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

annmc882

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

I'm always doing notes incredibly close to the exam and I've been fine so far...

Thanks

gives me hope!!

Gunslinger92

annmc882 wrote: »

Thanks

gives me hope!!

Loads of time yet just try keep the head! (But I empathise completely with ye, give me another few days ha)

FreeFallin94

Can anyone offer any help for this question on the constitutional paper (March 15, Q 6). According to the grid it is a judicial review question but I'm struggling with how I'd answer it based on what I've done on that topic.

“No one denies that the [1937] Constitution was influenced to some extent by Catholic teaching and doctrine .... What is more remarkable, however, is the extent to which that document also reflected secular ... values of liberal democracy, respect for individual rights, and the separation of the Church and State and the extent to which it does not reflect Catholic teaching."

Do you agree with this statement? Give reasons for your answer, making reference (where appropriate) to specific provisions of the Constitution and/or decided cases of the Irish courts

yournerd

FreeFallin94 wrote: »

Can anyone offer any help for this question on the constitutional paper (March 15, Q 6). According to the grid it is a judicial review question but I'm struggling with how I'd answer it based on what I've done on that topic.

I would have thought this is interpretation? Its under that on my grid!

FreeFallin94

yournerd wrote: »

I would have thought this is interpretation? Its under that on my grid!

Well that would make sense, because I haven't done that chapter and I had absolutely no idea how to answer it based on judicial review! Must just be the grid I'm using.

Frances94

FreeFallin94 wrote:

Can anyone offer any help for this question on the constitutional paper (March 15, Q 6). According to the grid it is a judicial review question but I'm struggling with how I'd answer it based on what I've done on that topic.

It's interpretation on mine - natural law.

FreeFallin94

Frances94 wrote: »

It's interpretation on mine - natural law.

Yeah it must just be the grid I'm using - obviously it's not the most accurate!

Tony_TwoLegs

annmc882 wrote: »

yournerd wrote: »

Anyone else in panic/stress mode? had like 3 meltdowns today ((((((

I am still doing notes and 2 exams next week... that cant be good

I wont have it learnt in time ... panic has set in big time

I think doing notes over and over help better than just reading. I think it's proven lol. Writing notes in own short-hand makes you retain it better. Do. Repeat process.
I'm still going over a topic or two (and working in day).
AND I'm rssitting Equity and haven't even opened my notes yet. I hope a week to focus on Equity and only Equity will be ok as I'm 'revising learnt October material

ArthurDayne

Anyone have any study tips for EU or Company ? Have Contract and Equity stuff here which may be of strategic help!

Robbie25808

Constitutional Law:

Anybody have an exam grid for constitutional law.

I have the one from Independent Colleges as I am doing the course but not sure if it is fully up to date and accurate?

Robbie25808

yournerd wrote: »

I would have thought this is interpretation? Its under that on my grid!

Could you write a full essay on interpretation for this? I know the different methods but a full question on just natural law?

Robbo

If anyone isn't at the Constitutional Studies Conference in UCD today (which is recommended for FE-1 tips), people are tweeting about it under #constudies

@ronanlupton is pretty active on the matter.

It's noted that Eoin Carolan is wondering whether McGowan & John Grace Fried Chicken are having much practical effect.
Cases mentioned so far:

1. Rowland v An Post [2017] IESC 20
2. Gilchrist v. Sunday Newspapers [2017] IESC 18
3. DPP v. Doyle [2017] IESC 1
4. O'Sullivan v. Sea Fisheries Protection Agency [2016] IEHC 77
5. Merriman v. Fingal County Council [2017] IEHC 695
6. NVH v. Minister for Justice & Equality [2017] IESC 35
7. Crayden Fishing Co v. Sea Fisheries Protection Authority [2017] IESC 74
8. Persona Digital Telephony Ltd v Minister for Public Enterprise [2017] IESC 27
9. YY (Not sure on Citation here, there's a number of HC Cases)
10. CIT ???

ninetythree

Robbo wrote: »

If anyone isn't at the Constitutional Studies Conference in UCD today (which is recommended for FE-1 tips), people are tweeting about it under #constudies

@ronanlupton is pretty active on the matter.

