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

LawGirl3434

jus_me wrote: »

Would anyone pleaseeee have sample answers for Contract ..... I had them and deleted them in error and now i'm really stuck!! Would seriously appreciate any help.

Happy to send anything on other subjects you need in return

Message me!

LawGirl3434

Hi all,

Would anyone be able to give me their thoughts on the case note question for EU? I am unsure about preparing for it - in my last sitting, I sat Constitutional and didn't bother with any sort of preparation for the case notes - I just felt that they were too unpredictable and it would be wasteful as there was just no chance of even remotely predicting what could come up.

However, from going through the papers it seems that this isn't the case as much with EU - would that be correct? As EU is such a big course, I am unsure whether to prep case notes or to mirror my approach with Constitutional.

Any help or general tips on EU would be really appreciated

Thanks!

lisac223

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Hi all,

Would anyone be able to give me their thoughts on the case note question for EU? I am unsure about preparing for it - in my last sitting, I sat Constitutional and didn't bother with any sort of preparation for the case notes - I just felt that they were too unpredictable and it would be wasteful as there was just no chance of even remotely predicting what could come up.

However, from going through the papers it seems that this isn't the case as much with EU - would that be correct? As EU is such a big course, I am unsure whether to prep case notes or to mirror my approach with Constitutional.

Any help or general tips on EU would be really appreciated

Thanks!

Heya,

I haven't sat EU yet but I'm doing a prep course and all I can say is the lecturer is totally against doing the case note. He is brilliant at EU law, fantastic lecturer and he tells us almost every class not to do the case note question. He says there are other guaranteed topics you can prepare for and the examiner is notoriously strict with the case note and requires an insight to the cases you only get from actually reading the judgments. He says reciting the facts, the ratio and giving a general overview of the lead up to the case isn't detailed enough for the examiner so it's worth it to know your topics well enough not to have to depend on it.

Hope that helps!

LawGirl3434

lisac223 wrote: »

Heya,

I haven't sat EU yet but I'm doing a prep course and all I can say is the lecturer is totally against doing the case note. He is brilliant at EU law, fantastic lecturer and he tells us almost every class not to do the case note question. He says there are other guaranteed topics you can prepare for and the examiner is notoriously strict with the case note and requires an insight to the cases you only get from actually reading the judgments. He says reciting the facts, the ratio and giving a general overview of the lead up to the case isn't detailed enough for the examiner so it's worth it to know your topics well enough not to have to depend on it.

Hope that helps!

This is exactly what I was looking for - thank you so much. I was thinking this may be the advice given by the experts - I understand that in Constitutional, the case note is actually marked very harshly as people underestimate the level of detail required too. Thanks so much!

Has your lecturer given any other advice/ tips on the paper? Thanks!

PuffleHuffLyra

lisac223 wrote: »

Heya,

I haven't sat EU yet but I'm doing a prep course and all I can say is the lecturer is totally against doing the case note. He is brilliant at EU law, fantastic lecturer and he tells us almost every class not to do the case note question. He says there are other guaranteed topics you can prepare for and the examiner is notoriously strict with the case note and requires an insight to the cases you only get from actually reading the judgments. He says reciting the facts, the ratio and giving a general overview of the lead up to the case isn't detailed enough for the examiner so it's worth it to know your topics well enough not to have to depend on it.

Hope that helps!

What "guaranteed"/core EU topics would you recommend?

LawGirl3434

PuffleHuffLyra wrote: »

What "guaranteed"/core EU topics would you recommend?

I feel you can't have an EU exam without the treaties/ institutions somewhere, as well as FMOG. Citizenship and FMOW seems to be pretty safe too in my opinion - just going from past papers?

lisac223

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

This is exactly what I was looking for - thank you so much. I was thinking this may be the advice given by the experts - I understand that in Constitutional, the case note is actually marked very harshly as people underestimate the level of detail required too. Thanks so much!

Has your lecturer given any other advice/ tips on the paper? Thanks!

Yeah no problem, I think it's worth saving the headache and learning off things that come up all the time and/or are just easier to learn and mechanistic to apply!

The most important topics he says are (in order of priority):
Judicial Review, FMG, FMW (incl services & establishement), DE of Directives, General Principles, Competition Law and Equality Law.

LawGirl3434

Anyone have any tips/ advice on equity? I absolutely loved contract and was my highest FE1 to date - so hoping that gives me a good foundation, as there is a sizable degree of crossover?

holliek

Property

Is there any parts of the chapter on succession that can be left out?

JCormac

holliek wrote: »

Property

Is there any parts of the chapter on succession that can be left out?

Personally I wouldn't risk it. Succession is always (or at least near always) the basis of at least one question on the paper.

