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

FreeFallin94

Can anyone tell me the difference between the duties owed by the different kinds of directors - formally appointed, shadow and de facto?

Do they all owe the s. 228 duties, or is that just the formally appointed directors? Do the fraudulent trading / restriction provisions apply to all 3?

Thanks in advance!!

ElmK2016

Hey! Did anyone ever find out what cases were discussed in that UCD lecture for constitutional?

Gunslinger92

binkevii wrote: »

Hi, what came up in October 2016 for the Contract Law exam? Any help would be appreciated

Pretty much feckin' everything came up, there were some questions which had three topics in them. Study everything. Sorry :pac:

I'll post a list of the cases from that constitutional lecture tomorrow, I left it in work

Pickpocket

In contract, problem questions are my strong suit and ideally I'd like to attempt all four. With that in mind the only real strategy for me is to study everything as there's a lot of mixing of topics within an individual problem question.

I've never sat an FE1 before but based on the contract past papers I'd urge people to be very wary about cutting out stuff. I honestly don't see how I can pass without studying everything. My aim is to have a good knowledge of every topic rather than knowing a certain amount of topics in great detail.

Redo91

In my Constitutional manual in relation to "colourable manoeuvres" it refers to cases of DPP v Gormley and Gormley v DPP. After googling both I can't seem to find anything on Gormley v DPP. Is it a typo and is the manual referring to the case of DPP v Gormley in both instances?

pottsss777

Does anyone know when the FE1s are in October? Are they at the start or the end of the month?

annmc882

pottsss777 wrote: »

Does anyone know when the FE1s are in October? Are they at the start or the end of the month?

late sept / early oct

Rinnuco2016

Hi All, does anyone have an up-to-date grid for criminal and contract law? I would be very grateful if you could pm me. Thanks a mil!

castle123

Hey,

Can someone please confirm what topics came up for both Tort and Contract on the October 2016 exam? Would be really appreciated.

Thanks

20029422

any thoughts on equity I've 11 topics
mine are
constitution of trusts
charitable trusts
resulting
3 certs
trustees
cypres
secret trusts
specific performance
injunctions inteloc & marvel
rectification
tracing
anybody have around the same or think I'm missing a important one.I've less topics for this than other ones

Cecef13

Dsalmon91 wrote: »

Just wondering has anyone received correspondence from the Law Society outlining the exam info and candidates exam number. I know in application receipt they said these details would be sent out approximately 2 weeks before the start of the exams but I haven't received anything yet.

I emailed them Friday and they said the letters will be posted out on Monday

Yoop

Redo91 wrote: »

In my Constitutional manual in relation to "colourable manoeuvres" it refers to cases of DPP v Gormley and Gormley v DPP. After googling both I can't seem to find anything on Gormley v DPP. Is it a typo and is the manual referring to the case of DPP v Gormley in both instances?

DPP v Gormley and DPP v White were heard together. White is about the possibility of getting advice from a solicitor before giving forensic samples. Could this be what the manual is referring to?

Pickpocket

Is proprietary estoppel examinable as part of contract or is it only promissory estoppel that's covered? I seem to remember reading that in a manual once and yet plenty of the notes doing the rounds have sections on proprietary? Thanks.

JakeSmith

Hi Folks, Would anyone have a Company or Tort Grid available. I could swop for an up to date Equity Grid. Cheers!!

Lindyloo 1

20029422 wrote: »

any thoughts on equity I've 11 topics
mine are
constitution of trusts
charitable trusts
resulting
3 certs
trustees
cypres
secret trusts
specific performance
injunctions inteloc & marvel
rectification
tracing
anybody have around the same or think I'm missing a important one.I've less topics for this than other ones

Wouldn't leave out Recission/Undue Influence

Lindyloo 1

Pickpocket wrote: »

Is proprietary estoppel examinable as part of contract or is it only promissory estoppel that's covered? I seem to remember reading that in a manual once and yet plenty of the notes doing the rounds have sections on proprietary? Thanks.

Proprietary estoppel examined in equity
Promissory estoppel examined in contract

Redo91

Yoop wrote: »

DPP v Gormley and DPP v White were heard together. White is about the possibility of getting advice from a solicitor before giving forensic samples. Could this be what the manual is referring to?

Thanks. That must be it. Knew about those cases but just threw me when the manual referred to a Gormley v DPP case. If you're citing the case in the exam would you be able to just refer to DPP v Gormley or would you need to mention DPP v White too?

shellbm

Still no sign of the candidate pack? Is everyone else in the same boat?

Ferry.Man

Got mine posted out to me today.

Pickpocket

Hi guys. I've just decided I'm gonna have to cut out some contract topics. My intention was to do at least something on every topic, even for use as a wild card/Hail Mary answer, but I've had a look at my calendar and realised it's not workable. I simply have to cut something out or I'm gonna spread myself too thin.

