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

saor19

Anybody know what the Independent tips are for EU?

safc_pete

Inmyownworld wrote: »

I think they word those Q's so widely that you won't be penalised much for leaving out a little bit... (that's what I'm telling myself!)

You'd hope so. Technically, you could have squeezed half the syllabus into that question.

iPringle

LostOutForeign wrote: »

I did property rights, right to a livelihood, locus standi and proportionality... Kicking myself for not spotting the non-delegation issue

What was the fair procedures element? I looked at locus standi, non delegation, property rights (madigan in particular) and then an analysis of the vagueness of the provision comparing it with the Vagrancy Act case...

Edit: Might have quoted the wrong person!

apriori

For how many years has the current examiner Shane Kilcommins been setting the Criminal Law paper?

--homeslice--

Slowly but surely losing the will to live.. EU, equity and contract lined up next so that's going to be enjoyable! All in a row too, beautiful!

Don't know how I'm going to function on so little sleep, during tort I was so tired all that was going through my head was electric six 'danger! high voltage' because I was reading over liability for fire before going in!

MissM89

--homeslice-- wrote: »

Slowly but surely losing the will to live.. EU, equity and contract lined up next so that's going to be enjoyable! All in a row too, beautiful!

Don't know how I'm going to function on so little sleep, during tort I was so tired all that was going through my head was electric six 'danger! high voltage' because I was reading over liability for fire before going in!

I feel your pain

sophya

Can anyone tell me what came up in March for criminal?

Stormington

apriori wrote: »

For how many years has the current examiner Shane Kilcommins been setting the Criminal Law paper?

A couple of years now. In fairness to him, the answers in the exam reports are a very good indicator of what he might want from an answer. A bit OTT with detail, but it paints a good picture of why you need to learn the syllabus as so much of it crosses over.

Unlike Eoin Carolan. Students failed to answer the question asked. Q 7 was often answered about something that was clearly not asked. The case notes were poorly answered.

You can tell which one of them feels like he needs to be held at gunpoint when it comes to writing the reports.

Inmyownworld

Stormington wrote: »

A couple of years now. In fairness to him, the answers in the exam reports are a very good indicator of what he might want from an answer. A bit OTT with detail, but it paints a good picture of why you need to learn the syllabus as so much of it crosses over.

Unlike Eoin Carolan. Students failed to answer the question asked. Q 7 was often answered about something that was clearly not asked. The case notes were poorly answered.

You can tell which one of them feels like he needs to be held at gunpoint when it comes to writing the reports.

The constitutional reports are useless! Why bother writing them!

LawCQ91

Can anyone tell me what came up in the criminal procedure Q for the march paper? Was it bail and something esle?

Thinking of leaving out whatever came up the last time .. or just leave out that topic entirely..

Legal125

MissM89 wrote: »

I feel your pain

Me too criminal, eu and equity....
Not sure how this works in reality.
Mental breakdown perhaps

Morris_fe1s

Really stuck here: any idea what the essay questions were that came up in contract recently please???????

kiwi33

A quick question... I'm looking for a case that supports the idea that a contract can consist of a promise in return for a promise. For example Anne says she will deliver the goods to Ben and Ben says he will provide her with £500 upon delivery.. It was in the exam reports but she didn't mention a case to go with it... anybody have any ideas??

kiwi33

Morris_fe1s wrote: »

Really stuck here: any idea what the essay questions were that came up in contract recently please???????

October 2013:
Q 5 Need to reform capacity on a minor to enter into a contract or certain kinds of contracts can only be enforced if evidenced in writing

Q6 Discuss principles discussing remoteness of damages and differences between liquidated damages clause and penalty clause

Q7 Principles to protect guarantedd and securities to financial institutions that advance monies to close friends and family memebers of guarantor (undue influence)

Q8 agent power to bind their principal where the have authority to act of principals behalf.. privity rule or Critical assess law reforms report on privity of contract

April 2013

Q 5 Discuss impact of EU Directives and Current harmonisation initiatives on irish contract law

Q6 a extent to which courts take into account background information when interpreting contractual documents and When will irish courts imply a term into a connntract

Q7 Outline duty of utmost good faith in irish insurance law
or Discuss whether each of the following could be an actionable misrepresentation 1. a statement of intention 2 statement of opinion and 3 silence

Q8 similar to one above re undue influnence, bank gaurantees and family member

I've also seen an essay question come up regarding relationship between considertion and economic duress

S12b

kiwi33 wrote: »

A quick question... I'm looking for a case that supports the idea that a contract can consist of a promise in return for a promise. For example Anne says she will deliver the goods to Ben and Ben says he will provide her with £500 upon delivery.. It was in the exam reports but she didn't mention a case to go with it... anybody have any ideas??