It's a pretty fundamental topic/chapter through & through imo - Though that's just my 2 cents!

user115

Does anyone know how long the fe1s are good for after you get all 8? I know all 8 have to be completed within 5 years starting from when you pass the first 3.

I'm planning on finishing them this year but don't know if I want to start traineeship next year or not, considering doing a bit of travel before I go to blackhall, interested if anyone has any info on it

vid36

user115 wrote: »

Does anyone know how long the fe1s are good for after you get all 8? I know all 8 have to be completed within 5 years starting from when you pass the first 3.

I'm planning on finishing them this year but don't know if I want to start traineeship next year or not, considering doing a bit of travel before I go to blackhall, interested if anyone has any info on it

The FE1s are valid for five years after you pass them.

holliek

As professional negligence was asked on the last tort paper are people planning to leave it out or is it still worth learning?

law_struggles

6 weeks to study and pass Equity / EU / Company / Constitutional.

Is this enough time?

LawGirl3434

holliek wrote: »

As professional negligence was asked on the last tort paper are people planning to leave it out or is it still worth learning?

Really hard to say - last sitting tort paper was a real stinker, probably the hardest since that awful one in 2014 so hopefully due a kinder paper for sure. Don’t really like to get into the whole ‘kind paper, harsh paper’ but tort is one where in my opinion there is a bit of a lack of standardization. I’d probably try to have a few cases prepped, you could answer a medical negligence Q with 5/6 good cases so may not be worth excluding entirely

Jenosul

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Really hard to say - last sitting tort paper was a real stinker, probably the hardest since that awful one in 2014 so hopefully due a kinder paper for sure. Don’t really like to get into the whole ‘kind paper, harsh paper’ but tort is one where in my opinion there is a bit of a lack of standardization. I’d probably try to have a few cases prepped, you could answer a medical negligence Q with 5/6 good cases so may not be worth excluding entirely

Thanks for the info. Sat tort last in oct 2018 short 4 marks to pass. I am resisting now. Unsure of what came up last. I was considering defamation, Tresspass to the person, negligence, causation, nuisance and rylans, passing off, employers liability. Nervous shock.

I am finding it so difficult to remember cases any tips. I literally forget them all. I try to word associate but go blank.

Thank you all. Hope everyone’s study is going well.

LawGirl3434

Jenosul wrote: »

Thanks for the info. Sat tort last in oct 2018 short 4 marks to pass. I am resisting now. Unsure of what came up last. I was considering defamation, Tresspass to the person, negligence, causation, nuisance and rylans, passing off, employers liability. Nervous shock.

I am finding it so difficult to remember cases any tips. I literally forget them all. I try to word associate but go blank.

Thank you all. Hope everyone’s study is going well.

That's tough - but you were so close that you're bound to get over the line!

Unlucky about the cases, but try not to get too bogged down by it - the likes of tort and criminal are super case heavy, compared to other subjects like Constitutional where its more about the depth of your cases rather than the quantity.

In terms of advice, I don't struggle with learning cases myself but a good friend of mine did massively - she emphasized the importance of being 'smart' with your cases (i.e. don't waste time trying to learn off several cases saying the same thing but rather being clever about it - e.g. the locus classicus, modern example, Irish example).

Another thing I remember she said she used to do is she would learn off a list of cases for a topic - e.g. for defamation, and when she got into the exam before even starting to plan the question she would write them out in this rigid order she had learnt. She would then go through the list and literally put a line through the ones not relevant to the specific question. Personally that sounds quite soul destroying, but she said it was the only way she could learn off cases was in this really ordered list. She flew through the exams so it may be really effective.

Not sure if any of that helps

HappyKitten62

Is it possible to leave out competition law for Eu? It’s massive

lisac223

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

In terms of advice, I don't struggle with learning cases myself but a good friend of mine did massively - she emphasized the importance of being 'smart' with your cases (i.e. don't waste time trying to learn off several cases saying the same thing but rather being clever about it - e.g. the locus classicus, modern example, Irish example).

Not sure if any of that helps

You don't struggle to learn cases? I am so very jealous! Do you have any tips about that in terms of how you go about learning so many or does it just come naturally? I definitely struggle with the names especially towards the end with all the subjects and all of their topics

CiaraND16

Does anybody have the topics that came up in the March 2017 Tort exam? Specifically question one. I am confused as to whether it is duty of care to third parties or vicarious liability.

LawGirl3434

lisac223 wrote: »

You don't struggle to learn cases? I am so very jealous! Do you have any tips about that in terms of how you go about learning so many or does it just come naturally? I definitely struggle with the names especially towards the end with all the subjects and all of their topics

Yeah, it doesn't really bother me at all it's probably one part of the exams that I like. I didn't study law in University so I think I probably have to spend more time than others actually understanding and identifying the content so I'm sure it evens out in terms of suffering!

