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

Robbie25808

LegalFianna wrote: »

Yeah but article 30 relates to charges for crossing the border.

Given that I finish tomorrow let’s take beer as an example.

If im exporting beer and when it crosses the border in to a different country, it is charged for crossing that border - Article 30.

If in the country I’m exporting to, there’s a tax on all beer regardless of where it comes from (import or domestic) - Article 110

So basically, if the charge is thrown on and they say this charge is for crossing the border A30.
But if the government say that all beer in shops has a 20% tax, then this is A110?

LegalFianna

Robbie25808 wrote: »

So basically, if the charge is thrown on and they say this charge is for crossing the border A30.
But if the government say that all beer in shops has a 20% tax, then this is A110?

Basically, yeah.

Snakeydoogey

Down but not out after constitutional.Could someone stick up the topics from 1-8 so I can torture myself some more please? Thank you

bluntspoon

LegalFianna wrote: »

Basically, yeah.

Charges imposed upon crossing a border can fall under A110 rather than A30 where certain conditions are met. See Denkavit and Michailidis.

Leraf

Snakeydoogey wrote: »

Down but not out after constitutional.Could someone stick up the topics from 1-8 so I can torture myself some more please? Thank you

I still cant quite figure out what the topics were and if i was right or wrong about them. what was question 1? i have no clue

Robbie25808

bluntspoon wrote: »

Charges imposed upon crossing a border can fall under A110 rather than A30 where certain conditions are met. See Denkavit and Michailidis.

Yeah i think i see that. If they are identical products and the tax is imposed at the same marketing stage is it?
(so the Irish creamery one is that the tax is actually imposed when they leave the herd)

RedBlanket

I am covering:

Equalty
Union Citizenship
FMG
Member State Liabiity
Imact on National Legal Systems
Istitutions
Infringment proceedins
Judicial Review
Private International Law
Preliminary Reference
Hopefully - General Principles

Should that be enough to cover me? Or is there anything I should cover?

LegalFianna

RedBlanket wrote: »

I am covering:

Equalty
Union Citizenship
FMG
Member State Liabiity
Imact on National Legal Systems
Istitutions
Infringment proceedins
Judicial Review
Private International Law
Preliminary Reference
Hopefully - General Principles

Should that be enough to cover me? Or is there anything I should cover?

I’m covering similar and case notes. Any chance you have private international law notes I could have a look at?

yournerd

LegalFianna wrote: »

I’m covering similar and case notes. Any chance you have private international law notes I could have a look at?

whats impact on national systems about?

RedBlanket

LegalFianna wrote: »

I’m covering similar and case notes. Any chance you have private international law notes I could have a look at?

Thanks!

My notes are all written sorry

RedBlanket

yournerd wrote: »

whats impact on national systems about?

Direct Effect etc

LegalFianna

Does anyone have notes on Private International Law for EU? Can return favour with notes on most, if not all, subjects. Thanks ðŸ˜

Robbie25808

Are the past paper question difficult to determine whether A110 or A30 is the issue?

May just have to take a guess at it in the exam.

FOHSMH254

I've got:

Institutions
General Principles
Supremacy, Direct Effect, MS Liability
Free Movement of Goods
Citizenship
Workers
Competition
Judicial Review
Equality (men and women)
Case Notes

Sorta bricking it

annmc882

Any tips for essays in contract ?

Lindyloo 1

annmc882 wrote: »

Any tips for essays in contract ?

Stay well clear of them if you can! Stick with problem questions for contract.

annmc882

Lindyloo 1 wrote: »

annmc882 wrote: »

Any tips for essays in contract ?

Stay well clear of them if you can! Stick with problem questions for contract.

are they marked that hard ? :O

Bayb12

annmc882 wrote: »

are they marked that hard ? :O

They are very specific but they do tend to repeat

annmc882

Bayb12 wrote: »

annmc882 wrote: »

are they marked that hard ? :O

They are very specific but they do tend to repeat

Thats what I was wondering, if one came up im familiar with.
I doubt I'll be able to dodge essay Q all together.

Bayb12

annmc882 wrote: »

are they marked that hard ? :O

I remember going through papers and preparing the promissory estoppel and I think the specific performance of contracts for services? And they both came up for me. Maybe I was just lucky

annmc882

good judgement and bit of luck.

There's no pattern but one could prob take a half guess and might be right.

I'll look over papers but it's only a guess, wouldn't want to rely on it.

Lindyloo 1

annmc882 wrote: »

are they marked that hard ? :O

I don't know about being marked harder as such it's just that they can be quite nuanced so potentially harder to do well in if not prepared - that's what prep course lecturer advised last year anyway when I sat it.

Lumi77

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Are the past paper question difficult to determine whether A110 or A30 is the issue?

May just have to take a guess at it in the exam.

From what I can see it actually gives u a hint on most of them

Robbie25808

Why was it contrary to A34 in Procurer du Roi case does anybody know?

Was it because it was impossible to get the certificate and therefore it was protecting the domestic market as you they would never be able to import the product?

Lumi77

How does one differentiate in a question if is direct effect of members state liability?
Kind of confused

FOHSMH254

Lumi77 wrote: »

How does one differentiate in a question if is direct effect of members state liability?
Kind of confused

A Directive has to contain a clear and precise right to be relied upon.

Sometimes this isn't the case, like in Francovich. MS can be liable if:

1. The result prescribed by a Directive entails the grant of a right/rights;
2. It's possible to identify the content of those rights; and
3. There is a causal link between the MS failure to implement and the individual's loss

RyanMcG123

Anyone know how to deal with this question in land? Know it is adverse possession but not sure is it Joe that is the squatter or Frank?

QUESTION FOUR
In 2000, Joe, a farmer, sold one of his fields to a large commercial development company - RJ Developments Ltd. The field was adjacent to a main road which the local authority had indicated would be upgraded to motorway status at some stage in the future. RJ Developments Ltd purchased the property from Joe with the intention of building a large motorway service station on the site. Once the sale of the land was complete, RJ Developments Ltd e-mailed Joe asking him if he could remove his cattle from the field and requesting him to place one of their advertising signs on the gate nearest the road. However, Joe never checked his e-mails since he did not 'do that technological stuff'. In fact, due to various delays in the motorway development, Joe continued to graze his cattle on the land for a number of years'.
35
In 2006, Joe decided that a change was needed and he left farming. He sold his cattle and went on a round the world trip. Before he left, he made an agreement to lease the field to his best friend and neighbour, Frank, so that he could grow some mushrooms. Frank put a number of mushroom tunnels in the field to serve as growing rooms.
In 2009, the Chief Executive of RJ Developments Ltd was driving by the field and noticed that there was some kind of funny looking structure in it. He parked the car and looked in over the gate at the structure in the field. He decided to notify his solicitor who wrote to Frank requesting that he leave this private property immediately. Frank replied and said he had intended on leaving anyway as he was getting tired of the mushroom farming and in any case, more traffic on a motorway would ruin his crops.
At the beginning of this year, RJ Developments Ltd has finally started on the motorway development but Frank has decided he wants to remain on the land to continue to grow organic vegetables, which have been flourishing in the field.
Advise RJ Developments Ltd.

The Talking Bread

Joe has still maintained a claim in ownership to the land and as Frank is leasing it from Joe (and not attempting himself to claim any full ownership of it, merely a continued lease) Joe would still be the adverse possessor.










I guess.

Robbie25808

EU:

What is the difference between a distinctly applicable rule and indistinctly applicable rule?

N2547

It's contrary to article 56 tfeu rather than 34 because a a freedom (freedom of services) has to be between to ms rather than a dispute amongst two private parties of the one ms