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

Pyggg

Is a County Council not considered a State Authority under adverse possession? Looking at a sample answer that only said 12 years was needed. Thanks in advance

LawBoy2018

Predictions for property??

Jaspoon12

Is it crazy to leave out any areas of criminal? What topics are people covering?

Teamhrach

Pyggg wrote: »

Is a County Council not considered a State Authority under adverse possession? Looking at a sample answer that only said 12 years was needed. Thanks in advance

CC is semi-State and therefore not a full state body so won't have same year requirement as a full state body would have. Examiner's report is correct.

Teamhrach

Jaspoon12 wrote: »

Is it crazy to leave out any areas of criminal? What topics are people covering?

If you haven't already covered trial in due course etc, cut that out because there's a lot in it..that's what I cut, can't remem what else as already passed it, sorry

yournerd

Jaspoon12 wrote: »

Is it crazy to leave out any areas of criminal? What topics are people covering?

The ONLY area you could leave out is the courts system

Smiley283

Pyggg wrote: »

Is a County Council not considered a State Authority under adverse possession? Looking at a sample answer that only said 12 years was needed. Thanks in advance

It says a county council isn't a state authority under the statute of limitations act.. correct me if I'm wrong please

Smiley283

Anyone have notes on Actus reus and men's rea section for criminal?! Im sure karma will reward you for helping a poor lost soul..

lawlad101

Jaspoon12 wrote: »

Is it crazy to leave out any areas of criminal? What topics are people covering?

Unfortunately for criminal you have to know a little about a lot

gallon27

Does anyone have an up to date EU grid or sample answers?

leavingcert17

I’m so so confused with injunctions - quia Timet - in Pq do you apply campus oil then a bit on quia timet? Do you talk about mandatory? I’m so confused and I’ve no sample answer or guide for it! If anyone could help on how to tackle a quia timet question

gfettig

SwD wrote: »

Does anyone know how I might get the court citation for this case. Its been recently decided and with the absence of case law RE: Syringe Attacks, it may come in handy as a back up!

Director of Public Prosecutions -v- O'Brien
[2016] IECA 146
05/12/2016



The People (At The Suit of The Director of Public Prosecutions) v Damien O'Brien
[2016] IESCDET 144
November 29, 2016

Smiley283

leavingcert17 wrote: »

I’m so so confused with injunctions - quia Timet - in Pq do you apply campus oil then a bit on quia timet? Do you talk about mandatory? I’m so confused and I’ve no sample answer or guide for it! If anyone could help on how to tackle a quia timet question

Hi I have no sample notes for you but I was told off hand from a friend that if it is a prohibetory quia timet injunction you apply the campus oil principles and make sure you also make reference to the apprehended fear/ threat.. if it is a mandatory quia timet injunction you look to the case lingham v hse -

Sorry I am not of much help to you but hopefully what i am telling you is correct

illy.m

Anyone has recent sample answers for property, mine date back to 2010, not that useful with the LCR2009, and the March 2018 examiners report?

Tony_TwoLegs

Following earlier posts on the exam process. I doubt the Law Society will be fast to kill the goose that lays the €1m a year golden egg!!

What bugs me is paying €120 to have an exam rechecked. I thought an external regraded it. Oh no.... they only tot up the bloody marks again. What a con!!

I won't name an examiner but I had them in Uni. Got 66% in it there. FAILED it in FE1. Same examiner remember..... how is that transparent?

frankz

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

I won't name an examiner but I had them in Uni. Got 66% in it there. FAILED it in FE1. Same examiner remember..... how is that transparent?

Maybe because it was a DIFFERENT exam, with no hints and probably a wider syllabus.
Transparent in that it shows Uni exams are not a good measure and being easily marked.

I am surprised at the lack of logic in these complaints

People looking for exemptions because they have studied property, criminal contract etc - well then should be easy pass them again if the Uni exams are up to standard which Tonys shows they are not.

If we want to work for this body then we have to meet the standards of this body

Supermax1988

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

What bugs me is paying €120 to have an exam rechecked. I thought an external regraded it. Oh no.... they only tot up the bloody marks again. What a con!!

Can I ask where you heard this from? It just seems beyond belief considering as you say you have to pay €115 for it and it takes an additional 6 weeks to get the result back.

L124

Supermax1988 wrote: »

Can I ask where you heard this from? It just seems beyond belief considering as you say you have to pay €115 for it and it takes an additional 6 weeks to get the result back.

Ring the law society.
The paper isn’t remarked or re graded. They simply are rechecking g the marks - even though you are paying for an ‘appeal’. Also you are told that you don’t get to view the script. (or were up to this point)

sapphire309

Property

Does this look alright? I'm planning on covering -

Succession
Adverse Possession
FHPA
Easements
Co-Ownership
Mortgages + judgment mortgages
Registration of Title
Licences & Estoppel
A page on finding objects (only have like 4 cases - can anyone direct me to where I can find more detail on this topic?)

