Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
For tort im thinking:
Negligence [duty of care, general neg and causation and damages], ch 3 with economic loss, neg misstatement and nervous shock and then vic lib, defamation, occ lib, trespass to person, trespass to land, limitation periods, damages, defective products and professional negligence!
Do people think this is enough?iamanengine wrote: »That's almost the same as me but I'm not doing Limitation Periods/Damages and I am doing Passing Off/Liability for Animals.
Oh and Nuisance/Rylands but you might be including that in trespass to land
With tort it's nearly better just to say what you're not doing
I think ye should both be fine
I'm being OTT cautious and I'm (hopefully) doing:
-Negligence
-Causation & Remoteness
-Pure Economic Loss
-Nervous Shock
-Neg Misstatement
-Professional Negligence
-Public Authorities (bit of an out there one)
-Product liability
-Employer's Liability (Wasn't worth all the effort it took as it's a lot of cases for an unlikely topic.
-Vicarious Liability
-Trespass to Persons
-Trespass to Land
-Nuisance
-Rylands
-Occupiers Liability
-Passing Off
-Defamation
-Damages
Leaving out Res Ipsa, Limitation Periods, Contrib and Concurrent Wrongdoers, Trespass to Chattels , Fatal Injuries and I don't think I'll have time for animals and fire
Shocked if I'm caught, I'm trying to be silly prepared for tort just as it scares me so much. 0 -
bigtophat13 wrote: »With tort it's nearly better just to say what you're not doing
I think ye should both be fine
I'm being OTT cautious and I'm (hopefully) doing:
-Negligence
-Causation & Remoteness
-Pure Economic Loss
-Nervous Shock
-Neg Misstatement
-Professional Negligence
-Public Authorities (bit of an out there one)
-Product liability
-Employer's Liability (Wasn't worth all the effort it took as it's a lot of cases for an unlikely topic.
-Vicarious Liability
-Trespass to Persons
-Trespass to Land
-Nuisance
-Rylands
-Occupiers Liability
-Passing Off
-Defamation
-Damages
Leaving out Res Ipsa, Limitation Periods, Contrib and Concurrent Wrongdoers, Trespass to Chattels , Fatal Injuries and I don't think I'll have time for animals and fire Shocked if I'm caught, I'm trying to be silly prepared for tort just as it scares me so much.
Haha I was just about to reply with what I'm not doing:
1 defamation
2 occupiers liability
3 public auth/state liability
4 employers liability
5 limitation periods
6 trespass to goods
Should probably do a little bit for 2-4 though?
I just used nutshells for animal/fire liability to get by in a PQ, maybe read it the morning of the exam to get by.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
I hope I won't get caught on the day, it would be dramatic. Don't think I could handle that aha :X.
I'm not doing fatal injuries or concurrent wrongdoers actually
Apologies in advance....
The past questions about people walking through someone's garden and the owner then assaulting etc? Is the people walking a nuisance/trespass? Or does occ liability come into play?
Eg october 17 q1
october 18 q30 -
-
-
-
Dliodoir2021 wrote: »I'm not doing fatal injuries or concurrent wrongdoers actually
Apologies in advance....
The past questions about people walking through someone's garden and the owner then assaulting etc? Is the people walking a nuisance/trespass? Or does occ liability come into play?
Eg october 17 q1
october 18 q3
It's actually a question I'd like to come up again as it's not too nasty but I don't think it will. The way I'd go at it would be based on what he asks in the actual question because if he asks "what torts will (Landowner) be liable for?" then you need to focus on the intentional torts because from reading his reports he's a stickler for giving too much info. Just to beware.
If it said "discuss all torts affecting the parties" I'm inclined to believe that you'd go with trespass to land. Nuisance is ongoing usually and can be intentional / reckless, trespass is usually a single event and intentional so that fits the bill with the person taking the shortcut.
I think with occupier's liablity he's more inclined to have a hazard on the land but I could be wrong.0 -
-
iamanengine wrote: »I remember studying for my Tort exam in 1st year and I just didn't bother covering Medical Negligence because I didn't want to learn off the Dunne principles!
Oh how simple it all was back then
I remember this time last year being irked about having to learn 4 topics for the final equity exam because the lecturer wasn't predictable, all the while the class were shocked that they'd schedule 2 exams in 2 days. The shock to the system is real 0 -
Was Negligent Misstatement tipped to come up this time round? I noted quite a few people on the thread intend to study it and it doesn't seem to appear regularly on my grid.
Oh and are the Night Before Notes from City Colleges out yet? Their website is a total disaster to navigate!
Thanks 0 -
Advertisement
-
jamesob123 wrote: »Was Negligent Misstatement tipped to come up this time round? I noted quite a few people on the thread intend to study it and it doesn't seem to appear regularly on my grid.
Oh and are the Night Before Notes from City Colleges out yet? Their website is a total disaster to navigate!
Thanks
the notes are out but they aren't loading, few people have had the same issues0 -
-
-
-
-
jamesob123 wrote: »Was Negligent Misstatement tipped to come up this time round? I noted quite a few people on the thread intend to study it and it doesn't seem to appear regularly on my grid.
Oh and are the Night Before Notes from City Colleges out yet? Their website is a total disaster to navigate!
Thanks
I just noticed from Grids that he tends to ask a couple of the less asked each year and it's awhile since it's up, it also has a lovely overlap with PEL so I did them based on that.0 -
Vegetarian2017 wrote: »Constitution
Leaving out:
Religion
Abortion
Due course (am I mad)?
Under personal rights am i mad to leave out elements of fair hearing plus access to courts/ right to litigate plus statute
Anyone feel there is any if the above crucial for this sitting?