It's noted that Eoin Carolan is wondering whether McGowan & John Grace Fried Chicken are having much practical effect.
Cases mentioned so far:

1. Rowland v An Post [2017] IESC 20
2. Gilchrist v. Sunday Newspapers [2017] IESC 18
3. DPP v. Doyle [2017] IESC 1
4. O'Sullivan v. Sea Fisheries Protection Agency [2016] IEHC 77
5. Merriman v. Fingal County Council [2017] IEHC 695
6. NVH v. Minister for Justice & Equality [2017] IESC 35
7. Crayden Fishing Co v. Sea Fisheries Protection Authority [2017] IESC 74
8. Persona Digital Telephony Ltd v Minister for Public Enterprise [2017] IESC 27
9. YY (Not sure on Citation here, there's a number of HC Cases)
10. CIT ???

Appreciate that, thank you. Has the paper reflected this talk in the past?

Robbo

ninetythree wrote: »

Appreciate that, thank you. Has the paper reflected this talk in the past?

I believe so. It would also be incredibly useful to be aware of these case for standard questions.

YY and Merriman would come in very handy in any question on unenumerated rights.

Doyle & Gilchrist are relevant to any question on fair trial rights.

ninetythree

Robbo wrote: »

I believe so. It would also be incredibly useful to be aware of these case for standard questions.

YY and Merriman would come in very handy in any question on unenumerated rights.

Doyle & Gilchrist are relevant to any question on fair trial rights.

Okay that's great. Thanks very much for your help.

ArthurDayne

Hi all - I've passed Tort, Constitutional, Criminal and Property. Have decent materials here for them. Also have some good materials on Contract.

Wondering if anyone wants to swap for any Company or EU stuff ?

Charles OCK

Lumi77 wrote: »

Absolutely brilliant advice, the notes should have been done and redone months ago. I passed them myself and with work full time and a single mam of two.
close off all social media accounts too for now and no days off at all.
plan , plan and re plan and stick to it.

Horses for courses.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Lumi77 wrote: »

Absolutely brilliant advice, the notes should have been done and redone months ago. I passed them myself and with work full time and a single mam of two.
close off all social media accounts too for now and no days off at all.
plan , plan and re plan and stick to it.

I think posts like this are unfair. As the poster above says - horses for courses. Everyone has different systems and making people feel guilty for not having notes done isn't going to help them. You may have been able to do it in your situation but I really struggled (and still have one to go) not working but suffering from epilepsy and recovering from brain surgery. It's taken me 3 years and 6 sittings to (hopefully) get my passes.

Good luck everyone, whatever way you do it! :-)

Gunslinger92

Aye, I don't really think coming in here the week before the exams when multiple posters have said they're still doing notes at this point, and telling them the notes should have been done months ago, comes across very well.

Lumi77

I am very sorry about your situation and I understand health reasons( I had cervical cancer when I did my first sitting) its not easy.
I hope you get better and you wont give up.
I did not mean to come across as it came, was just genuine advise as we all learn the hard way, I made mistakes in my first also and made endless notes and so .
I wrote this as a genuine piece of advise when I had none.
I discovered this post too late. Was not meant to put anyone down and if I could help anyone i would gladly do it.
Good luck everyone.

Robbie25808

The Government introduces the Payment of Arrears Bill 2015 in an effort to establish a more efficient system for the recovery of monies owed to various State bodies.
Section 2 of the Act establishes the State Debt Recovery Agency (“The Agency”) which has a responsibility “to pursue and obtain all outstanding debts owed to the State”. The Agency is entitled to bring actions for debt recovery in the courts. (so far this is ok)
It is also granted the power by section 2 (4) to issue a ‘Debt Owed Order’ without any court process once the Agency is satisfied that a debt is owed and that this would be more efficient than issuing court proceedings. A ‘Debt Owed Order’ allows the Agency to make deductions at source from wages or social welfare payments.
Section 4 of the Act allows for a debt to be recovered from “a related person” and “in the case of a tenant, the registered landlord of that person”.
The President is concerned that aspects of the Bill may be unconstitutional and may convene a meeting of the Council of State for the purposes of considering making an Article 26 reference.
You have been asked to advise the President on (i) any aspects of the Bill that may be unconstitutional; and (ii) the advantages or disadvantages of making an Article 26 reference.