I've done fa since contract yesterday except sleeping so have literally everything to learn -_-

L124

frankz wrote: »

Maybe because it was a DIFFERENT exam, with no hints and probably a wider syllabus.
Transparent in that it shows Uni exams are not a good measure and being easily marked.

I am surprised at the lack of logic in these complaints

People looking for exemptions because they have studied property, criminal contract etc - well then should be easy pass them again if the Uni exams are up to standard which Tonys shows they are not.

If we want to work for this body then we have to meet the standards of this body

Might be more sympathetic to your argument was it not for the fact there’s only one qualifying body for solicitors in this country. So no, I don’t want to work for the law society - I want to work as a solicitor in Ireland. Consequently I have to go through the law society to get that professional qualification.

As for mentioning hints etc? I don’t know what kind of hints a law lecturer would give that could in anyway undermine the exam process. The fact is that the person had to study the law, go in to the exam and answer questions they’d not seen on topics they’d hopefully studied. I really don’t see how what you described is any different from there being ‘definite’ questions on an fe1 paper.
You need only scan the exam grids to see what I’m talking about here.

Also as mentioned by someone there are exemptions for other professional exams based on college degrees - so the argument they’re somehow less valid doesn’t hold much weight to me. There is a different thread set up for this whole issue though so maybe chats can continue on that.

Sorry for the long message - Good luck to everyone studying!

Supermax1988

L124 wrote: »

Ring the law society.
The paper isn’t remarked or re graded. They simply are rechecking g the marks - even though you are paying for an ‘appeal’. Also you are told that you don’t get to view the script. (or were up to this point)

I paid for a re-check in March but assumed they were at least doing me the courtesy of regrading it considering I was forking out €115. What an absolute joke.

MagicThree18

I'm currently trying to untangle discretionary trusts and the different tests. Ughh. I think I'll play Bloodborne for a couple of hours just to relax.

FE1s2018

Does anyone have criminal notes on presumption of innocence or right to silence please?!

Essay predictions for criminal? Strict liability/ classification of crime/ jurisdiction of courts?

Tony_TwoLegs

frankz wrote: »

Maybe because it was a DIFFERENT exam, with no hints and probably a wider syllabus.
Transparent in that it shows Uni exams are not a good measure and being easily marked.

I am surprised at the lack of logic in these complaints

People looking for exemptions because they have studied property, criminal contract etc - well then should be easy pass them again if the Uni exams are up to standard which Tonys shows they are not.

If we want to work for this body then we have to meet the standards of this body

I'm guessing you didn't spend 4 years studying Law in Uni then Franz, as you fail to grasp the argument I think.
If you're suggesting the NUI exams are easier, spoon fed, a smaller syllabus, and are somewhat irrelevant - then that is a bit cynical and disrespectful.

Vegetarian2017

Maybe the body should meet our standards somewhat! If enough people complain there will have to be some compromise. It is a disgrace. We should get feedback at the very least for the money we spend not have to PAY to see a general exam report. Also if say passing the 3 exams u don't get 1 on the first sitting and have to sit all 3 again, is it fair to have to pay again for the ones you actually already paid for and passed, and yet may have failed the 3rd exam by three percent. So thats 320 euro down the drain and fork another 320. How is that logical or fair. Laughing all the way to the bank.

twitchandsweep

Would anyone be able to explain to me briefly the changes the criminal law sexual offences act 2017 made?

user115

Anyone else think property offences in criminal would be enough to skim big ones, burglary, robbery and theft? he put a really detailed q last year on nitty critty offences .... Trying to cut down at the moment... So much in it

Jaspoon12

twitchandsweep wrote: »

Would anyone be able to explain to me briefly the changes the criminal law sexual offences act 2017 made?

I think somebody posted this a while back, I can't for life of me find the page though because I too would like to know again

frankz

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

I'm guessing you didn't spend 4 years studying Law in Uni then Franz, as you fail to grasp the argument I think.
If you're suggesting the NUI exams are easier, spoon fed, a smaller syllabus, and are somewhat irrelevant - then that is a bit cynical and disrespectful.

No need to personalise it.

Guessing is a fools game.

I did not say there were easier or spoon fed or irrelevant.

I say some syllabi are shorter in Uni.

I said that if we are intelligent enough to pass the modules in college then the same subjects should be easier in the FE1s but they are not because the Law Society has different standards - hence we need to sit them again to the Law Society standard.

It was not in anyway cynical or disrespectful - Uni degrees are not a simply training ground for the FE1 exams, they give other important skills.
On top of Uni knowledge I think its clear the Law Society expect a little more.

That is not being disrespectful it is highlighting that there is a difference between academic exams and qualifications and the practice route.

SwD

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

then that is a bit cynical and disrespectful.

Don't overlook the hint of realism. You cannot realistically equate a 1st year tort and advanced tort exam to the FE1?