So my friend did it in terms of learning off a really rigid list that she could recite off in one big lump and that worked for her as I mentioned, there was a user on here from the last sitting who used to make an acrostic poem of the first letter of each case and I think they found that successful

Hope that's of some use!

JohnsKite

lisac223 wrote: »

You don't struggle to learn cases? I am so very jealous! Do you have any tips about that in terms of how you go about learning so many or does it just come naturally? I definitely struggle with the names especially towards the end with all the subjects and all of their topics

it can help to just learn off the first letters of the case and write them all out the second you sit down. so for secret trusts I just need "WA37/SA65 GOFBSS BKP", which gives me a jumping off point for any related issue. some people find it easier to use whole words.

Redhighking

HappyKitten62 wrote: »

Is it possible to leave out competition law for Eu? It’s massive

Yes but I would advise still learning the three or four of the major cases, just to cover yourself if they come up in the case review question or if you are very stuck and need to answer a competition law question.

luimneachabu73

I am under the impression that the examiners want short, succinct answers, which are fully related to the question.

This leads me to believe that answers could be fine at 1-2 pages, and that you'd only need between 1 and 2 hours to answer 5 questions.

Am I right with this assumption or am I way off? Cheers.

holliek

luimneachabu73 wrote: »

I am under the impression that the examiners want short, succinct answers, which are fully related to the question.

This leads me to believe that answers could be fine at 1-2 pages, and that you'd only need between 1 and 2 hours to answer 5 questions.

Am I right with this assumption or am I way off? Cheers.

I find the time in the exams go by fairly fast, like you've to factor in also reading through the paper and planning etc. Like even if you allocate 30 mins per question that's still 2.5 hours. I feel if I'm able to do a question from start to finish including planning it in less than 30 mins then either I'm an absolute Einstein and know my notes/answer inside out or you haven't written enough.

Bearing in mind I wouldn't be the fastest of writers but that's just my experience.

lawless11

luimneachabu73 wrote: »

I am under the impression that the examiners want short, succinct answers, which are fully related to the question.

This leads me to believe that answers could be fine at 1-2 pages, and that you'd only need between 1 and 2 hours to answer 5 questions.

Am I right with this assumption or am I way off? Cheers.

I'd say one page is definitely not enough. Two is pretty short too - except if you write in a really small way. Consider this: you still need some structure, for problem questions (ILAC) or essays (intro, middle, conclusion) you can't just wing it completely. Of course examiners want relevant things, but having reviewed 5 of my 8 papers, I still did better (in general) in questions with about 3 pages. The questions where I had something in between 1 and 2 pages I just was missing elements in general.
Oh and I definitely used all of my time (bar for 1 of them) because I liked to pre-plan ALL of my answers before starting the paper (memory blanks avoidance this particular way). I feel even by tackling question by question, you'd still need at least that half hour per question.

But that's just my two cents.

user115

Would anyone have a grid and manual for company?

JohnsKite

can anyone share grids for tort and contract? I can swap for equity and land.

Freckley201

Hi all, I'm re-sitting constitutional but using last years notes. Have there been any big recent cases in the last year that you think might be relevant for this year?

Thanks!!

LawGirl3434

lawless11 wrote: »

I'd say one page is definitely not enough. Two is pretty short too - except if you write in a really small way. Consider this: you still need some structure, for problem questions (ILAC) or essays (intro, middle, conclusion) you can't just wing it completely. Of course examiners want relevant things, but having reviewed 5 of my 8 papers, I still did better (in general) in questions with about 3 pages. The questions where I had something in between 1 and 2 pages I just was missing elements in general.
Oh and I definitely used all of my time (bar for 1 of them) because I liked to pre-plan ALL of my answers before starting the paper (memory blanks avoidance this particular way). I feel even by tackling question by question, you'd still need at least that half hour per question.

But that's just my two cents.

Agree with this completely - there's a good quote in one of the examiners reports, think it might have been from a recent sitting of property where the examiner said "we are not so concerned with the candidate's final answer or advice but rather how they came to that point". I think the examiners are really looking for a detailed discussion of the case law in that area, obviously ruling out stuff not in any way relevant to the question, but spending a fair amount of time (and paper!) on discussing the law case by case and how each individual case is relevant.

I think in problem questions also it can look well in your application to come down on one side in your advice, but argue the other side to the client also - like I think X has a likely chance of success because of precedents in these cases discussed above, but equally there is a chance they may not and to try and have cases there too. A friend said to me before my first sitting to remember you're not a court of law - you're merely trying to get the client to see what is likely to happen in court, but equally you must tell them all the possible things that could happen and doing that will absolutely increase the length of your answers.

Just my approach - hope it helps