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

Inmyownworld

FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: »

What?! Are you sure? Really needed to pass that exam!

Im not sure but I hope I'm right about 6! Best to forget about it, stressing if you answered something right or not won't help now so try puy it out of your head. Focus on contract tomorrow or celebrating if you're done!

That's why I almost run out of the exam hall after, I hate hearing people saying what they thought each Q was cause then I freak out thinking I did it wrong!

kiwi33

FE1 EXAMS 2013 wrote: »

Did anyone get confused with questions 6 and 8 in equity?! thought they were a tad similar, fxxxxx me right up!

I did!! So annoyed.. I thought q6 was estoppel!! Just didn read 8 stupidly enough. I wiuld have flew it aswell and then know i definitely passed but not sure, have to count out that question, raging at myself

--homeslice--

If 6 was the one about the properties being given to Martin by Ian his uncle then that's the presumption of advancement in resulting trusts and if 8 is the one regarding Helen and her mam's house then that's estoppel I think! Possibly unconscionability too!

Inmyownworld

--homeslice-- wrote: »

If 6 was the one about the properties being given to Martin by Ian his uncle then that's the presumption of advancement in resulting trusts and if 8 is the one regarding Helen and her mam's house then that's estoppel I think! Possibly unconscionability too!

Was 6 the one about John leaving the shop to his brother? Imperfect gift?

--homeslice--

Inmyownworld wrote: »

Was 6 the one about John leaving the shop to his brother? Imperfect gift?

Whoops no sorry that's not the one I'm thinking of! My brain is muddled and don't even want to see that paper again!

Inmyownworld

--homeslice-- wrote: »

Whoops no sorry that's not the one I'm thinking of! My brain is muddled and don't even want to see that paper again!

Yeah feckit. Done till Sept/Oct now.

Best of luck anyone sitting contract!

sophya

--homeslice-- wrote: »

If 6 was the one about the properties being given to Martin by Ian his uncle then that's the presumption of advancement in resulting trusts and if 8 is the one regarding Helen and her mam's house then that's estoppel I think! Possibly unconscionability too!

That's what I did. Q4 about resulting trusts and advancement and Q8 on proprietary estoppel. I had a total blank trying to remember part of satisfaction and wrote 5 lines on legacies by portions (probably called it the wrong thing too).

Ah well, I had 3 good answers, 1.5 ok answers and half of an iffy one.

Lily Belle

--homeslice-- wrote: »

If 6 was the one about the properties being given to Martin by Ian his uncle then that's the presumption of advancement in resulting trusts and if 8 is the one regarding Helen and her mam's house then that's estoppel I think! Possibly unconscionability too!

I went with estoppel for Q 8 too but have to say I really wasn't sure at the start of the exam cause I only scanned it. Don't really know what else it could have been, it seemed like classic estoppel from my perspective. I'll be pretty disappointed if I interpreted that wrongly!

Redo91

I'm pretty sure 6 was the rule in Strong v Bird and 8 was estoppel. Only cases I used for Q8 were Smyth v Halpin and Gillett v Holt. Hopefully they are enough. Was my last question so I rushed it a bit but I think I came to the right conclusion.

kiwi33

Inmyownworld wrote: »

Was 6 the one about John leaving the shop to his brother? Imperfect gift?

I thought it was imperfect gift too but apparently its strong v bird!! Raging

kiwi33

Does imperfect gift have anything to do with no 6 at all?? At least im not alone!!

kiwi33

Redo91 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure 6 was the rule in Strong v Bird and 8 was estoppel. Only cases I used for Q8 were Smyth v Halpin and Gillett v Holt. Hopefully they are enough. Was my last question so I rushed it a bit but I think I came to the right conclusion.

It was based on facts of recent case nayer v maher, but they would have applied aswell

Inmyownworld

kiwi33 wrote: »

Does imperfect gift have anything to do with no 6 at all?? At least im not alone!!

Strong v bird is the exception that equity doesn't perfect and imperfect gift. So yup, same thing.

