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

Becks63976

Ye I might just briefly touch on vicarious liability and defamation as a back up. Thanks 

iamanengine

nailforhammer wrote: »

Would it not be an argument of omission rather than active conduct?

University College Cork - National University of Ireland -v- Electricity Supply Board [2018] IECA 82:
"The damage arose from a natural event. ESB did not cause the flooding of UCC’s buildings; ESB did not release stored water from its reservoirs. The outflow was at all material times less than the quantity of water coming downriver into the Lee Scheme."

It looks like UCC wanted ESB to either have built a bigger reservoir capable of storing more water or to have released water to make space before the storm happened and argued that failure to do so was an omission. But the court held that ESB had no duty to take in water and prevent flooding.

Yeah I read that too, that's the part that confused me. However, my manual, which is only updated as far the HC case which says "As the water level began to rise, the defendant released water into the river which caused the flooding."

So combining both bits of information, what I gathered was that the ESB did not specifically release stored water, they only released they excess which was caused by the storm. The case is also under Active Conduct in the manual so they must have released some water...If anyone else knows better please weigh in!

Smiley283

Does anyone have a property law examiners report from the march sitting?

twitchandsweep

Anyone else feeling like having a mental breakdown?

kasey0123

EQUITY Q

Can anyone please give me a concise breakdown of essential topics for equity?

As in if you had to pick 6 topics that are likely what would they be?? Excluding charitable trusts because my brain can’t take it ......

Also is there any ther big cases for QT injunctions all I have is Szabo ..

Thanks! Hope everyone isn’t as bad me lol

yournerd

Contract I'm covering the below. What do people think?


1. Offer/Acceptance/Considerations/Estoppel
2. Consumer/Exclusion/Terms
3. Remedies
4. Discharge
5. Mistake
6. Misrepresentation

Is duress/undue influence due a run?

bigtophat13

twitchandsweep wrote: »

Anyone else feeling like having a mental breakdown?

You know it But don't worry everyone is I imagine, so at least you're not alone in your descent I guess ?

bigtophat13

kasey0123 wrote: »

EQUITY Q

Can anyone please give me a concise breakdown of essential topics for equity?

As in if you had to pick 6 topics that are likely what would they be?? Excluding charitable trusts because my brain can’t take it ......

Also is there any ther big cases for QT injunctions all I have is Szabo ..

Thanks! Hope everyone isn’t as bad me lol

-Specific Performance
-Undue Influence
-Injunctions, QT & Mandatory Interlocutory most likely
-Tracing
-Trustee Duties?
-Constructive Trusts

I wouldn't be utterly confident with just them though because charitable is quite common, if its the sheer quantity of the charitable cases then you could chance your arm with the cy pres style question as that's due back up but again, no promises!

bigtophat13

yournerd wrote: »

Contract I'm covering the below. What do people think?


1. Offer/Acceptance/Considerations/Estoppel
2. Consumer/Exclusion/Terms
3. Remedies
4. Discharge
5. Mistake
6. Misrepresentation

Is duress/undue influence due a run?

I haven't touched it yet but I'm going to try have enough of undue influence that if it came up on a nice problem question (besides it) that I could write 5 or 6 relevant cases and dispose of it rather than losing out on a question that might have some of the other obvious ones up above in it.

Not a priority anyway compared to some of what you have up there.

twitchandsweep

yournerd wrote: »

Contract I'm covering the below. What do people think?


1. Offer/Acceptance/Considerations/Estoppel
2. Consumer/Exclusion/Terms
3. Remedies
4. Discharge
5. Mistake
6. Misrepresentation

Is duress/undue influence due a run?

This is exactly what I’m doing... haven’t done discharge yet but intend to! Have covered capacity for minors also incase it comes up I think it would be a sweet question!

Covering duress and undue influence out of sheer panic and nightmares of not being able to write 5 questions

*breathes into brown paper bag*

bigtophat13

twitchandsweep wrote: »

This is exactly what I’m doing... haven’t done discharge yet but intend to! Have covered capacity for minors also incase it comes up I think it would be a sweet question!

