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

Vegetarian2017

How fÃ႒႒â€â€Ã႒႒â€â€ked am I?
I am doing five subjects. I have notes for tort (some i wrote myself and some that a kind soul sent me) they are condensed chapters no page summarys. Only started to learn tort tonight like feel like from scratch ;( Is it worth my while? Anyone esle in the same boat or were already and passed. Reason I'm asking is should i just cut it and focus on other four. Although not a confirmed offer as of yet blackhall is a possibility this year.
My concern is i normally condense down chapters to one or two pages not a hope can i do this. Reading bigger most popular topics tonight to understand the concepts n principles. Any advice as I have not looked at tort in yrs so no idea if wasting time. Is he a tough examiner? Does he mark high for actually identify the issues

Vegetarian2017

iamanengine wrote:

Feels like I know nothing atm, major cramming to be done over next 2 and a half days!

iamanengine wrote:

Ryland/Nuisance/ToL Trespass to Person PEL/NM Nervous Shock Passing Off Defective Products Occupiers Vicarious Liability for Animals Defamation Negligence Medical Negligence

iamanengine wrote:

Obligatory panic about not covering enough for Tort kicking in...do I have enough/anything I should really be covering?

I haven't even got smaller condensed notes only larger notes. Covering similar to you.

bigtophat13

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

How f××ked am I?
I am doing five subjects. I have notes for tort (some i don't myself and some that a kind soul sent me) condensed chapters no page summarys. Only started to learn tort tonight like feel like from scratch ;( Is it worth my while. Anyone esle in the same boat or were and passed. Reason I'm asking is should i just cut it and focus on other four. Although not a confirmed offer as of yet blackhall is a possibility this year.
My concern is i normally condense to chapters to one or two pages not a hope can i do this. Reading bigger most popular topics tonight to understand the concepts n principles. Any advise as I have not looked at tort in yrs so no idea if wasting time.

Without a doubt you're in a difficult spot as tort is huge but I think he has a fat bell curve so if you can show competency you'll pass. Concentrate on the biggest topics and you could get lucky, but most importantly have an overarching understanding of the topics. If you show understanding 5 cases can pass you!

Vegetarian2017

bigtophat13 wrote:

Without a doubt you're in a difficult spot as tort is huge but I think he has a fat bell curve so if you can show competency you'll pass. Concentrate on the biggest topics and you could get lucky, but most importantly have an overarching understanding of the topics. If you show understanding 5 cases can pass you!

True
So my main focus will be:
Negligence DOC, causation etc
Professional neg
Occupiers
Vicarious
All trespasses
Nuisance
Defamation

Next
defective products
damages
animal liability
Eco loss
nervous shock
passing off

iamanengine

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

True
So my main focus will be:
Negligence DOC, causation etc
Professional neg
Occupiers
Vicarious
All trespasses
Nuisance
Defamation

Next
defective products
damages
animal liability
Eco loss
nervous shock
passing off

You have 2 full days of study, just cram cases like crazy! Your main focus list is solid.

Trespass to Land/Nuisance/Rylands and Negligence are almost bankers imo.

Also think there’s a strong chance occupiers and trespass to Person will be on it.

Add in Defamation and VL because of how popular they are.

Know those really well and then try add a few more once you have those down. There’s a few topics that don’t come up as often but are due up like Medical Negligence, Negligent Misstatement etc

I nearly know the tort grid by heart at this stage lol

Gunslinger92

Vegetarian definitely sit it, not to give any of ye a heart attack but when I sat tort I could only answer 3 questions on the paper so I had to pull two answers out of nowhere and I still passed... my defamation answer was excellent but the other two nothing special. So absolutely have a crack at it, nothing to lose! Best of luck

Vegetarian2017

iamanengine wrote:

You have 2 full days of study, just cram cases like crazy! Your main focus list is solid.

iamanengine wrote:

