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

corkgirl1994

for people doing tort, I know its probably a bit late in the day to be asking but are you leaving out much ?

Im planning on leaving out:
Public Authorities Liability
Employers Liability
Breach of statutory duty
defective premises
fatal injuries
state liability
defences

And doing everything else... Not sure should I try cover a few of these topics quickly or at this stage am I better off revising what I have covered..

annmc882

stick with what you have

you're very well covered if you've rest covered. don't waste time on the list above as you'll have ur 5 questions and chances them coming up is slim.

annmc882

response meant for cork girl

annmc882

once it's good pic Id but get offical one if u can at all to be on safe side. garda card would be good enough I'd say.

Dr Ice

Vicarious liability is vomit

nmwcc

Am I mad to leave out Rylands v Fletcher?? Have nuisance and trespass to land covered .. really dont want to start learning new stuff at this stage

Robbie25808

Tort:

For psychiatric damages. In Ireland it says we do not distinguish between primary or secondary victims? So does that mean the zone of danger or aftermath doctrine has no relevance and we just follow Kelly whether they are at the scene or come to the scene?

Robbie25808

nmwcc wrote: »

Am I mad to leave out Rylands v Fletcher?? Have nuisance and trespass to land covered .. really dont want to start learning new stuff at this stage

Nuisance comes up more often. Doing the same myself so should be fine. Have a choice anyway.

Lumi77

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

All good points.
Thing is I must travel up, stay in Dublin. Travel back.
Next 4 days would be all Constitutional and neglecting the other two.
I feel I would pass the other two if I attack them over 10 days. Otherwise, risk the 3.
Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

I am doing 5 have two kids single parent and work full time. I had a breakdown in March first sitting and was the same did not want to go. I passed them.
So now back to it.
Can I suggest would u not be better off staying in a hotel nearby that's what I had to do
It helps as it saved time on road and more peace

yournerd

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Tort:

For psychiatric damages. In Ireland it says we do not distinguish between primary or secondary victims? So does that mean the zone of danger or aftermath doctrine has no relevance and we just follow Kelly whether they are at the scene or come to the scene?

Yep, but there most be proximity in relationship or time and place.

Robbie25808

yournerd wrote: »

Yep, but there most be proximity in relationship or time and place.

Yeah thats fine. So if we are asked a problem question is there any point in discussing the English law? Or just briefly at the start?

Also, what do you mean by time and place? As in they must come to the scene within a reasonable time?

yournerd

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Yeah thats fine. So if we are asked a problem question is there any point in discussing the English law? Or just briefly at the start?

Also, what do you mean by time and place? As in they must come to the scene within a reasonable time?

I don't think there is much to say about English approach. You can just note that they recognize 2ndry victims.
I think There was a case where the victims of Hiilsborough were claiming nervous shock but they were only watching it on tv so it wasn't applicable.
I think they must be either at the scene or in hospital etc.

Since the case of Alcock v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police was decided following the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, it has been well established that certain control mechanisms need to be satisfied by the Claimant, to successfully bring a claim for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim.

A primary victim was described by Lord Oliver in the case of Alcock as an injured Claimant “who was involved, either mediately or immediately as a participant”.

A secondary victim was described in Alcock as a witness that “was no more than a passive and unwilling witness of injury caused to others”. In other words, a secondary victim is someone who suffers psychiatric injury solely as a result of witnessing the injury or endangerment of another.

The House of Lords held that those watching the disaster on live television, in other parts of the stadium to the 96 victims or through the radio, could not claim as secondary victims.

To successfully recover compensation for psychiatric injury as a secondary victim, the following criteria must be demonstrated by the Claimant:

A close tie of love and affection with the person killed or injured;
That he was close to the incident in time and space;
That he has suffered a recognisable psychiatric illness;
That it was reasonably foreseeable in the circumstances that someone of ordinary fortitude would suffer psychiatric injury in the same circumstances; and
That the mechanism by which the injury was suffered can properly be described as “the sudden appreciation by sight or sound of a horrifying event”.

Robbie25808

Tort:

For Pofessional Negligence. Walsh v Family Planning Service says the test is reasonable physician standard (is this the same as doctor knows best?) but for elective it is more strict and have to say everything.

Was this then overruled in Geoghan v Harris and Fitzpatrick v White where they said it must be patient-centric (patient knows best)

nmwcc

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Tort:

For Pofessional Negligence. Walsh v Family Planning Service says the test is reasonable physician standard (is this the same as doctor knows best?) but for elective it is more strict and have to say everything.

Was this then overruled in Geoghan v Harris and Fitzpatrick v White where they said it must be patient-centric (patient knows best)

I understood Geoghan v Harris and Fitzpatrick v White were both examples of where the plaintiff must prove that the negligence caused the damage and the doctor's duty to disclose risk. In Fitzpatrick v White, he was only told the risks of the procedure half an hour before. However the court was not satisfied that he would have opted against the procedure in any event and it failed on causation. Maybe I have picked it up wrong?

Robbie25808

nmwcc wrote: »

I understood Geoghan v Harris and Fitzpatrick v White were both examples of where the plaintiff must prove that the negligence caused the damage and the doctor's duty to disclose risk. In Fitzpatrick v White, he was only told the risks of the procedure half an hour before. However the court was not satisfied that he would have opted against the procedure in any event and it failed on causation. Maybe I have picked it up wrong?