Does anybody know why this case relates to a breach of the separation of powers and what cases to refer to?

iamanengine

I have a Griffith manual for Tort but nowhere does it say which year it's for. The most recent case is in 2014....should I buy an updated manual?

Teamhrach

iamanengine wrote: »

I have a Griffith manual for Tort but nowhere does it say which year it's for. The most recent case is in 2014....should I buy an updated manual?

I'm not doing tort but pretty sure there was a big UK case which overhauled the law of negligence (in the last month or two!) Sorry I have no other info.

demarche

Robbie25808 wrote: »

The Government introduces the Payment of Arrears Bill 2015 in an effort to establish a more efficient system for the recovery of monies owed to various State bodies.
Section 2 of the Act establishes the State Debt Recovery Agency (“The Agency”) which has a responsibility “to pursue and obtain all outstanding debts owed to the State”. The Agency is entitled to bring actions for debt recovery in the courts. (so far this is ok)
It is also granted the power by section 2 (4) to issue a ‘Debt Owed Order’ without any court process once the Agency is satisfied that a debt is owed and that this would be more efficient than issuing court proceedings. A ‘Debt Owed Order’ allows the Agency to make deductions at source from wages or social welfare payments.
Section 4 of the Act allows for a debt to be recovered from “a related person” and “in the case of a tenant, the registered landlord of that person”.
The President is concerned that aspects of the Bill may be unconstitutional and may convene a meeting of the Council of State for the purposes of considering making an Article 26 reference.
You have been asked to advise the President on (i) any aspects of the Bill that may be unconstitutional; and (ii) the advantages or disadvantages of making an Article 26 reference.


Does anybody know why this case relates to a breach of the separation of powers and what cases to refer to?

" issue a ‘Debt Owed Order’ without any court process" - I think that's the key reference to the SOP as the Government is overstepping their mark and granting orders without "any court process". I would reference the Sinn Fein funds case (Buckley v AG), State (McEldowney) v Kellher, Maher v AG, Sloan v Special Criminal Court etc etc.

Gunslinger92

Do we reckon for EU that free movement of workers could come up again? My grid says it hardly ever comes up and it came up last sitting..

BASHBAG

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

Do we reckon for EU that free movement of workers could come up again? My grid says it hardly ever comes up and it came up last sitting..

Hey, I won't be covering it anyway but that is purely because of time constraints, I will probably have a read over the few main cases.

Could you please tell me what came up in the rest off the paper last sitting, working of an out of date exam grid.

Thanks

Robbie25808

demarche wrote: »

" issue a ‘Debt Owed Order’ without any court process" - I think that's the key reference to the SOP as the Government is overstepping their mark and granting orders without "any court process". I would reference the Sinn Fein funds case (Buckley v AG), State (McEldowney) v Kellher, Maher v AG, Sloan v Special Criminal Court etc etc.

Ah yeah that makes perfect sense.

Robbie25808

Constitutional Law:

In different chapters they say you should apply the proportionality test. Is this test always the test in Heaney v Ireland?

Gunslinger92

BASHBAG wrote: »

Hey, I won't be covering it anyway but that is purely because of time constraints, I will probably have a read over the few main cases.

Could you please tell me what came up in the rest off the paper last sitting, working of an out of date exam grid.

Thanks

Sure thing!
Q.1: institutions (parliament, commission and council)
Q.2: general principles
Q.3: case note question
Q.4: direct effect and member state liability
Q.5: judicial review
Q.6: free movement of goods in particular art. 110
Q.7: free movement of goods arts 34-36
Q.8: free movement of workers, citizenship

I'd recommend looking at the Zambrano case as I reckon it'll come up in the case note question

FreeFallin94

Would anyone be able to tell me if in DPP v Bolger the appellant was entitled to rely on the DPP v. Damache decision retrospectively.