Covering duress and undue influence out of sheer panic and nightmares of not being able to write 5 questions

*breathes into brown paper bag*

Are you doing capacity for minors in the form of a problem question level - knowing when they're beneficial contracts kinda stuff - or for an essay? Because one came up a few years ago and it was all on the reform and I don't fancy going through an LRC paper

Discharge could be handy for a problem when frustration could come up or even breach and frustration could both come up in essay form somewhere

user115

For criminal do ye think this is enough:

- Definition
- Classification
- AR MR
- Participation in crime
- Homicide
- Sexual offences
- NFOAP
-Property
- Insanity
- Diminsh Respon
-Self defense
- Intox

What are other people covering?

twitchandsweep

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Are you doing capacity for minors in the form of a problem question level - knowing when they're beneficial contracts kinda stuff - or for an essay? Because one came up a few years ago and it was all on the reform and I don't fancy going through an LRC paper

Discharge could be handy for a problem when frustration could come up or even breach and frustration could both come up in essay form somewhere

preferably I’d want to be picking up most of my marks in the problem questions.. so the main ones you definitely have and should be covered
Minors capacity doesn’t show every year, but as a back up if it did it would be handy. So just the general law criteria and case law reflecting each of the main principles so if it came up in a problem you’d be able to apply it and cover yourself. You should be fine though without it don’t panic. maybe a few points on the reform, these might help. basic and simple but will (hopefully) save you thrawling through the report!

REFORM – RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION
- Law Reform Commission – Report on Minor’s Contracts (1985)
- LRC recommended that the area should be amended to allow qualified enforceability with minors. This would only be done where it was considered to be fair to do so.
- General principle of restitution would be introduced whereby a contract made by a minor with an adult would be enforceable by the minor against the adult but unenforceable by the adult against the minor.
CONVICTS
- McDermott notes – it would appear that in theory a prisoner has an unfettered right to enter into a contract. This right will only be exercisable in so far as the prison authorities permit an inmate to conduct such transactions from his cell.
MENTAL INCAPACITY
- Generally, contracts with the mentally ill are considered to be valid unless
1. The nature of the illness prevented them from knowing what they were doing
2. The other contracting party were aware of this illness
- The onus of proving a mental illness lies on the person alleging it
- Sale of Goods Act 1893 Section 2 – mentally incapacitated person is only required to pay a reasonable price for the goods.
INTOXICATION
- Generally, contracts with the intoxicated are considered to be valid unless
1. They were so intoxicated that they were prevented them from knowing what they were doing
2. The other contracting party were aware of this intoxication
- Important that they repudiate the contract as soon as they regain sobriety
- Contracts for necessaries will be binding but they need only pay a reasonable price
- White v McCooey (1976)

Becks63976

Hi
Does anyone have a copy of the tort exam paper from last sitting. Would really appreciate it.

bigtophat13

twitchandsweep wrote: »

preferably I’d want to be picking up most of my marks in the problem questions.. so the main ones you definitely have and should be covered
Minors capacity doesn’t show every year, but as a back up if it did it would be handy. So just the general law criteria and case law reflecting each of the main principles so if it came up in a problem you’d be able to apply it and cover yourself. You should be fine though without it don’t panic. maybe a few points on the reform, these might help. basic and simple but will (hopefully) save you thrawling through the report!

REFORM – RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION
- Law Reform Commission – Report on Minor’s Contracts (1985)
- LRC recommended that the area should be amended to allow qualified enforceability with minors. This would only be done where it was considered to be fair to do so.
- General principle of restitution would be introduced whereby a contract made by a minor with an adult would be enforceable by the minor against the adult but unenforceable by the adult against the minor.
CONVICTS
- McDermott notes – it would appear that in theory a prisoner has an unfettered right to enter into a contract. This right will only be exercisable in so far as the prison authorities permit an inmate to conduct such transactions from his cell.
MENTAL INCAPACITY
- Generally, contracts with the mentally ill are considered to be valid unless
1. The nature of the illness prevented them from knowing what they were doing
2. The other contracting party were aware of this illness
- The onus of proving a mental illness lies on the person alleging it
- Sale of Goods Act 1893 Section 2 – mentally incapacitated person is only required to pay a reasonable price for the goods.
INTOXICATION
- Generally, contracts with the intoxicated are considered to be valid unless
1. They were so intoxicated that they were prevented them from knowing what they were doing
2. The other contracting party were aware of this intoxication
- Important that they repudiate the contract as soon as they regain sobriety
- Contracts for necessaries will be binding but they need only pay a reasonable price
- White v McCooey (1976)

Thank you I appreciate it, that is a big help, and no less at 2.35!

twitchandsweep

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Thank you I appreciate it, that is a big help, and no less at 2.35!