Any advice be appreciated?
also leave out inviolabilty of a dwelling?Does freedom of expression have to be studied in conjunction with assembly and association? I'm covering expression but leaving out the other 2.
See Constitutional rots me because there's so much to do and we only have 7 questions working on the assumption the case note is challenging.
Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.
Abortion I'm ditching. It's a big topic and it's moot.
My extent of religion is kinda melded into the family cases and a couple personal rights. Good few cases on Jehova's Witnesses refusing blood and CW & JW with the heel prick test and Temple Street v C & D where they were allowed give the baby the blood. If it came up I could see it being part of a problem mixed with family maybe? By no means core or crucial.
Fair hearing I've not done yet and I don't want to, but it came up twice recently and apparently Frank Clarke is all about it so it could be a shout again What statute is involved in the right to litigate forgive me ignorance :I
If you're leaving out inviolability of the dwelling that's only gonna come into a question relating to due course or perhaps property rights so it's not massive.
I really don't want to have to do assembly and association. FoE is more interesting and much more fleshed out. He asked a question a couple years ago where he essentially said to compare the courts treatment. That being said something like 60% of the time there's a freedom of expression question.0 -
-
bigtophat13 wrote:See Constitutional rots me because there's so much to do and we only have 7 questions working on the assumption the case note is challenging.bigtophat13 wrote:Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.bigtophat13 wrote:See Constitutional rots me because there's so much to do and we only have 7 questions working on the assumption the case note is challenging.bigtophat13 wrote:Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.bigtophat13 wrote:Abortion I'm ditching. It's a big topic and it's moot.bigtophat13 wrote:My extent of religion is kinda melded into the family cases and a couple personal rights. Good few cases on Jehova's Witnesses refusing blood and CW & JW with the heel prick test and Temple Street v C & D where they were allowed give the baby the blood. If it came up I could see it being part of a problem mixed with family maybe? By no means core or crucial.bigtophat13 wrote:Fair hearing I've not done yet and I don't want to, but it came up twice recently and apparently Frank Clarke is all about it so it could be a shout again What statute is involved in the right to litigate forgive me ignorance :Ibigtophat13 wrote:If you're leaving out inviolability of the dwelling that's only gonna come into a question relating to due course or perhaps property rights so it's not massive.bigtophat13 wrote:I really don't want to have to do assembly and association. FoE is more interesting and much more fleshed out. He asked a question a couple years ago where he essentially said to compare the courts treatment. That being said something like 60% of the time there's a freedom of expression question.bigtophat13 wrote:If you're leaving out inviolability of the dwelling that's only gonna come into a question relating to due course or perhaps property rights so it's not massive.bigtophat13 wrote:Fair hearing I've not done yet and I don't want to, but it came up twice recently and apparently Frank Clarke is all about it so it could be a shout again What statute is involved in the right to litigate forgive me ignorance :Ibigtophat13 wrote:My extent of religion is kinda melded into the family cases and a couple personal rights. Good few cases on Jehova's Witnesses refusing blood and CW & JW with the heel prick test and Temple Street v C & D where they were allowed give the baby the blood. If it came up I could see it being part of a problem mixed with family maybe? By no means core or crucial.bigtophat13 wrote:See Constitutional rots me because there's so much to do and we only have 7 questions working on the assumption the case note is challenging.bigtophat13 wrote:Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.bigtophat13 wrote:See Constitutional rots me because there's so much to do and we only have 7 questions working on the assumption the case note is challenging.bigtophat13 wrote:Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.bigtophat13 wrote:Due course is a very big topic and it does come up, I'm doing it because it seems so big, but at the same time it doesn't come up as often as it is large if you get me? So if you're under pressure for time then it might not be worth the returns, that being said maybe look at 5 cases to do with Uncon obtained evidence as they're easy to chart and you could get lucky. Rather than doing all 40 cases that span from the right to see a solicitor to preserving evidence etc.bigtophat13 wrote:My extent of religion is kinda melded into the family cases and a couple personal rights. Good few cases on Jehova's Witnesses refusing blood and CW & JW with the heel prick test and Temple Street v C & D where they were allowed give the baby the blood. If it came up I could see it being part of a problem mixed with family maybe? By no means core or crucial.
Thanks a mill, yeah re due i was thinking of scanning illegally obtained evidence, ughhhh re right to courts and litigation just cant face it and no time. So much to cover for all exams. Yeah decided to do all the freedoms. Freedom assembly and ass only 3 pages in my book.
Defo covering family, leaving out abortion.
Not sure re amending constitution is it due? Ive to wrap up const notes today to reopen to learn off from next Tuesday after tort n company for exam on Friday So 2.5 days learning in total for it! 0 -
Advertisement
-
Vegetarian2017 wrote: »Thanks a mill, yeah re due i was thinking of scanning illegally obtained evidence, ughhhh re right to courts and litigation just cant face it and no time. So much to cover for all exams. Yeah decided to do all the freedoms. Freedom assembly and ass only 3 pages in my book.
Defo covering family, leaving out abortion.
Not sure re amending constitution is it due? Ive to wrap up const notes today to reopen to learn off from next Tuesday after tort n company for exam on Friday So 2.5 days learning in total for it!
If you've time it wouldn't be a bad idea. I might do the same so, probably only a couple cases for each? And it would help if it's part of a problem question.
Family is crucial (and a little boring in places)
They brought up a question relating to an issue with the voting in of something else last year, so they wanted you to spin the amending the constitution info for that. Nothing to say they wouldn't bring up a pure amendment question though! But you could argue that was it being tested last exam.
I'm re-opening Constitutional today after wrapping up tort. You have my sympathy and empathy. Gonna give 2 days to Con, 2 to criminal, 1 to property and then 2 to Tort before the exam. Then I'm 4 in 5 days so no gaps really
But oh well, that's what caffeine is for!0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement