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

Law101

Hi does anyone know where to get a copy of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 and the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980? Can I download it and bring it in? I'm having a mental breakdown, thanks!

supercreative

Law101 wrote: »

Hi does anyone know where to get a copy of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 and the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980? Can I download it and bring it in? I'm having a mental breakdown, thanks!

You can't bring in a copy printed from the internet - contact the Government Publications Office and they should be able to get a copy for you, you can pay over the phone and my copies of the LCLRA and Succession Act got delivered pretty quickly.

Law101

Thats brilliant, just called them and they're sending them out! thanks a mill

Jeremiah25

What are we covering for Tort guys?

Any predictions or is that just pointless?

iamanengine

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

What are we covering for Tort guys?

Any predictions or is that just pointless?

They are kind of pointless, almost impossible to predict. But for what it's worth this is my attempt to do the impossible!:

Limitations - there were two SC cases on Limitations this year so that might be in with a shout, hasn't been up in two sittings.
Land Torts - Comes up almost every sitting, didn't come up last sitting.
Vicarious Liability - Comes up more often than not, didn't come up last sitting.
Ordinary negligence - Hasn't come up in two sittings, has never missed 3 sittings.
Nervous Shock - Hasn't come up in two sittings, could be due a go.
Negligent Misstatement - Hasn't come up in 5 sittings.
Trespass to Person - Infliction of Emotional Distress came up last sitting, maybe a regular Q this time.
Occupiers Liability - Didn't come up last sitting and is quite popular.

Defamation/Damages have been rinsed recently, may be due a miss.

Disclaimer - This is complete guesswork on my part and is purely based on over analyzing the grid. :rolleyes:

My main focus will be on knowing the 8 mentioned inside out but I am still covering Damages/Defamation/Employers Liability etc etc

Last sitting the paper was quite tough so hopefully we are due a nice one, but again, not guaranteed by any means.

LawGirl3434

iamanengine wrote: »

They are kind of pointless, almost impossible to predict. But for what it's worth this is my attempt to do the impossible!:

Limitations - there were two SC cases on Limitations this year so that might be in with a shout, hasn't been up in two sittings.
Land Torts - Comes up almost every sitting, didn't come up last sitting.
Vicarious Liability - Comes up more often than not, didn't come up last sitting.
Ordinary negligence - Hasn't come up in two sittings, has never missed 3 sittings.
Nervous Shock - Hasn't come up in two sittings, could be due a go.
Negligent Misstatement - Hasn't come up in 5 sittings.
Trespass to Person - Infliction of Emotional Distress came up last sitting, maybe a regular Q this time.
Occupiers Liability - Didn't come up last sitting and is quite popular.

Defamation/Damages have been rinsed recently, may be due a miss.

Disclaimer - This is complete guesswork on my part and is purely based on over analyzing the grid. :rolleyes:

My main focus will be on knowing the 8 mentioned inside out but I am still covering Damages/Defamation/Employers Liability etc etc

Last sitting the paper was quite tough so hopefully we are due a nice one, but again, not guaranteed by any means.

Guys just to flag on this - I sat the march 2019 paper and scored well in that Q on the infliction of emotional distress (think 13 or 14 out of 20) and I only spoke about nervous shock, don’t mean to add in any confusion but had literally had one case on infliction of emotional distress that I threw in at the end, so I feel it must have come up on the last paper?

Daly29

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Guys just to flag on this - I sat the march 2019 paper and scored well in that Q on the infliction of emotional distress (think 13 or 14 out of 20) and I only spoke about nervous shock, don’t mean to add in any confusion but had literally had one case on infliction of emotional distress that I threw in at the end, so I feel it must have come up on the last paper?

It's a bit confusing, I scored well in this Q and I focused on nervous shock, I think I added a line re intentional infliction.

As someone helpfully explained -

In an intentional infliction of emotional distress case, the tort is the intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress
and the loss, injury, damage etc. might be nervous shock.

Hopefully that clarifies a bit :-)



Rereading your message - yes it did come up last sitting.

LawGirl3434

Daly29 wrote: »

It's a bit confusing, I scored well in this Q and I focused on nervous shock, I think I added a line re intentional infliction.

As someone helpfully explained -

In an intentional infliction of emotional distress case, the tort is the intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress
and the loss, injury, damage etc. might be nervous shock.

Hopefully that clarifies a bit :-)



Rereading your message - yes it did come up last sitting.

That explains it! Looks like we got the right answer on the day without understanding how

iamanengine

LawGirl3434 wrote: »

Guys just to flag on this - I sat the march 2019 paper and scored well in that Q on the infliction of emotional distress (think 13 or 14 out of 20) and I only spoke about nervous shock, don’t mean to add in any confusion but had literally had one case on infliction of emotional distress that I threw in at the end, so I feel it must have come up on the last paper?

Well, that is confusing haha

I got a grid off someone doing the city colleges course and that question is marked as Trespass to the Person not Nervous Shock.

Also the way its phrased - Advise Mary (the tortfeasor) as to any potential liability in tort law that she may have - her liability would be under the tort of infliction of emotional distress. If it was Nervous Shock I am thinking it would ask whether Joseph has any recourse under Tort, which would be under Nervous Shock.

Infliction of Emotional Distress being the Tort and Nervous Shock being the type of injury.

Maybe he allowed it seeing as the Q is kind of ambiguous?

Not sure though, I definitely could be wrong!

Edit - I just checked the examiner report. He says "A question on the issue of intentional infliction of emotional distress..."

Sineaddh

Hi all... definitely getting nervous now as the day draws closer! I sat property last time with succession, ap, ownership, land reg essay and easements and only got a 45! This time I’m doing all that aswell as coownership.. should I have another topic just in case the same happens as March?

Also first time sitting equity! Any tips on what topics I should cover? Haven’t started studying it yet so definitely worried and would really appreciate any advice!

hullaballoo

iamanengine wrote: »

Well, that is confusing haha

I got a grid off someone doing the city colleges course and that question is marked as Trespass to the Person not Nervous Shock.

Also the way its phrased - Advise Mary (the tortfeasor) as to any potential liability in tort law that she may have - her liability would be under the tort of infliction of emotional distress. If it was Nervous Shock I am thinking it would ask whether Joseph has any recourse under Tort, which would be under Nervous Shock.

Infliction of Emotional Distress being the Tort and Nervous Shock being the type of injury.

Maybe he allowed it seeing as the Q is kind of ambiguous?

Not sure though, I definitely could be wrong!

Edit - I just checked the examiner report. He says "A question on the issue of intentional infliction of emotional distress..."

hullaballoo wrote: »

Nervous shock is not a tort in the way that intentional infliction of emotional distress is. Nervous shock is a condition that may be a result of a tort (wrong) but it is not a wrong itself.

So any given question can be about one or both the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress and nervous shock.

Conflating the two concepts would cause confusion. I will try and clarify by reference to more accessible torts and conditions.

Take the tort of negligence. The wrong is the negligent act or omission that gives rise to loss, injury, damage etc. A straightforward example is concussion suffered as a result of being rear-ended in a car crash. The tort or wrong is the negligent driving (failing to stop, driving at an excessive speed, failure to keep a proper look out etc.) The loss, injury, damage is the concussion.

In an intentional infliction of emotional distress case, the tort is the intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress and the loss, injury, damage etc. might be nervous shock. So to continue with a road traffic scenario by way of analogy, if someone drives so erratically and in such a dangerous way as to give other road users such a fright that one or more of them develop nervous shock, for example, an out of control driver mounting a footpath at a busy bus stop but miraculously failing to hit any pedestrians might still cause loss or damage to people at the bus stop from their wrongdoing. This may be held to be the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress and some of the rather fortunate unfortunates at the bus stop may develop nervous shock and have a case against the driver of the vehicle.

THIS POST IS ABOUT NERVOUS SHOCK VS. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DAMAGE!!!

Hopefully that settles it.

The real shame is that there's any confusion in the first place tbh because it should be made crystal clear they are entirely different concepts every time lecturers encounter them.

iamanengine

Sineaddh wrote: »

Hi all... definitely getting nervous now as the day draws closer! I sat property last time with succession, ap, ownership, land reg essay and easements and only got a 45! This time I’m doing all that aswell as coownership.. should I have another topic just in case the same happens as March?

Also first time sitting equity! Any tips on what topics I should cover? Haven’t started studying it yet so definitely worried and would really appreciate any advice!

For what it's worth, I'm covering:

Succession, AP, Finding, Registration, Easements, Mortgages, Family Property, Co-Ownership and decided today to cover Landlord and Tenant Law as I think it's due up.

I'm definitely playing it on the safe side though.

channing90

I have covered AP, Succession, co ownership, Easements, Finding and Family Property. How safe is this?
was thinking of doing another on of either landlord tenant or land reg.

rightytighty

What is everyone covering for equity?

Law101

CONTRACT

Just wondering about Consumer Protection - is it necessary to do the European part? Does it come up regularly, can I leave it out (I've no grids)? I've done everything else and can't face CP at all, its my last topic. Plus I know the examiner actually teaches the module. I'm finding the case load extremely heavy, no idea how I'm going to memorise everything - nightmare.

