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

BASHBAG

Hey folks,

Quick const law question in relation to equality.

Am I right in saying that the two main points to come out of the decision in Quigley v VEC are:

1. Acceptance by the courts that the law has evolved and that the blanket exclusion on trading activities and conditions of employment with regard to art 40.1 (as per Quinn and Murtagh) is no longer applicable.

2. That the "Human Persons" qualification is still relevant ie: that the discrimination must be based on human attributes namely sex, race, gender etc.,

Thanks for any help!

Robbie25808

Constitutional Law:

How does McGee v AG relate to the right to life?

Does this case allow for the use of contraception which prevents the life of a child? I thought this case was more to do with the right to marital privacy?

BASHBAG

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Constitutional Law:

How does McGee v AG relate to the right to life?

Does this case allow for the use of contraception which prevents the life of a child? I thought this case was more to do with the right to marital privacy?

From my understanding it relates to both. There was a substantial risk to the plaintiffs life if she got pregnant again, therefore sex without contraception constituted a health risk. Court found that the right to life was violated.

I think both rights were referred to in the judgement 1)Violating right to privacy in regard to her marital relations and 2) "by frustrating and making criminal any efforts...to ensure her life and health"

Robbie25808

BASHBAG wrote: »

From my understanding it relates to both. There was a substantial risk to the plaintiffs life if she got pregnant again, therefore sex without contraception constituted a health risk. Court found that the right to life was violated.

I think both rights were referred to in the judgement 1)Violating right to privacy in regard to her marital relations and 2) "by frustrating and making criminal any efforts...to ensure her life and health"

Perfect. That actually makes sense.

yournerd

For anyone doing Constitutional - I ordered the Supreme Court book off Easons for 12.96 (inc 3Plus discount code) and free delivery which says 2-7 days. I ordered yesterday and I received it this morning

BASHBAG

yournerd wrote: »

For anyone doing Constitutional - I ordered the Supreme Court book off Easons for 12.96 (inc 3Plus discount code) and free delivery which says 2-7 days. I ordered yesterday and I received it this morning

I might do the same. By any chance do you know what topics came up in the last sitting?

yournerd

BASHBAG wrote: »

I might do the same. By any chance do you know what topics came up in the last sitting?

I can send you the paper because I dont have an updated grid, send me your PM!

miamiz93

Is anyone else not covering trial in due course of law? I was thinking of covering just JC and Heaney in the event they come up as case notes, but otherwise its so enormous I'm not bothered for the sake of only one question.

castle123

EU CASE NOTES Q

Has anyone been given any tips or have a good shout on what Cases that are likely to appear?

Teamhrach

BEST WAY TO STUDY at this stage?

I'm reading/highlighting through all my notes (lecture notes that I never shortened down!) I think flashcards/mind-maps would be too time-consuming at this stage so I'm going to start timing myself doing exam questions towards the end of the week. This should work well for Criminal, Property and Equity.

At a bit of a loss with regards Constitutional because it's so unpredictable!
Has this worked for people in the past or any other tips? I ordered the Supreme Court book from Easons too - thank you to whoever recommended it!

miamiz93

Teamhrach wrote: »

BEST WAY TO STUDY at this stage?

I'm reading/highlighting through all my notes (lecture notes that I never shortened down!) I think flashcards/mind-maps would be too time-consuming at this stage so I'm going to start timing myself doing exam questions towards the end of the week. This should work well for Criminal, Property and Equity.

At a bit of a loss with regards Constitutional because it's so unpredictable!
Has this worked for people in the past or any other tips? I ordered the Supreme Court book from Easons too - thank you to whoever recommended it!

If your lecture notes are typed, you can make them into flashcards reasonably quickly with excel. I found practice questions always the best way to study the big core points of a subject. I'm finding the same with constitutional, its unfortunate its so huge! From what I've been told just try to learn as many essays as possible or do as many questions as possible

Frances94

What is this supreme court book??

miamiz93

Frances94 wrote: »

What is this supreme court book??

If its the book I'm thinking of, its this one. Its supposed to be really interesting (not strictly for the exams, but for interests sake once these exams are done and we all have free time again )

https://www.easons.com/the-supreme-court-ruadhan-mac-cormaic-9780241970331

Teamhrach

miamiz93 wrote: »

If your lecture notes are typed, you can make them into flashcards reasonably quickly with excel. I found practice questions always the best way to study the big core points of a subject. I'm finding the same with constitutional, its unfortunate its so huge! From what I've been told just try to learn as many essays as possible or do as many questions as possible

There's a website/app Quizlet that's good for making flashcards - can print them as PDFs or cards and test yourself online/using the app. I'm just so fed up with looking at a screen at this stage! I think test out as many problem questions as possible for it.