Padjo1

I had same experience try too distinguish between question 4 & 8

I thought question 4 was not proprietary estoppel because the property was already transferred to Martin. therefore cant be imperfect gift/common expectation/unconsciousability or strong-v-bird as martin was not executor of the will.

I answered it on small bit on resulting trust but mostly on the presumption of advancement had how certain relationship give rise to the fact that a gift was intent including relationships of locos parentis which Ian voluntary assumed responability for martin treating him like a son, therefore martin has a claim for the property even though he provided no consideration

I thought question 8 was proprietary estoppel because Jane promised Helen certain house. I thought it was analogous to the facts of smyth-v-Haplin, also mentioned common expectation because Jane encouraged Helen in her improvements by abstaining.

I mention that as she had incurred no cost she may fail on the detriment part of estoppel however she make still claim proprietary estoppell on the basis of unconscionability which is the caught all net to prevent unconscionable behaviour were it would be unjust for Jane to go back on her promise to Helen in the circumstances.

could be wrong lol but that's how I saw and reasoned it

I didnt do question 6 but just read it I think thats Strong-v-Bird gift of property, continuing intention until then. Patrick was executor all the hallmarks of strong-v-bird
Last one tomorrow thankfully

safc_pete

What's everyone focusing on for Contract? I've got:

Offer & Acceptance
Consideration & Estoppel
Terms
Misrepresentation
Exemption Clauses
Illegality
Termination

Is there anything obvious that I'm leaving out?

kiwi33

safc_pete wrote: »

What's everyone focusing on for Contract? I've got:

Offer & Acceptance
Consideration & Estoppel
Terms
Misrepresentation
Exemption Clauses
Illegality
Termination

Is there anything obvious that I'm leaving out?

I would do Damages aswell.. Seems to be thrown in here and there in problem questions... Even just quickly but I'm pretty much doing the same doing mistake instead of illegality

MissM89

Any idea how performance comes up in relation to termination?

CRM1

MissM89 wrote: »

Any idea how performance comes up in relation to termination?

All contractual obligations are performed = termination. Breached if obligation is not performed in full. 'Entire Contracts' - where one party must perform their obligation first before an obligation accrues to the other party. Then just issues of substantial performance.

LawCQ91

Padjo1 wrote: »

I mention that as she had incurred no cost she may fail on the detriment part of estoppel however she make still claim proprietary estoppell on the basis of unconscionability which is the caught all net to prevent unconscionable behaviour were it would be unjust for Jane to go back on her promise to Helen in the circumstances.

I am so glad you said it was estoppel too... I had left out that when studying for equity but had studied it for property law... So answered the question based on my knowledge from the property law manual ..:/ Surprised I actually remembered a few case, like Cullen v Cullen, pascoe v turner

Didn't even mention of unconscionability or common expectation. I also said fail on the detriment factor because there is no positive expenditure.. and argued that she might be able to rely on her ' physical labor' of improving the house like those farm cases... I think it was mccarron v mccarron... Not really a strong argument tbh :pac: Also the fact she gave up her job as a doctor to help the business that kinda contributed to the family business... ( which is prob not even relevant )

do you think I would get about 10 marks for recognizing the doctrine ,explained it, and dropped a few cases.. really not sure how the papers will be marks

MissM89

CRM1 wrote: »

All contractual obligations are performed = termination. Breached if obligation is not performed in full. 'Entire Contracts' - where one party must perform their obligation first before an obligation accrues to the other party. Then just issues of substantial performance.

Thank you!! I cant believe today is the last day - thank God!!! Good luck to all doing contract:)

--homeslice--

Oh Jesus that contract paper was dreadful!!! Feck it it's alllll over! For now!

MissM89

--homeslice-- wrote: »

Oh Jesus that contract paper was dreadful!!! Feck it it's alllll over! For now!

I agree it was horrendous!! Out of 6 essays I could literally not do a single one...and problems were to bloody convoluted!! feck sake like not a good way to finish but its done!

