings of SH's as well.

& cover pretty much everything else, incl some changes by 2014 act do people think I would be covered or am I cutting out a bit too much there?

First time, first exam, stressing a bit as I don't know what to expect!

Tigerbalm1

starbar91 wrote: »

Thanks guys. Think I'll leave it at that then with property and get cracking on exam q's. Do you think treasure trove/ownership will only be one part of a question? It's a very small topic...

Any thoughts on the contract topics??

Treasure trove/ownership often comes up as a question by itself. Well worth studying as it is a short topic.

tobeginbegin

would someone please send me on eu exam grid if they had one? Thank you!

emmet7

Hi guys could someone please send me on a contract and/or company grid? I'd really appreciate it, panic has really set in

binkevii

hi, when do people get results of the exams?

MeganC1554

Would someone please give me a contract exam grid? Thanks so much. I have 2016 examiners report in return if that's any good?

smeal

binkevii wrote: »

hi, when do people get results of the exams?

Usually 6 Fridays after the last exam so I would say the 25th November

20029422

anyone know when the courses start again in Griffith?

Bayb12

What are people covering for injunctions?

amomcnico91

Q about Tort -

Has the historical background to the general negligence principles ever been questioned? I've been focusing more on the application of the principles to problem questions - and the historical context is so mundane - wondering if it's a risk to leave it out?

As in - I have the development of the principles roughly made out for problem questions but would it be possible for an essay to come up?

Dunne1995

Anyone got a sample answer for Q1 of the Autumn 2015 Paper in Contract? It's concerning consideration and promissory estoppel

Thanks in advance.

angelicapickle

Quick question in relation to retention of title clauses in Company Law. Is there a difference between aggregation clauses and manufactured products claims? Or are they the same?

The Talking Bread

angelicapickle wrote: »

Quick question in relation to retention of title clauses in Company Law. Is there a difference between aggregation clauses and manufactured products claims? Or are they the same?

AC Allows seller to retain title where goods are used in manufacturing/processing 
Its effect is that where the goods have been incorporated into a manufactured product, the vendor will still retain title provided the goods can be removed without damaging the manufactured product
I.e. the goods remain readily identifiable
Will not have any effect where goods are “irreversibly mixed”
In such cases the seller’s title is extinguished and the clause becomes a charge (remember charges must be registered)

Allows seller to retain title where goods are used in manufacturing/processing 

Its effect is that where the goods have been incorporated into a manufactured product, the vendor will still retain title provided the goods can be removed without damaging the manufactured product
I.e. the goods remain readily identifiable
Will not have any effect where goods are “irreversibly mixed”
In such cases the seller’s title is extinguished and the clause becomes a charge (remember charges must be registered)


so in simple form AC turn into MPC once the goods sold on (although title still retained) are used in a manufacturing process.

It comes down to the issue of readily identifiabilty (excuse the word!) of the manufactured good. And distinguishing it and separating it from the manufacture product.

If the original goods the vendor sold on are in a position to be separated (ie nuts and bolts in an engine/on a trailor) from the manufactured product and can be returned, owing to failure of payment then the ROTC is maintained but if they are irreversibly mixed (ie bags of sugar into a cake!) then they clearly cannot be returned so the clause becomes a charge.

And then it comes down to whether the charge was registered.

angelicapickle

I think I get it now. Thanks so much for your reply!

Leraf

anyone else's quotes button not working? I press it to quote the query I am replying to but nothing happens. Perhaps I am doing something wrong?

In any event, I have a Contract Grid if the person looking for it still wants it, you can send me your email address

amomcnico91

Company -

Can anyone explain s238 & 239 CA 2014 to me please? I don't understand why I am not understanding this.

Also in Tort -

Can anyone help me out with this question in relation to defamation and online publications:

Critically discuss the requirement for publication in the law of defamation and to what extent do the rules on publication and in particular online publication where the publication may be unintended?

The Talking Bread

angelicapickle wrote: »

I think I get it now. Thanks so much for your reply!

you are welcome!! I actually wasn't 100% sure myself how to format it into simple writing until I wrote it down myself!

So you done me a favour!

hullaballoo

amomcnico91 wrote: »

Company -

Can anyone explain s238 & 239 CA 2014 to me please? I don't understand why I am not understanding this.

I am not quite sure what you are not understanding, is it the technical details around monetary limits on values etc. or is it the reasoning for the prohibitions?

TheCrutzer

Just in relation to Company Law and shareholder protection, I'm looking at the rule in Foss and Harbottle and I'm confused. Is this still applicable and could we be asked a question whereby we have to apply it or has to Companies Act made it redundant and we just need to know it for what the situation was before 2014?

amomcnico91

hullaballoo wrote: »

I am not quite sure what you are not understanding, is it the technical details around monetary limits on values etc. or is it the reasoning for the prohibitions?

Would you be able to explain what it exactly prohibits please?

tobeginbegin

Contract Law & Remedies

Question 4 of March 2016 Paper:
The examiner reports mentions a case called Leahy v Rawson ("note the Supreme Court decision")

Can someone tell me what what she is looking for in particular?

odwyer94

odwyer94 wrote: »

Anyone doing equity, for charitable trusts do you think it's necessary to cover the case law on what is and isn't considered a charitable purpose considering this is all explicitly defined under section 3 of the 2009 act?

Can anyone help me with this???