Trespass to Land/Nuisance/Rylands and Negligence are almost bankers imo.

iamanengine wrote:

Also think there’s a strong chance occupiers and trespass to Person will be on it.

iamanengine wrote:

Add in Defamation and VL because of how popular they are.

iamanengine wrote:

Know those really well and then try add a few more once you have those down. There’s a few topics that don’t come up as often but are due up like Medical Negligence, Negligent Misstatement etc

iamanengine wrote:

I nearly know the tort grid by heart at this stage lol

Thanks! You're right if i even know main bankers I am halfway. Will be off to buy some red bull tomo. Nice sleep tonight as i suspect there won't be much till Wednesday. Dreaded two in a row.

bigtophat13

Vegetarian2017 wrote: »

True
So my main focus will be:
Negligence DOC, causation etc
Professional neg
Occupiers
Vicarious
All trespasses
Nuisance
Defamation

Next
defective products
damages
animal liability
Eco loss
nervous shock
passing off

iamanengine wrote: »

You have 2 full days of study, just cram cases like crazy! Your main focus list is solid.

Trespass to Land/Nuisance/Rylands and Negligence are almost bankers imo.

Also think there’s a strong chance occupiers and trespass to Person will be on it.

Add in Defamation and VL because of how popular they are.

Know those really well and then try add a few more once you have those down. There’s a few topics that don’t come up as often but are due up like Medical Negligence, Negligent Misstatement etc

I nearly know the tort grid by heart at this stage lol

I agree with this, some sittings you'll get 2 and even the crazy odd time 3 in that first trio of trespass/nuisance/rylands. VL is great, Causation is very due up as is gen neg and duty of care. Mix in negligent misstatement with PEL as they can be almost totally overlapped. Think there are probably 10 overlapping cases because when someone makes a misstatement its usually economic and not injury!

Vegetarian2017

bigtophat13 wrote:

I agree with this, some sittings you'll get 2 and even the crazy odd time 3 in that first trio of trespass/nuisance/rylands. VL is great, Causation is very due up as is gen neg and duty of care. Mix in negligent misstatement with PEL as they can be almost totally overlapped. Think there are probably 10 overlapping cases because when someone makes a misstatement its usually economic and not injury!

bigtophat13 wrote:

I agree with this, some sittings you'll get 2 and even the crazy odd time 3 in that first trio of trespass/nuisance/rylands. VL is great, Causation is very due up as is gen neg and duty of care. Mix in negligent misstatement with PEL as they can be almost totally overlapped. Think there are probably 10 overlapping cases because when someone makes a misstatement its usually economic and not injury!

Thanks so much!

Legal_Eagle_95

Is there some reason people feel liability for animals will come up? I see a fee predictions here and feel disheartened as what i have covered doesn’t seem to be cropping up. Do you think I’ll be ok with:

Causation
DOC/SOC
Vicarious Liability
Employers Liability
Defective Products
Nervous Shock and PEL
Trespass to the Person
Occupiers Liability
Damages
Statute of Limitations
Nuisance and Rylands
Defamation
Res isqa loquitor

bigtophat13

Legal_Eagle_95 wrote: »

Is there some reason people feel liability for animals will come up? I see a fee predictions here and feel disheartened as what i have covered doesn’t seem to be cropping up. Do you think I’ll be ok with:

Causation
DOC/SOC
Vicarious Liability
Employers Liability
Defective Products
Nervous Shock and PEL
Trespass to the Person
Occupiers Liability
Damages
Statute of Limitations
Nuisance and Rylands
Defamation
Res isqa loquitor

Animals is just an outside option that hasn't been up in a while, it's a shout alright, about the same level as statute of limitations, damages, Res Ipsa (although that was up last time) and a little less than nervous shock / pure economic loss.

The fact is he always brings up 2 or 3 odd ones so pick whatever you like more of the wildcard bunch as it's easier to remember!

You list looks good to me!

