****LEAVING CERT BUSINESS BEFORE AND AFTER****

leavingcert problems

aleatorio wrote: »

Maslows Hierarchy, functions of meetings and impact of technology on communications :P

Phew!!!! I did it!
Totally blanked on B part of ABQ, could only think of 4 out of 7 contact things, so I put Down how invitation to treat wasn't part of agreement and rubbished on about that. Do ye think I might get a few marks for it??

K6Y

aleatorio wrote: »

I did too many for it id say :pac:
I did offer, acceptance, consideration, legality of form and capacity to contract

Too many? The question was worth 30 marks and my teacher always told me that one point is only worth 5 marks, so I had to talk about 6!!

Aspiring

thelad95 wrote: »

What did people say for the elements of contracts. I said Agreement, Consideration, Legality of Form. Couldn't find links for anything else.

Went with acceptance myself.

Odrevan

2thousand14 wrote: »

Offer and Legality of purpose

And intention to contract as they both want it to be legally binding. And an Invitation to Treat if you were stuck at the start. Pretty much everything tbh!

robman60

eoinoc2509 wrote: »

What did you all get for the debt equity ratio? I got 0.65 but I think I did it wrong

That's incorrect. The ratio was 3:1. You should ignore the authorised capital, it was there to throw you off.

That's the nicest paper I've ever done. Suited me perfectly and everything went well. The short Qs were beautiful except I didn't get FDI. The first part of the ABQ was a little more difficult than normal as the links weren't as celar as they sometimes are. The contract part was a dream and the last part was meh. It was the only part of the ABQ chapters I hadn't revised but I still knew it fairly well.

For long Qs I did 1,3,4 and 5. 4 and 5 were lovely and straightforward, Maslow''s hierarchy and the ratio Q was perfect. The HR manager part was lovely too.

Question 1 was okay, can't believe there wasn't any Labour Court or similar part in the question. The EU part of Question 3 was beautiful too and I had revised all the relevant things this morning luckily, Wasn't that sure on the A part but happy nonethless.


Absolutely delighted overall!

thelad95

Aspiring wrote: »

Went with acceptance myself.

Offer + Acceptance = Agreement

mono2

Can anyone tell me what the correct answer was for the Recruitment part of Q5? Had to absolutely wing it, just wondering if I was on the right track

aleatorio

robman60 wrote: »

That's incorrect. The ratio was 3:1. You should ignore the authorised capital, it was there to throw you off.

That's the nicest paper I've ever done. Suited me perfectly and everything went well. The short Qs were beautiful except I didn't get FDI. The first part of the ABQ was a little more difficult than normal as the links weren't as celar as they sometimes are. The contract part was a dream and the last part was meh. It was the only part of the ABQ chapters I hadn't revised but I still knew it fairly well.

For long Qs I did 1,3,4 and 5. 4 and 5 were lovely and straightforward, Maslow''s hierarchy and the ratio Q was perfect. The HR manager part was lovely too.

Question 1 was okay, can't believe there wasn't any Labour Court or similar part in the question. The EU part of Question 3 was beautiful too and I had revised all the relevant things this morning luckily, Wasn't that sure on the A part but happy nonethless.


Absolutely delighted overall!

I did the same long questions as you, definitely the most straight forward of the lot!

little sis...

Aspiring wrote: »

Anybody fill their booklets? :pac:
Didn't manage to

Yeh and wrote another 2 pages.
I found it difficult because I was writing headings/answers that I wasn't sure would be accepted.
There wasn't much factual info you had to be a good waffler for a good few parts I though

7jy

mono2 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what the correct answer was for the Recruitment part of Q5? Had to absolutely wing it, just wondering if I was on the right track

Remind me what the question was?

thelad95

mono2 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what the correct answer was for the Recruitment part of Q5? Had to absolutely wing it, just wondering if I was on the right track

That was a really weird Q, like something off a pass paper. I'd say if you did a decent 'wing' effort you will probably get close to full marks.

TimeToShine

Can't believe that Maslow's hierarchy of needs is still on the course never mind them asking it. That was debunked as a load of bollocks years ago.

allyb17

Did you have to write ALL elements of contract? It didn't specify that and I really went into detail with 4 points

Odrevan

allyb17 wrote: »

Did you have to write ALL elements of contract? It didn't specify that and I really went into detail with 4 points

Probably needed 6 @ 5 marks each for full marks so youd be looking at 20/30

robman60

thelad95 wrote: »

What did people say for the elements of contracts. I said Agreement, Consideration, Legality of Form. Couldn't find links for anything else.

Agreement -> Negotiations and offers and counter offers
Consideration -> The €8000
Capacity -> Before his 28th birthday. This was a tricky one that I just managed to spot!
Intention -> They intended that a legally binding agreement be formed
Legality of form -> necessary paperwork in the solicitor's

mono2

7jy wrote: »

Remind me what the question was?

