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

chops018

Milkypops wrote: »

how long were you waiting for a response chops?? i emailed this morning too so just wondering how long il be waiting??

alsol on a side note you wouldnt know anyone that would have the constitutional paper from the march sitting??

I emailed them at 10.25 and got a response at 11.13, so I wasn't waiting long at all.

Maybe check your junk folder?

No, I don't know anyone who just sat that personally, so I can't help there I'm afraid.

Eveline14

Milkypops wrote: »

how long were you waiting for a response chops?? i emailed this morning too so just wondering how long il be waiting??

Emailed them there about 20 mins ago, just after getting a reply. I sent the email to the address listed on their info page about the review sessions.

Milkypops

Just watched Brendan Foley's online lecture from the Revision Class on Constitutional - Very insightful, would definitely recommend watching it!

penny1500

Anyone doing Company, EU or Equity for the September sitting? Would you be interested in taking a course in one and sharing notes? Best of luck to anyone sitting the exams this time round!!!

Lolers11

Would someone be able to post what came up in the March sitting in Company please?

chops018

Lolers11 wrote: »

Would someone be able to post what came up in the March sitting in Company please?

I posted a detailed description of what came up on the date of the exam - March 20th. If you go back a few pages you should come across it.

Lolers11

chops018 wrote: »

I posted a detailed description of what came up on the date of the exam - March 20th. If you go back a few pages you should come across it.

Thanks a mil! Must have missed that in my study haze.

sophya

Milkypops wrote: »

Just watched Brendan Foley's online lecture from the Revision Class on Constitutional - Very insightful, would definitely recommend watching it!

Is that not happening until Thursday or is there an earlier one that you can get access to as a non independent colleges student?

Inmyownworld

Milkypops wrote: »

Just watched Brendan Foley's online lecture from the Revision Class on Constitutional - Very insightful, would definitely recommend watching it!

I'm waiting for them to send me the link to the Constitutional and EU recordings, I only got the link to the live stream today. Is there another way of getting it?

Inmyownworld

sophya wrote: »

Is that not happening until Thursday or is there an earlier one that you can get access to as a non independent colleges student?

From what I saw it was on last Wednesday?

sophya

Inmyownworld wrote: »

From what I saw it was on last Wednesday?

I emailed them and they said the constitutional review class isn't until Thursday but their website did say last Thursday. But I'd prefer access to the class done by Brendan Foley because the one on Thursday is someone else.

Inmyownworld

sophya wrote: »

I emailed them and they said the constitutional review class isn't until Thursday but their website did say last Thursday.

Oh right, I e-mailed them about a couple of classes and they just e-mailed me the one for today and didn't mention when the others are on. I had seen on the website that they were last week so presumed I'd just get the recording.

kiwi33

Does anybody know of hand what Clarke J's obiter comment was in Carroll v Dublin Bus (2005) in relation to specific performance??

Also does anybody know a case in relation to trespassing that stipulates if they find an object on somebody else's land they still have a better claim to it than anyone else other than that of the paper owner whether they were trespassing or not. (property, finding)

Ownleme

kiwi33 wrote: »

Does anybody know of hand what Clarke J's obiter comment was in Carroll v Dublin Bus (2005) in relation to specific performance??

Also does anybody know a case in relation to trespassing that stipulates if they find an object on somebody else's land they still have a better claim to it than anyone else other than that of the paper owner whether they were trespassing or not. (property, finding)

Hannah v peel supposedly is about a trespasser (soldier in army who requisitioned house) who found a broach and as a finder was entitled to it over owner of house because owner of house had never occupied the house and so had no intention to possess the item by showing they controlled the house and everything in it ( but not sure if it specifically says if real owner came along they could have it) also in Webb didnt they become trespassers cuz they breached licence to look at church

kiwi33

Ownleme wrote: »

Hannah v peel supposedly is about a trespasser (soldier in army who requisitioned house) who found a broach and as a finder was entitled to it over owner of house because owner of house had never occupied the house and so had no intention to possess the item by showing they controlled the house and everything in it ( but not sure if it specifically says if real owner came along they could have it) also in Webb didnt they become trespassers cuz they breached licence to look at church

Thank you so much, I was searching and couldn't find a case and I saw that part always sneaks its way into questions with findings. Probably of case as I was looking past it, too much study can have that effect.. so thank you very much!!!

Milkypops

sophya wrote: »

I emailed them and they said the constitutional review class isn't until Thursday but their website did say last Thursday. But I'd prefer access to the class done by Brendan Foley because the one on Thursday is someone else.

Just email them and ask for the links..

Brendan foleys are the ones I got from them
them

sophya

Milkypops wrote: »

Just email them and ask for the links..