Sineaddh

channing90 wrote: »

I have covered AP, Succession, co ownership, Easements, Finding and Family Property. How safe is this?
was thinking of doing another on of either landlord tenant or land reg.

I know last time we were expecting a land reg essay and it never came up so maybe that!

iamanengine

Would anyone mind sharing what they are covering for Tort?

Want to make sure I'm covering enough, I think I am but it's hard to know

TheLawGuy

With regards to the legislation we can bring into the exams, are we allowed to highlight the relevant areas?

sbbyrne

TheLawGuy wrote: »

With regards to the legislation we can bring into the exams, are we allowed to highlight the relevant areas?

Yes, you can highlight but no drawing or writing - literally just highlight and tab

iamanengine

Property people:

Just remembered some legislation was enacted this year re Landlord and Tenant Law so it might pop up in a Q this sitting - Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2019 came into force in June.

SwD

iamanengine wrote: »

Property people:

Just remembered some legislation was enacted this year re Landlord and Tenant Law so it might pop up in a Q this sitting - Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2019 came into force in June.

*NB

iamanengine

Speaking of, if any kind soul has notes on the RTA Amendment Act 2019 they could send me I would love you forever.

There is good info on the RTB website but it doesn't mention sections and time is tight to start combing through legislation.

Mr. JD

Hi all,

Thoughts on the below for constitutional... would ppl add to this or do you think it's enough? would really appreciate any thoughts!

1. Const interpretation
2. the pres/AG
3. House of O
4. Courts and Judiciary
5. SOP
6. International relations
7. Obstacles to Const Challenge
8. Freedom of Expression (w/ Privacy, Assembly and Association)
9. Family
10. Trial in Due Course
11. Property
12. Fair Procedures
13. Equality

niamh1612

iamanengine wrote: »

For what it's worth, I'm covering:

Succession, AP, Finding, Registration, Easements, Mortgages, Family Property, Co-Ownership and decided today to cover Landlord and Tenant Law as I think it's due up.

I'm definitely playing it on the safe side though.

Out of Family Property, Mortgages and Landlord and tenant what topic would you say is the smallest/easiest to learn?
I have Succession, AP, Easements, Finding, Co ownership learned, I was guna leave it at that but Im thinking maybe I shouldnt risk it and learn one of the others!

Sineaddh

niamh1612 wrote: »

Out of Family Property, Mortgages and Landlord and tenant what topic would you say is the smallest/easiest to learn?
I have Succession, AP, Easements, Finding, Co ownership learned, I was guna leave it at that but Im thinking maybe I shouldnt risk it and learn one of the others!

I haven’t studied either of those 3 yet but in my manual family property is at least 10-20 pages less than the other topics so I would think that! I’ve also covered what you’ve covered and think I’ll just add family property too!

iamanengine

niamh1612 wrote: »

Out of Family Property, Mortgages and Landlord and tenant what topic would you say is the smallest/easiest to learn?
I have Succession, AP, Easements, Finding, Co ownership learned, I was guna leave it at that but Im thinking maybe I shouldnt risk it and learn one of the others!

Family Property is handy but it came up last sitting I think (could still come up this sitting).
Mortgages is a little confusing.
Landlord and Tenant is huge but I think it is due up and think we will get a question specifically on the RTA Act 2004 and its 2019 amendment. So that is all I'm covering for Landlord/Tenant.

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

Family Property is handy but it came up last sitting I think (could still come up this sitting).
Mortgages is a little confusing.
Landlord and Tenant is huge but I think it is due up and think we will get a question specifically on the RTA Act 2004 and its 2019 amendment. So that is all I'm covering for Landlord/Tenant.

Are there any good sources for the 2019 amendment? My manual is 2018 and only covers RTA 2004-2016

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

Are there any good sources for the 2019 amendment? My manual is 2018 and only covers RTA 2004-2016

I'm using this as my source - https://onestopshop.rtb.ie/legislation-change/

Breaks down the changes well, plus it's the RTB website so it should be official.

Only thing is it doesn't mention the specific sections.

Dj23

Can anyone clarify easements by prescription? My manual seems to have gone very complicated with a transitional period where the old rules and new rules might still apply and can't seem to get my head around it. Also, the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows is totally gone isn't it?

DUMSURFER

iamanengine wrote: »

Would anyone mind sharing what they are covering for Tort?

Want to make sure I'm covering enough, I think I am but it's hard to know

Neg (DOC/SOC/Causation/ROD)
Neg - Categories of Persons (Road Users/Children)
Product Liability
Employers Liability
Vicarious Liability
Defamation
Occupiers Liability
Negligent Misstatement

If I can I want to try get in another 1 or 2, don't feel quite covered for 5 Q's. What do people think?