It was something like in relation to recruitment talk about
(I) internal and external recruitment
(ii) job description and person specification
(ii) job interview

Something like that anyways!

allyb17

Odrevan wrote: »

Probably needed 6 @ 5 marks each for full marks so youd be looking at 20/30

Not too bad I loved the paper anyway

mono2

thelad95 wrote: »

That was a really weird Q, like something off a pass paper. I'd say if you did a decent 'wing' effort you will probably get close to full marks.

There was a few parts of that paper that looked like they belonged on a pass paper haha, I got nearly 2 pages on it all absolute waffle

Aspiring

thelad95 wrote: »

Offer + Acceptance = Agreement

Acceptance is an element of a valid contract...? Completely seperate to offer

Aarong9224

Was a grand paper , question 7 was unbelievably easy. Common sense for the most part.

aleatorio

robman60 wrote: »

Agreement -> Negotiations and offers and counter offers
Consideration -> The €8000
Capacity -> Before his 28th birthday. This was a tricky one that I just managed to spot!
Intention -> They intended that a legally binding agreement be formed
Legality of form -> necessary paperwork in the solicitor's

Those are what I said too

Kyro

robman60 wrote: »

That's incorrect. The ratio was 3:1. You should ignore the authorised capital, it was there to throw you off.

Technically, it was 1:3 and not 3:1 but yeah.

Odrevan

Kyro wrote: »

Technically, it was 1:3 and not 3:1 but yeah.

To be more technical theyre usually expressed as x:1 so itd be 1/3:1 or 0.33:1 but i doubt theyd dock for that :P

robman60

Aspiring wrote: »

Acceptance is an element of a valid contract...? Completely separate to offer

As far as I know, offer and acceptance are not separate elements of a contract. They go together to form agreement, which is an element of a contract.

You can call it "agreement" or "offer and acceptance", but they are one point. In the statute books the latter seems to be the term used but they form one element of a contract.


The HR part in Q5 seemed abnormally easy. The terms were all self-intuitive and I just explained them all, although I've never read it from the book. Seemed like a ridiculously easy 25 marks if I've dealt with it correctly.

Same with the insurance part of Q5. Seemed like a handy 15 marks. I mentioned average clause would apply if you made a claim having been under-insured, anyone else do the same?

Kyro

Odrevan wrote: »

To be more technical theyre usually expressed as x:1 so itd be 1/3:1 or 0.33:1 but i doubt theyd dock for that :P

Yes, I had it 0.33:1 haha. I was just letting him know he had it the wrong way around.

aleatorio

robman60 wrote: »

As far as I know, offer and acceptance are not separate elements of a contract. They go together to form agreement, which is an element of a contract.

You can call it "agreement" or "offer and acceptance", but they are one point. In the statute books the latter seems to be the term used but they form one element of a contract.


The HR part in Q5 seemed abnormally easy. The terms were all self-intuitive and I just explained them all, although I've never read it from the book. Seemed like a ridiculously easy 25 marks if I've dealt with it correctly.

Same with the insurance part of Q5. Seemed like a handy 15 marks. I mentioned average clause would apply if you made a claim having been under-insured, anyone else do the same?

I couldn't remember the name for it but I mentioned indemnity and wrote the average clause formula :P

Kyro

Aspiring wrote: »

Acceptance is an element of a valid contract...? Completely seperate to offer

Agreement is the element of a valid contract. It is made up of both an offer and acceptance. Both must be present.

robman60

Aarong9224 wrote: »

Was a grand paper , question 7 was unbelievably easy. Common sense for the most part.

I didn't do Q7, but Q5 seemed to be the same way. I wonder if those particular questions will be marked harder as a result.

7jy

mono2 wrote: »

It was something like in relation to recruitment talk about
(I) internal and external recruitment
(ii) job description and person specification
(ii) job interview

Something like that anyways!

ah yeah:

1) defined them both and referred to transfers/promotions for internal and job advertisements/recruiting agencies for external

2) defined them both pretty easily, wrote a second short paragraph for both but cant for the life of me remember what the context of the question was

3) just mentioned what it was, mentioned that the interviewer had to be unbiased/prepared with questions and that a record had to be kept for a year afterwards

not a bad question at all, probably wrote too much but my timing was perfect to the minute somehow so it didn't really matter

Odrevan

robman60 wrote: »

I didn't do Q7, but Q5 seemed to be the same way. I wonder if those particular questions will be marked harder as a result.

I'm thinking the same thing, and that thought struck me in the exam but i had already done Q5 by then :L As damage limitation I did Q6 rather than 7, all this promotional mix and advertising crap was too wishy washy, that marking scheme will be pretty tight on it I imagine!