Legal_Eagle_95

bigtophat13 wrote: »

Animals is just an outside option that hasn't been up in a while, it's a shout alright, about the same level as statute of limitations, damages, Res Ipsa (although that was up last time) and a little less than nervous shock / pure economic loss.

The fact is he always brings up 2 or 3 odd ones so pick whatever you like more of the wildcard bunch as it's easier to remember!

You list looks good to me!

Great thanks! Might have a quick glance through negligent misstatement and liability for animals so! I swear stuff just isn’t sticking like last time, I look over topics I’ve covered and all the case names are gone

scooby321

lawlad101 wrote: »

I'm doing same, but with Family Rights. I also plan to cover Oireachtas privilege/non-reviewability and interpretation!

Oh great, thank you! I might try and include Family if i have time, though I'm not finished notes yet and won't be for a couple of days!

Breacnua

Property:
Does anyone think a reform Q is likey on S117 - childrens provision in Succession?

Jimdtug1

Can anybody tell me what they are studying for EU law? If anybody had a grid it would be extremely helpful

Fe1hayes

sapphire309 wrote: »

I'm struggling with EU too - did 2 days of EU revision last week and I could barely tell you 1 thing about what I revised. I know people say the pass rate is one of the higher ones for EU, but I have no clue how I'm going to remember it, it's all so complex and obscure!

Jimdtug1 wrote: »

Can anybody tell me what they are studying for EU law? If anybody had a grid it would be extremely helpful

I am covering Institutions,Sources,Gen Principles,JR,Direct effect and State Liability, FMG, Comp law , State aid, Citizenship,Workers and Equality.

Not sure is that enough or not but from looking at the grid I'd able to answer at least 6 qu each year.I find some qu in EU can be worded weirdly so I'd like to have the option to avoid them. Also there is essentially 9 options on each paper.

JCormac

Can someone much smarter than myself please explain the issues below under the Systems of Land Registration in Property?


I don't understand (besides maybe fraud [?]) how two parties can Register the Deeds of a piece of land (in confliction with eachother).

I get it that one of the people registering the land is the lands rightful owner; but who is this other party?

Also, Legal interest vs Equitable interest?


I just can't wrap my head around any of this, no matter how many different sources I read. It's like a mental block

iamanengine

JCormac wrote: »

Can someone much smarter than myself please explain the issues below under the Systems of Land Registration in Property?


I don't understand (besides maybe fraud [?]) how two parties can Register the Deeds of a piece of land (in confliction with eachother).

I get it that one of the people registering the land is the lands rightful owner; but who is this other party?

Also, Legal interest vs Equitable interest?


I just can't wrap my head around any of this, no matter how many different sources I read. It's like a mental block

With unregistered land the land itself isn’t registered, you can only register deeds in relation to the land. A deed is an interest on the land. So for example, you can register a charge (mortgage) on a property. If someone takes out two mortgages on an unregistered property with two different banks, you can see how they might be in conflict. If the mortgagor defaults the property might not be valued high enough to satisfy both debts. So the doctrine of priority kicks.

A legal mortgage is one created by charge. An equitable mortgage can be created a few ways e.g. deposit of title deeds.

The doctrine of priority means that’s the legal mortgage will have priority over the equitable once. The equitable mortgage may have priority if it was registered before the legal mortgage. However, the later legal mortgage may get priority if it is held by a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the earlier equitable interest.

JCormac

iamanengine wrote: »

With unregistered land the land itself isn’t registered, you can only register deeds in relation to the land. A deed is an interest on the land. So for example, you can register a charge (mortgage) on a property. If someone takes out two mortgages on an unregistered property with two different banks, you can see how they might be in conflict. If the mortgagor defaults the property might not be valued high enough to satisfy both debts. So the doctrine of priority kicks.

A legal mortgage is one created by charge. An equitable mortgage can be created a few ways e.g. deposit of title deeds.