No problem, best of luck

Insta92

Can anyone advise where I can buy the Companies Act 2014? I can only find options to order it online and with exam on Wednesday don’t have time to wait on delivery.

yournerd

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Are you doing capacity for minors in the form of a problem question level - knowing when they're beneficial contracts kinda stuff - or for an essay? Because one came up a few years ago and it was all on the reform and I don't fancy going through an LRC paper

Discharge could be handy for a problem when frustration could come up or even breach and frustration could both come up in essay form somewhere

What do you think will be contract essay topics? I hate the essays

Ethan90

Tort Question - Does anyone know if the material contribution test has been formally accepted in Irish case law?

Frances456

Insta92 wrote: »

Can anyone advise where I can buy the Companies Act 2014? I can only find options to order it online and with exam on Wednesday don’t have time to wait on delivery.

You might be able to get it in Easons. Or call the OPW on Monday and you might be able to collect it from them instead of waiting for posting.

holliek

If I'm dropping in legislation on Monday does anyone know what time they'll be there until? They don't leave straight after exams do they?

legalspeelman

holliek wrote: »

If I'm dropping in legislation on Monday does anyone know what time they'll be there until? They don't leave straight after exams do they?

I'm fairly certain that they will be there if you drop it in after the exam of that day. However, if you drop it in late that day after the exam, they will say that you might not have it until an hour into the exam.

demarche

holliek wrote: »

If I'm dropping in legislation on Monday does anyone know what time they'll be there until? They don't leave straight after exams do they?

9-1pm each day - not sure if they are there tomorrow... more than likely not

bigtophat13

yournerd wrote: »

What do you think will be contract essay topics? I hate the essays

It really is such a toss up with contract, I'm the same, if I can I'll do 4 problems and one essay. It's usually more technical aspects so I'm gonna try have a knowledge of when they have the duty to contract in good faith as that came up both 2017 papers as an essay and in a problem last exam so he clearly likes it and it wasn't an essay last time. Privity was 2 of the last 3 so I'm leaving that out as I don't think it'll be an essay on it's own again, at most an A or B scenario. I want to have a knowledge also of their interpretation of documents although that's quite heavy and maybe know lots on the formal requirements of contracts for sale of land as they asked that in a form 2 of the last 5 (although once mixed with part performance). Besides that they like termination too, usually in relation to hong kong firs and that line but that was up last too. It really is random. Would be lovely to have something along the lines of consideration come up as it has before!

flyingdog

Tort Question - For Vicarious Liability the City College Night before notes seem to imply the "Close Connection " test is still not used in sexual abuse cases. However,Hickey v McGowan 2017 says that the close connection test is now law.

Does anyone know whether or not the close connection test is now always used for sexual abuse cases in Ireland? thanks!

ucdlaw_2018

Ethan90 wrote: »

Tort Question - Does anyone know if the material contribution test has been formally accepted in Irish case law?

It has been accepted, but only in exceptional circumstances like those in Fairlee.

Gomzu

I’ve realised that I’ve crossed out 2 sections in my constitution without thinking. An X straight through. Would this be okay for the exam? Or should I just get a new one

leavingcert17

Tort - I’m covering nuisance, trespass to person, occupiers liability, animals, duty of care for general essay, vicarious liability and professional neg passing off and pure economic loss is that enough ? And can I cut out any

tiddy_boo

Insta92 wrote: »

Can anyone advise where I can buy the Companies Act 2014? I can only find options to order it online and with exam on Wednesday don’t have time to wait on delivery.

Try adverts.ie or donedeal, you might find someone near you who has one for sale and you can collect it. Otherwise get them to send it to you by express post tomorrow you should have it the next day.

Fuguestate

leavingcert17 wrote: »

Tort - I’m covering nuisance, trespass to person, occupiers liability, animals, duty of care for general essay, vicarious liability and professional neg passing off and pure economic loss is that enough ? And can I cut out any

Honestly, no. It's not enough. You need to study the three land torts together, so Rylands v Fletcher and trespass to land should be in there.