I note that City Colleges' 'night before notes' from October 2016 list the following as topics that should always be revised: offer & acceptance, consideration/estoppel, contractual terms, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, mistake, misrepresentation, discharge and damages.

Is there anything else you'd add to that core list based on recent grids, etc?

Thanks.

Bayb12

Does anyone know when the 2017 night before notes will go up?

Yoop

Redo91 wrote: »

Thanks. That must be it. Knew about those cases but just threw me when the manual referred to a Gormley v DPP case. If you're citing the case in the exam would you be able to just refer to DPP v Gormley or would you need to mention DPP v White too?

I would just refer to it as DPP v Gormley.

Yoop

Pickpocket wrote: »

Hi guys. I've just decided I'm gonna have to cut out some contract topics. My intention was to do at least something on every topic, even for use as a wild card/Hail Mary answer, but I've had a look at my calendar and realised it's not workable. I simply have to cut something out or I'm gonna spread myself too thin.

I note that City Colleges' 'night before notes' from October 2016 list the following as topics that should always be revised: offer & acceptance, consideration/estoppel, contractual terms, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, mistake, misrepresentation, discharge and damages.

Is there anything else you'd add to that core list based on recent grids, etc?

Thanks.

I would know a few points and a couple of cases about capacity and formal requirements as well. And I would definitely advise knowing those topics you're doing inside out.

I don't know if you've seen the exam papers but on the October paper Q1 contained two topics, Q2 had three, Q3 had three, Q4 had two and Q6 was and answer (a) and (b) question.

Be careful as well of relying too much on the grids and leaving a topic out just because it's not often examined and came up on the previous paper; illegality was asked in both 2016 sittings for example.

Pickpocket

Yoop wrote: »

I would know a few points and a couple of cases about capacity and formal requirements as well. And I would definitely advise knowing those topics you're doing inside out.

I don't know if you've seen the exam papers but on the October paper Q1 contained two topics, Q2 had three, Q3 had three, Q4 had two and Q6 was and answer (a) and (b) question.

Be careful as well of relying too much on the grids and leaving a topic out just because it's not often examined and came up on the previous paper; illegality was asked in both 2016 sittings for example.

Cheers for that! I just want to get a solid list of topics nailed down and then hopefully come back and do another few topics, even briefly. I know from my time as an undergrad that those last minute topics can help, especially with a problem question where referencing a couple of cases could end up being very important. I've gotten over the line so many times based on topics that I initially cut.

Pickpocket

Is there any recent case law that clarifies when acceptance via email is actually received?

shellbm

For anyone whos passed company; I have heard the examiner is quite pushed on case law. I aim to learn roughly 15-20 cases per chapter to try and cover any question thrown at us. Would the undergrad level of roughly 8 cases per question get you through? Generally speaking (I know some chapters require more/less).

Redo91

shellbm wrote: »

For anyone whos passed company; I have heard the examiner is quite pushed on case law. I aim to learn roughly 15-20 cases per chapter to try and cover any question thrown at us. Would the undergrad level of roughly 8 cases per question get you through? Generally speaking (I know some chapters require more/less).

Jesus will we need that many cases per question? It's my first time doing Company but going by other subjects anything around 5 per question is enough.

shellbm

Redo91 wrote: »

Jesus will we need that many cases per question? It's my first time doing Company but going by other subjects anything around 5 per question is enough.

Sorry, didn't mean to alarm. This is my first round of FE1s, I am really unsure of what it takes to pass. If that is the case with other topics then I'm sure Company is the same, thanks !

Redo91

shellbm wrote: »

Sorry, didn't mean to alarm. This is my first round of FE1s, I am really unsure of what it takes to pass. If that is the case with other topics then I'm sure Company is the same, thanks !

No worries! Just speaking from experience of my previous exams that usually 5 is enough. Hopefully someone that has actually passed Company can give you a better idea about what the examiner wants.

angelicapickle

shellbm wrote: »

For anyone whos passed company; I have heard the examiner is quite pushed on case law. I aim to learn roughly 15-20 cases per chapter to try and cover any question thrown at us. Would the undergrad level of roughly 8 cases per question get you through? Generally speaking (I know some chapters require more/less).

It very much depends on the question. I sat the paper last October and passed comfortably.

I think it's the big problem questions which refer to numerous issues that you need to refer to plenty of case law. For the Oct 2016 paper question 5 in relation to the transfer of shares i had about 9 cases.

Question 1, in relation to the companies act on the other hand I didn't refer to any case, i may have cited academic commentary once or twice but that was it.

I answered question 4 in relation to the crystallisation of floating charges too, and that was a much shorter answer than my other questions but I referred to about 6 cases.

Ideally i'd try to aim for 8 per question, but as I said don't panic if you can't. Some questions require them more than others. Address the issues asked, don't spit out irrelevant case law just because you know it, that would be my advice! Best of luck!