Brendan foleys are the ones I got from them
them

Is that independent colleges?

Legal125

sophya wrote: »

Is that independent colleges?

Brendan foley is city colleges. To clarify. Unless he is working for independant too.

Milkypops

sophya wrote: »

Is that independent colleges?

Ya its city colleges...

Milkypops

also does anyone happen to have brendan foleys slides on the case note question??

kgalway

Is anybody still waiting on their information (exam number etc.) from the Law Society for the April sitting?

chops018

kgalway wrote: »

Is anybody still waiting on their information (exam number etc.) from the Law Society for the April sitting?

I got mine the start of last week. It's getting very close, I would ring them.

Also, I'm in the 900's for this set, for March I was in the 200's. I assume they're just continuing the numbers into April as no way could there be nearly 1,000 people sitting these!!

Milkypops

chops018 wrote: »

I got mine the start of last week. It's getting very close, I would ring them.

Also, I'm in the 900's for this set, for March I was in the 200's. I assume they're just continuing the numbers into April as no way could there be nearly 1,000 people sitting these!!

you never know with people sitting the exams twice...most people would have waited till april to give them more time...so i say majority would be sitting in april with the extra numbers then from those who sat in march....i say theres a great possibility of than many sitting the april ones!

kgalway

chops018 wrote: »

I got mine the start of last week. It's getting very close, I would ring them.

Also, I'm in the 900's for this set, for March I was in the 200's. I assume they're just continuing the numbers into April as no way could there be nearly 1,000 people sitting these!!

Thanks, beginning to panic now! Sent them an email on Friday, but no reply from them.. going to ring them now.

chops018

kgalway wrote: »

Thanks, beginning to panic now! Sent them an email on Friday, but no reply from them.. going to ring them now.

Ah you'll be grand. Once you have your letter acknowledging receipt of payment you should be ok if worst comes to worst.

kgalway

chops018 wrote: »

Ah you'll be grand. Once you have your letter acknowledging receipt of payment you should be ok if worst comes to worst.

Thanks, rang them and it turns out that they used my previous address. They're reissuing them today. Lucky I rang! Thanks!

S12b

kiwi33 wrote: »

Does anybody know of hand what Clarke J's obiter comment was in Carroll v Dublin Bus (2005) in relation to specific performance??

Also does anybody know a case in relation to trespassing that stipulates if they find an object on somebody else's land they still have a better claim to it than anyone else other than that of the paper owner whether they were trespassing or not. (property, finding)

Carroll v Dublin Bus: obiter comments were expressing doubt over whether a court had the jurisdiction to order the specific performance of a contract for employment. Court concluded they possibly could but only if no difficulties would arise as a result of the order.

This was then applied in Ahmed v HSE. Despite the fact that relationship of trust and confidence still existed between the parties, the court refused to order specific performance of the contract of employment because there was potential for certain issues to arise as a result of the order and as the court could not foresee what these issues would be, they refused to order SP. (It had something to do with the contract being related to provision of surgery to members of the public and as it was a complex area, many problems could arise so the court simply steered clear)

With regard to the trespasser, a trespasser can never have superior title to anyone. If the object is found above the land, Parker v British Airways applies (finder must be lawfully there). If the object is found below the land, land owner has superior title to finder regardless. Finally, under the 1994 Act a finder may be given some compensation but this is discretionary i.e if you're a trespasser unlikely to get anything.

FE1 student

Hi all, does any one know if the ECHR have given a judgment in Reilly v Ireland (2009) relating to vicarious liability. I cant find anything on line.

Ownleme

Am I right in saying for someone not signed up to any classes

City Colleges you can watch online and get link to recording the next morning if you email
Independent you can either go to or email next day asking for the link

Thanks

Ownleme

S12b wrote: »

Carroll v Dublin Bus: obiter comments were expressing doubt over whether a court had the jurisdiction to order the specific performance of a contract for employment. Court concluded they possibly could but only if no difficulties would arise as a result of the order.

This was then applied in Ahmed v HSE. Despite the fact that relationship of trust and confidence still existed between the parties, the court refused to order specific performance of the contract of employment because there was potential for certain issues to arise as a result of the order and as the court could not foresee what these issues would be, they refused to order SP. (It had something to do with the contract being related to provision of surgery to members of the public and as it was a complex area, many problems could arise so the court simply steered clear)

With regard to the trespasser, a trespasser can never have superior title to anyone. If the object is found above the land, Parker v British Airways applies (finder must be lawfully there). If the object is found below the land, land owner has superior title to finder regardless. Finally, under the 1994 Act a finder may be given some compensation but this is discretionary i.e if you're a trespasser unlikely to get anything.

Man wish I'd know this for my exam. Although doubt that aspect of SP will come up again