The doctrine of priority means that’s the legal mortgage will have priority over the equitable once. The equitable mortgage may have priority if it was registered before the legal mortgage. However, the later legal mortgage may get priority if it is held by a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of the earlier equitable interest.

Thanks, I owe you one! I wish I could send you a virtual pint.

That makes sense about the possible multiple Morgagees.

I was thinking more along the lines of it being something like someone trying to adversely possess your land by virtue of actually just registering it before you, which raised the question of why the hell doesn't the true owner just register their land to avoid that in the first place.

The FE1s have obviously destroyed my common sense, hah.

Thanks again

BemusedKettle

There are desks in the rooms of the Red Cow aren't there?

bigtophat13

BemusedKettle wrote: »

There are desks in the rooms of the Red Cow aren't there?

yup thank god!

lawless11

Anyone could explain to me what is needed for the defence of honest opinion in defamation? I can't wrap it around my head with the facts/opinion difference, if anyone would have a simple explanation that'd be wonderful .

AJM95

Predictions for company?

iamanengine

lawless11 wrote: »

Anyone could explain to me what is needed for the defence of honest opinion in defamation? I can't wrap it around my head with the facts/opinion difference, if anyone would have a simple explanation that'd be wonderful .

The only case I have is Convery v The Irish News where a review of a restaurant was held to be an opinion, not a fact.

It makes sense, if you’re writing a review of something it’s obviously your own opinion and it can’t be a fact because it’s your own subjective view.

That’s all I have on it! Sorry I don’t know if that’s very helpful haha

bigtophat13

lawless11 wrote: »

Anyone could explain to me what is needed for the defence of honest opinion in defamation? I can't wrap it around my head with the facts/opinion difference, if anyone would have a simple explanation that'd be wonderful .

iamanengine wrote: »

The only case I have is Convery v The Irish News where a review of a restaurant was held to be an opinion, not a fact.

It makes sense, if you’re writing a review of something it’s obviously your own opinion and it can’t be a fact because it’s your own subjective view.

That’s all I have on it! Sorry I don’t know if that’s very helpful haha

It's all down to how you frame your idea, the difference between "From the evidence I think that politician X may be involved with scrupulous developers" is honest opinion vs. "Politician X is clearly taking brown envelopes and we all know it" - the second couldn't be honest opinion as its an assertion of fact. You'd have to use the defence of truth for the latter and that's much harder to prove!

lawless11

bigtophat13 wrote: »

It's all down to how you frame your idea, the difference between "From the evidence I think that politician X may be involved with scrupulous developers" is honest opinion vs. "Politician X is clearly taking brown envelopes and we all know it" - the second couldn't be honest opinion as its an assertion of fact. You'd have to use the defence of truth for the latter and that's much harder to prove!

Thanks a million! Much clearer put this way!

laurar2019

predictions for company and property??

Vegetarian2017

On an entirely separate issue:
Weather warnings in place from tomo till Monday. Dublin set to be hit with snow.
So travel could be disrupted for anyone travelling from particular areas .

jewels652

Hello everyone,

For Those who are siting criminal law. I just want to make you aware that there is a very recent case, which was devised on Friday.
Where the accused Ross Outram was found guilty of murder of a 90 year old pensioner Paddy Lyons.

The accused claimed he was acting in self defence but this was rejected.

That’s all the info I have if anybody can add to this please do as I would like to know more.

bigtophat13

jewels652 wrote: »

Hello everyone,

For Those who are siting criminal law. I just want to make you aware that there is a very recent case, which was devised on Friday.
Where the accused Ross Outram was found guilty of murder of a 90 year old pensioner Paddy Lyons.

The accused claimed he was acting in self defence but this was rejected.

That’s all the info I have if anybody can add to this please do as I would like to know more.

Worth noting more facts - 28 year old vs 90 year old. The old chap had osteoporosis and the use of only one arm. Court considered self defence nothing short of ridiculous.