MJW5

what came up in contract?

Redo91

I thought it was decent but getting a bit worried now seeing some of these comments. I did the 4 problem Q's which I thought were ok except for the first 1 (Waterford Crystal) which was very broad. I answered the 7th Q on revocation of contracts/and voidability for unclear terms which I thought was relatively straightforward.

dashdoll

I hope everyone's exams went well over the past few weeks!

This thread will probably be like a ghost town for a while as everyone is off taking a well deserved break!

I'm just looking for some advise. I'm finishing work at the end of May so will have pretty much 4 months to study full time and I want to get as many exams out of the way in Sept/Oct as possible.

Would I be insane to attempt all 8 given the time that I have or would I be better of sitting 6/7 as I don't want to sit 8 and only confuse myself totally. I just feel that with all the time I have I could give a good few a lash and treat studying like a full time job. Would love to here peoples thoughts on this.

Also, re prep courses, I have a law degree and masters but I'm not the best at learning off etc. Would I be way better off to bite the bullet and do the courses instead of just buying the most recent manuals/sample answers etc? The thought of forking out over 2k for these is a bit sickening but to sit them and fail would just be worse so would appreciate any thoughts on that also if it is realy worth it and if it would make a difference.

Thanks :-)

missindigo123

dashdoll wrote: »

I hope everyone's exams went well over the past few weeks!

This thread will probably be like a ghost town for a while as everyone is off taking a well deserved break!

I'm just looking for some advise. I'm finishing work at the end of May so will have pretty much 4 months to study full time and I want to get as many exams out of the way in Sept/Oct as possible.

Would I be insane to attempt all 8 given the time that I have or would I be better of sitting 6/7 as I don't want to sit 8 and only confuse myself totally. I just feel that with all the time I have I could give a good few a lash and treat studying like a full time job. Would love to here peoples thoughts on this.

Also, re prep courses, I have a law degree and masters but I'm not the best at learning off etc. Would I be way better off to bite the bullet and do the courses instead of just buying the most recent manuals/sample answers etc? The thought of forking out over 2k for these is a bit sickening but to sit them and fail would just be worse so would appreciate any thoughts on that also if it is realy worth it and if it would make a difference.

Thanks :-)

Honesty don't think you could do all 8 but people certainly have tried it! Also, wouldn't bother with a prep course get a manual and the past papers, look at what the examiners want and where they say students went wrong.
I have just attempted them, same as u with the masters and that but it still is different. They seem to want less info on more topics as opposed to detail one one topic!!

safc_pete

I've just done 4. Mentally, they're very draining. I'd say do 5. Leave out EU & Constitutional and then take your pick from there.

safc_pete

Redo91 wrote: »

I thought it was decent but getting a bit worried now seeing some of these comments. I did the 4 problem Q's which I thought were ok except for the first 1 (Waterford Crystal) which was very broad. I answered the 7th Q on revocation of contracts/and voidability for unclear terms which I thought was relatively straightforward.

I'm the same. I did the 4 probs. Please tell me there was penalty clauses as well as implied terms on the one with the grain. After that, I answered the Specific Performance Q as one would have answered it in Equity.

apriori

What's the general consensus on the best manual to use?

I had Independent colleges for tort, criminal, land and equity. I found them okay but the land manual is a disaster.

Sitting EU, Constitutional, Contract and Company next so I want to make sure I have the best one for each.

sophya

safc_pete wrote: »

I've just done 4. Mentally, they're very draining. I'd say do 5. Leave out EU & Constitutional and then take your pick from there.

But then you have to do EU and Constitutional in the same sitting. I'd say split them up. The first time I did them was Contract, Property and Equity because they overlap a bit, also did Company and EU. Got the four I needed.

I'd say look at the timetable as a guide but don't decide which exams to sit by having days between them. I'd recommend to do two of EU, Constitutional, Tort or Company in September. All four of them are so big and having two in each sitting is much less stressful.