The definition of consideration provided in Dunlop v Selfridge includes a promise for a promise.

"an act or forbearance of one party, or the promise thereof, is the price for which the promise of the other is bought, and the promise thus given for value is enforceable"

FE1 EXAMS 2013

This is so mentally draining 😭 feel like nothing is going in!

MissM89

Hi there, hope everyone is doing ok! only a few days of this hell left!

I have a question re criminal I'm hoping someone can answer - in DPP v Nally did Nally get off in the end at the retrial? I'm reading conflicting things and the manual doesn't actually say which or whether so any confirmation would be appreciated!

Legal125

MissM89 wrote: »

Hi there, hope everyone is doing ok! only a few days of this hell left!

I have a question re criminal I'm hoping someone can answer - in DPP v Nally did Nally get off in the end at the retrial? I'm reading conflicting things and the manual doesn't actually say which or whether so any confirmation would be appreciated!

Yeah he did. At trial they weren't given the option of not guilty hence retrial and found not guilty

Inmyownworld

Too risky to leave out competition law for EU, also not planning on doing a case note Q.....

Have covered basically everything else though.

My head is wrecked!

Legal125

Hey. Duress in criminal trial. Can't be raced for murder but can it for manslaughter? Yes?

MissM89

Legal125 wrote: »

Hey. Duress in criminal trial. Can't be raced for murder but can it for manslaughter? Yes?

Duress is never a defence to murder (AG v Whelan)

Legal125

MissM89 wrote: »

Duress is never a defence to murder (AG v Whelan)

Sorry thanks dope murder is reduced to manslaughter by a defence by a defence. Silly me.

But assault manslaughter./ criminal and dangerous act manslaughter.? No. Agh confusing myself. Help.

Legal125

Legal125 wrote: »

Sorry thanks dope murder is reduced to manslaughter by a defence by a defence. Silly me.

But assault manslaughter./ criminal and dangerous act manslaughter.? No. Agh confusing myself. Help.

There was a problem question where a man pushed a woman of a boat. And unbeknownst to her e couldn't swim. He did it to save lives of others. She died so homocide. But he mentioned duress in exam report as a defence for the man so that is what has confused me.

Inmyownworld

Legal125 wrote: »

There was a problem question where a man pushed a woman of a boat. And unbeknownst to her e couldn't swim. He did it to save lives of others. She died so homocide. But he mentioned duress in exam report as a defence for the man so that is what has confused me.

I'd say that you could argue necessity to save the others had to push her out but that can only be used against the charge of murder and if successfully invoked then his charge would be reduced to manslaughter.

So still guilty.

saor19

Q6 of Oct 2011 paper? Can't see any ref to duress, only necessity.

missindigo123

Criminal law :-( sad face haha!!! So much information!!!!!!!!

I've done murder, manslaughter, what is a crime / difference between the offences, NFOAP 1997, incoherent offences, lawful / unlawful ardent, presumption of innocence / right to silence, sexual offences, essay on special criminal court, defences (self defence, provocation, intoxication, insanity)

Will I be ok leaving out property offences??

kiwi33

Does anybody else feel they have whip-lash going between the decisions for the case law regarding mandatory interlocutory injuntions and whether its a fair question to be tried or a higher standard? Holy ****!

Glinda!

Anyone care to share any wisdom they have as to what could appear on EU paper tomorrow? Very worried that i wont have five questions . . .

Inmyownworld

Glinda! wrote: »

Anyone care to share any wisdom they have as to what could appear on EU paper tomorrow? Very worried that i wont have five questions . . .

Not a clue! Basically the city colleges lecture said it could be anything really... great stuff!

Redo91

Just a quick question. In criminal today I was tight for time so I was writing until the very end. Never got a chance to right the numbers of the questions I did on the cover. I assume this isn't a big deal?

Also for those of you that did the essay question on incitement, did you right about the 1989 Act as well as DPP v O'Grady and DPP v Callan? I never mentioned Capaldi or Shaw and not sure if I should have.