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

TemptationWaits

holliek wrote: »

Predictions/essential topics for company?

I'm planning to focus on:
- main changes under Companies Act
- corporate authority
- advantages of incorporation
- share transfer
- corporate veil
- corporate borrowing / charges
- shareholder rights and remedies
- the sec 31 contract

Tommybojangles

does anyone have grids or sample answers for Equity, contract or criminal? Can't swap a whole lot since my laptop containing all my old notes has had a meltdown 😀

Becks63976

Does the doctrine of supremacy come up much for EU

Teamhrach

Becks63976 wrote: »

Does the doctrine of supremacy come up much for EU

I don't think for the FE1s - we just need to understand it but unlikely to be asked a question on it alone?

MarkOC95

Can anyone tell me what came up on the March 2018 Constitutional Paper please??

LawBoy2018

Does anyone want to swap stuff? I have material for all subjects but would like to swap some sample answers to save time.

LawBoy2018

Also, any predictions for Property in October? Getting very worried.

iamanengine

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

Also, any predictions for Property in October? Getting very worried.

I'm new to fe1s so don't quote me on this but seems to me like you can pretty much bank on - Succession 2 Qs, Easements, AP...so pick up a couple more topics and you should be grand...Finding looks pretty nailed on as well.


Any predicitions for Tort? What can be left out? I'm in a good place for my other 3 subjects but have barely looked at Tort yet!

Teamhrach

iamanengine wrote: »

I'm new to fe1s so don't quote me on this but seems to me like you can pretty much bank on - Succession 2 Qs, Easements, AP...so pick up a couple more topics and you should be grand...Finding looks pretty nailed on as well.

Yeah! Property registration wasn't on the last paper so prepare an essay on that, it's very easy

There's only a handful of cases on treasure trove so do out a bullet point page in case it appears again.

LawBoy2018

Teamhrach wrote: »

Yeah! Property registration wasn't on the last paper so prepare an essay on that, it's very easy

There's only a handful of cases on treasure trove so do out a bullet point page in case it appears again.

You da real MVP

Leraf

Teamhrach wrote: »

Yeah! Property registration wasn't on the last paper so prepare an essay on that, it's very easy

There's only a handful of cases on treasure trove so do out a bullet point page in case it appears again.

Dont forget its the new examiner for property.

LawBoy2018

What does that mean?

Teamhrach

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

What does that mean?

There was a new examiner for the March 2018 paper. I'd imagine it would be okay to cut out the historical areas of the course eg feudal times. The paper will probably be freshened up over the next few sittings but mightn't drift too much from the previous papers just yet.

Try to answer problem questions where possible - its easier to focus your answer rather than writing everything you know but not answering an essay question even close to what was asked.

Fe1hun18

anyone have any predictions/tips for constitutional?

iamanengine

Could anyone clarify the law surrounding Mistaken Identity in Contract? It's really confusing me, seems like there are so many conflicting lines of authority, the manual says Shogun clears it up but that just left me more confused. So in case of mistaken identity due to fraud will the contract be void or voidable? Or is it the case that it will be void if the seller went to great lengths to identify the purchaser, and voidable if they didn't go to great lengths?

Leraf

Is anyone not doing Consumer Contracts? Or has anyone not done it in previous sittings? I am beyond bored nothing is going in

yournerd

Leraf wrote: »

Is anyone not doing Consumer Contracts? Or has anyone not done it in previous sittings? I am beyond bored nothing is going in

I think it comes in most sittings so I’m covering It!

yournerd

Tommybojangles wrote: »

does anyone have grids or sample answers for Equity, contract or criminal? Can't swap a whole lot since my laptop containing all my old notes has had a meltdown 😀

Message me!

yournerd

MarkOC95 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what came up on the March 2018 Constitutional Paper please??

I can send it to you if you’d like!

yournerd

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

Does anyone want to swap stuff? I have material for all subjects but would like to swap some sample answers to save time.

I have sample answers if you’re still stuck

Gunslinger92

yournerd wrote: »

I can send it to you if you’d like!

Could you send it to me also, please? I'd be super grateful

jus_me

Got my confirmation email for October ! Anyone else?

lawless11

jus_me wrote: »

Got my confirmation email for October ! Anyone else?

I've received like the confirmation of payment last week. No ID number or anything yet though.

Pyggg

Anything big you can leave out in Constitutional?

Supermax1988

iamanengine wrote: »

Could anyone clarify the law surrounding Mistaken Identity in Contract? It's really confusing me, seems like there are so many conflicting lines of authority, the manual says Shogun clears it up but that just left me more confused. So in case of mistaken identity due to fraud will the contract be void or voidable? Or is it the case that it will be void if the seller went to great lengths to identify the purchaser, and voidable if they didn't go to great lengths?

It's tricky alright. My understanding of it is that, you distinguish between situations where the plaintiff is dealing with the fraudster face to face, and cases where it's over the phone, letter, fax, etc.

So if you were dealing with them face to face, it's voidable up until the point the fraudster sells it to a 3rd party. After that the 3rd party gets good title. Because it's difficult to prove you didn't intend to deal with the person in front of you. (Phillips v Brooks, Lewis v Avery)

But if you're dealing with them over the phone then it's likely they'll find the contract is void. For example in Shogun, they communicated via fax and ran a credit check on Mr. Patel. It's easier for them to prove that they only intended to deal with "Mr.Patel" and not the fraudster whom they never met.

The outlier is Ingram v Little where the contract was deemed void even though they dealt with the fraudster face to face but it's most likely that the judge just took pity on the plaintiffs (two elderly sisters)

L124

Never received an email or letter confirming payment for the exams... should I start panicking or is this normal?

LawStudent2018

L124 wrote: »

Never received an email or letter confirming payment for the exams... should I start panicking or is this normal?

I haven't received anything either

iamanengine

Supermax1988 wrote: »

It's tricky alright. My understanding of it is that, you distinguish between situations where the plaintiff is dealing with the fraudster face to face, and cases where it's over the phone, letter, fax, etc.

So if you were dealing with them face to face, it's voidable up until the point the fraudster sells it to a 3rd party. After that the 3rd party gets good title. Because it's difficult to prove you didn't intend to deal with the person in front of you. (Phillips v Brooks, Lewis v Avery)

But if you're dealing with them over the phone then it's likely they'll find the contract is void. For example in Shogun, they communicated via fax and ran a credit check on Mr. Patel. It's easier for them to prove that they only intended to deal with "Mr.Patel" and not the fraudster whom they never met.

The outlier is Ingram v Little where the contract was deemed void even though they dealt with the fraudster face to face but it's most likely that the judge just took pity on the plaintiffs (two elderly sisters)

Thank you so much that makes a lot of sense, wasn't explained well in the manual at all but seems like you're reasoning is solid.

holliek

L124 wrote: »

Never received an email or letter confirming payment for the exams... should I start panicking or is this normal?

I haven't received anything either. Said that they'll reply with confirmation within 3 weeks so still time!

holliek

For contract is promissory and proprietary estoppel of equal importance? Or should I just focus on one?