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

BASHBAG

Thanks a million that is exactly what I needed to hear was having a bit of an anger panic attack there.

Much appreciated.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Snakeydoogey wrote: »

Anyone who fancies posting the 8 topics that are going to come up in equity is free to do so.No rush like.

If you check out the the City Colleges night before notes the first page has a list of recommended topics.
<<Mod deletion. Pls don't comment on the various colleges>>

The Talking Bread

Charitable and secret trusts, SP, undue influence, interlocutory injunctions, Quia Timet, resulting trusts, prop estop

Rebelgirl87

BASHBAG wrote: »

Thanks a million that is exactly what I needed to hear was having a bit of an anger panic attack there.

Much appreciated.

No worries! Anytime! You will be fine.

Flamingo125

Findings/TT
Succession
Co-ownership
Licences & RR
Family property
Adverse poss
Land reg

Too risky not to cover another topic do people think?

2121993

20029422 wrote: »

did the other woman incite or was it accesorial liability for procuring?

I mentioned both as an accessory and inciting and I think both are equally right. I think it comes under the counselling or procuring angle of accessorial liability.

starbar91

Flamingo125 wrote: »

Findings/TT
Succession
Co-ownership
Licences & RR
Family property
Adverse poss
Land reg

Too risky not to cover another topic do people think?

I'm doing all of the above minus land reg. treasure trove would be a beaut if it came up and there's usually 2 succession questions. Late now to do another. I'd say you're grand with the above.

Fe1r

I'm having a major panic over criminal this morning. I panicked in there and had total word vomit. I think I wrote that in the harassment question that he is liable for both burglary and aggravated burglary. Is this completely wrong? is it just one or the other and not both? Im worried I did the same for question 1 in sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault

2121993

I actually realised in the exam that I wasn't sure about this but I just went with one or the other as otherwise anyone who is guilty of aggravated burglary is always necessarily guilty of burglary too. I just went with the more serious one each time but I really doubt that this is a terrible mistake to make! If you even got that much I'd say that's pretty good

XxMCRxBabyxX

Ah f**k, I completely forgot that aggravated burglary was a thing! I just said burglary Hopefully they'll just presume that's what I meant. :-D

Leraf

I said burglary but that if he brought the weapon with him it was aggravated burglary. I don't think it mentioned if he brought the knife or found it in the house

lawgirl23

Leraf wrote: »

I said burglary but that if he brought the weapon with him it was aggravated burglary. I don't think it mentioned if he brought the knife or found it in the house

Agreed. I said if he had it when he went in, he would probably get aggravated burglary, and if he acquired it when he was in there, he would likely get just basic burglary instead... It didn't specify where exactly he got the knife

Tigerbalm1

Fe1r wrote: »

I'm having a major panic over criminal this morning. I panicked in there and had total word vomit. I think I wrote that in the harassment question that he is liable for both burglary and aggravated burglary. Is this completely wrong? is it just one or the other and not both? Im worried I did the same for question 1 in sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault

I didn't sit this but you can be charged with multiple counts so suggesting both is a good idea. There's usually a multitude of offences within the facts of each problem. It doesn't have to be clear cut but makes sense to suggest any possible offences that appear from the facts.

Leraf

I Finally got something right !!! lol

20029422

did anybody deal with question two with lawful use of force Kevin using the screwdriver he did no more than he thought was necessary even if it was more than necessary in Ireland it's a subjective test.causation neglect of injury/causation causing tiernan to injure himself in escaping could be held liable but probably not because of there original act of aggression in attacking Kevin,and I mentioned manslaughter and provocation very briefly

Leraf

20029422 wrote: »

did anybody deal with question two with lawful use of force Kevin using the screwdriver he did no more than he thought was necessary even if it was more than necessary in Ireland it's a subjective test.causation neglect of injury/causation causing tiernan to injure himself in escaping could be held liable but probably not because of there original act of aggression in attacking Kevin,and I mentioned manslaughter and provocation very briefly

I said that Kevin could plead self defence but that the plea would likely fail as it was not justified and proportionate as Tom (?) had already retreated. Said Kevin could not expect Tom to mitigate his losses by seeking medical attention so he would probably be charged with Manslaughter. And I mentioned the age of responsibility as the question mentioned their ages.

fe1er

In Family Property does anyone know what the law is regarding same sex couples and civil partnerships?

Flamingo125

starbar91 wrote: »

I'm doing all of the above minus land reg. treasure trove would be a beaut if it came up and there's usually 2 succession questions. Late now to do another. I'd say you're grand with the above.

Cool thanks, some sort of reassurance to know someone is in the same boat! Yes 2 nice succession Q's & TT would be ideal

amomcnico91

Can someone explain Debors the Will in Secret Trusts to me please

20029422

amomcnico91 wrote: »

Can someone explain Debors the Will in Secret Trusts to me please

dehors or outside the will.if I have a bit on the side and need to hide it from the missus I tell me friend Tom that I will leave him something in the will but it's really for me missus on the side that he will hold on trust so on the face of the will looks like its for tom

2121993

Does anyone who has already sat or passed EU have any tips about how to handle it? I am currently panicking as I am much less prepared for this one than all of the others and don't know how to take in so much information so quickly...

Fe1r

2121993 wrote: »

Does anyone who has already sat or passed EU have any tips about how to handle it? I am currently panicking as I am much less prepared for this one than all of the others and don't know how to take in so much information so quickly...

I passed it last year <<Mod deletion>> I hope this helps a little

/Mod
Pls, no comments about your examiners

2121993

Fe1r wrote: »

I passed it last year <<Mod deletion>> I hope this helps a little

/Mod
Pls, no comments about your examiners

Thank you, it does! I just feel like it's hopeless at this stage - there's so much to learn...

starbar91

Are you going over DMC for succession law in property or leaving it out?

Gunslinger92

starbar91 wrote: »

Are you going over DMC for succession law in property or leaving it out?

Leaving it out, don't think it's ever come up on the property paper?

Just saw that the findings / treasure trove topic came up last sitting

starbar91

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Leaving it out, don't think it's ever come up on the property paper?

Just saw that the findings / treasure trove topic came up last sitting

You are not serious. How did I not spot that that's one high marker gone for me then...

Dunne1995

starbar91 wrote: »

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Leaving it out, don't think it's ever come up on the property paper?

Just saw that the findings / treasure trove topic came up last sitting

You are not serious. How did I not spot that that's one high marker gone for me then...

Findings has come up the past three sittings at least .. I don't think that means it won't be on it tomorrow

Flamingo125

starbar91 wrote: »

Are you going over DMC for succession law in property or leaving it out?

Have a paragraph on it I'll hopefully rem but that's itðŸ˜

bivo87

Does anyone know in the march 2016 Eu paper was the question on free movement of goods a charge having equivalent effect under art 30 (because it was being asked for a payment of the fee for the inspection) or was it an article 34 q because it was really in relation to an EU directive on inspection with a justification under art 36 and public health???

Really stuck on this :-( Cannot figure it out and could possible answer the whole question wrong!!!

Gunslinger92

Dunne1995 wrote: »

Findings has come up the past three sittings at least .. I don't think that means it won't be on it tomorrow

Oh! Friend of mine told me it never comes up twice in a row. I don't have a property grid. Hopefully you are right

Also good Christ if I can avoid two in a row next sitting I will, I'm absolutely bollixed and have equity on Thursday too...