I think your right there. I think they said in other situations that the late advice might result in liability but not in this case.

I think the test is what a reasonable patient would want to know in their situation?

nmwcc

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Tort:

For psychiatric damages. In Ireland it says we do not distinguish between primary or secondary victims? So does that mean the zone of danger or aftermath doctrine has no relevance and we just follow Kelly whether they are at the scene or come to the scene?

I would mention Justice Denham's comments on the UK approach in McLoughlin in her decision in Mullally v Bus Eireann in the SC in 1992. She said the court was guided by Mcloughlin however the Irish courts would not place a focus on relationship of love and affection but would apply the general principles of negligence. For sake of a few lines I think it shows you are aware of the UK principles and the development without going off course

tiddy_boo

Hi there, I'm just wondering if someone could help me out here, I had a paper copy of the last company paper March 2017 but left it at home with all my panic! Is there any chance someone who has it could email it to me please? :-)

kirakirakira1

fe1hunzo wrote: »

Hey everyone!

Maybe a stupid q, but do you need a form of ID for the exams like a passport? Or would student ID from college suffice? Or do we need it at all? ðŸ˜

The Law Society letter mentions Passport and drivers licence - must have photo and signature.

ak4321

Tort

Dunne principles apply equally to doctors, nurses and solicitors. Could it then be argued in a problem question if it so arose that this extends to another profession e.g. Accountant?
Or should you be looking instead at neg mistatement? So long as there is proximity, reliance etc

Tony_TwoLegs

Lumi77 wrote: »

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

All good points.
Thing is I must travel up, stay in Dublin. Travel back.
Next 4 days would be all Constitutional and neglecting the other two.
I feel I would pass the other two if I attack them over 10 days. Otherwise, risk the 3.
Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

I am doing 5 have two kids single parent and work full time. I had a breakdown in March first sitting and was the same did not want to go. I passed them.
So now back to it.
Can I suggest would u not be better off staying in a hotel nearby that's what I had to do
It helps as it saved time on road and more peace

Yeah this is my second sitting.
I've 5 left to do. I registered for 3 this time but my LL.M overflowed into my study time so was left with 2-3 weeks.
Now I've a lot less.
I'll do 2 and leave one out till March.
OF law society win as they don't have to pay the market their 17e (I think) per paper.
I stayed in Ibis last time. Green isle too. Latter further but nicer.
Keep up the fight. 5 is a lot of work so well done

Tony_TwoLegs

Hi
Anyone have the October papers for 2016 and 2015. Equity.

I'm formulating a pattern, aside from the grids.
Well.... trying to.
The endeavour of the desperate....

Thanks

Tony_TwoLegs

Hi
Anyone have the October paper 2015 for Equity.

I'm formulating a pattern, aside from the grids.
Well.... trying to.
The endeavour of the desperate....

Just the topics 1-8??

Thanks

Lumi77

I have one quick question
On average how many cases does everyone have for defamation. I just made a list and I have over 50 which is just madness
Thank you

Lumi77

Tony_TwoLegs wrote: »

Yeah this is my second sitting.
I've 5 left to do. I registered for 3 this time but my LL.M overflowed into my study time so was left with 2-3 weeks.
Now I've a lot less.
I'll do 2 and leave one out till March.
OF law society win as they don't have to pay the market their 17e (I think) per paper.
I stayed in Ibis last time. Green isle too. Latter further but nicer.
Keep up the fight. 5 is a lot of work so well done

Thank you and good luck to you too
Keep up the work you 'll get there
We should have done these first. I did masters first also and regret it that i didn't do fe1 first

yournerd

Lumi77 wrote: »

I have one quick question
On average how many cases does everyone have for defamation. I just made a list and I have over 50 which is just madness
Thank you

i'm gonna have 10 if even. 50 is great if you remember them all!

Lumi77

yournerd wrote: »

i'm gonna have 10 if even. 50 is great if you remember them all!

Thank you it is a lot on top of all the other ones

bluntspoon

Lumi77 wrote: »

I have one quick question
On average how many cases does everyone have for defamation. I just made a list and I have over 50 which is just madness
Thank you

50 is bonkers, especially for a relatively straightforward topic like defamation. I think I had about 10 for defamation when I did Tort. You'll just never have time to mention more than 6-8 cases in the exam so you should prioritise learning key cases that will be applicable in a lot of scenarios. There's no need to waste your time on remembering scores of cases you'll never have time to use. Practicing past exam questions would be a better use of your time!

yournerd

Will there be a board with seat numbers?
Am I correct in saying that the ID Number is the one that goes on legislation? Whats the candidate number for???

Lindyloo 1

yournerd wrote: »

Will there be a board with seat numbers?
Am I correct in saying that the ID Number is the one that goes on legislation? Whats the candidate number for???

Candidate number is your seat number which you use for your legislation and your answer booklet. There'll be a board up in hotel lobby saying which numbers are in which rooms.

Robbie25808

Do we need to bring that paper with our exam number to the exam? Have lost the sheet.