How do you learn off essays? For my undergrad it was easy - just keep writing them out! Had a lot less going on back then though!

LucBetton

miamiz93 wrote: »

For EU, would it be a stupid idea to not study competition law in depth? It seems to only come up as a half a question and its so complicated and long.

Competition law seems very, very likely.. Any predictions I've heard say that it will come up at least once I'd not in two questions

LucBetton

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Constitutional Law:

How does McGee v AG relate to the right to life?

Does this case allow for the use of contraception which prevents the life of a child? I thought this case was more to do with the right to marital privacy?

It's important to realise that McGee had a clear allegory with Griswold v Connecticut, which decriminalised contraception in the USA.. Griswold also emphasised the right to personal privacy in decisions of reproductive rights

This idea of privacy in reproductive rights was then the cornerstone of the SCOTUS decision in Roe v Wade which made access to abortion a constitutional right in the US.

Once the Supreme Court on Ireland passed McGee the Catholic church and pro life movement generally became very frightened that the SC would introduce a constitutional right to abortion just like the US did in Roe.. Therefore, McGee was the primary motivation behind the campaign to introduce the eighth amendment

miamiz93

LucBetton wrote: »

Competition law seems very, very likely.. Any predictions I've heard say that it will come up at least once I'd not in two questions

Hmm yeah see this is my fear, in light of the Apple case. I might just try practice the questions that have already come up and at least then I've some idea what is going on.

jazzypatty89

Any study tips for Contract? TIA

Robbo

miamiz93 wrote: »

Hmm yeah see this is my fear, in light of the Apple case. I might just try practice the questions that have already come up and at least then I've some idea what is going on.

Apple isn't a case yet. It's only a finding of the Commission. We also aren't going to be hauled in front of the CJEU for non-compliance with the Commissions decision re collecting the money and putting it into escrow.

It won't be in the Court for some time yet. Don't get too worked up about it as a fact pattern, just know the core cases and have a brief outline.

This won't be legitimate case law for exam purposes for some time yet.

frankiejoepat

Hi, I'm just wondering about the impact of the Criminal Justice (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 on mistake and consent as a result of legislating for the CO'R case - I haven't been able to find all that much about that case through googling... any sources? Also, I'm using my griffith textbook for last autumn's sitting - has this this Act changed loads of the key references in the area of sexual offences? Rape and sexual assault are still defined by Criminal Law (Rape) Act, 1981 and Criminal Law (Rape) (amendment) Act, 1990 respectively?
Bit confused. Thanks!

iamanengine

Looking to swap exam grids. I have a lot of stuff but not very up to date

I have - Constitutional 2006 - 13, Company 01 - 10, Contract 05 - 13, Equity 03 - 10, Property 06 - 16, Tort 07 - 12

Missing EU and Criminal so would like those or any up to date ones really. Cheers

Leraf

iamanengine wrote: »

Looking to swap exam grids. I have a lot of stuff but not very up to date

I have - Constitutional 2006 - 13, Company 01 - 10, Contract 05 - 13, Equity 03 - 10, Property 06 - 16, Tort 07 - 12

Missing EU and Criminal so would like those or any up to date ones really. Cheers

I dont have the most up to date stuff but it is more up to date than yours I believe. If you send me your email, I can send you my grids.

Robbie25808

Constitutional Law:

In terms of equality, it has to relate to the human personality. What is the human personality it relates to in the case of Kelly v Minister for Environment (cap on electoral expenses case)

sls16

Hi!

Could anyone tell me what came up last sitting for Constitutional Law? Thanks!

ally1234

Just a quick criminal Q: do the topics actus/mens rea come up as stand alone topic. I have no manual or exam papers to refer to on this subject. Thanks.

sls16

frankiejoepat wrote: »

Hi, I'm just wondering about the impact of the Criminal Justice (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 on mistake and consent as a result of legislating for the CO'R case - I haven't been able to find all that much about that case through googling... any sources? Also, I'm using my griffith textbook for last autumn's sitting - has this this Act changed loads of the key references in the area of sexual offences? Rape and sexual assault are still defined by Criminal Law (Rape) Act, 1981 and Criminal Law (Rape) (amendment) Act, 1990 respectively?
Bit confused. Thanks!

As far as I could see, it has made changes to the 2006 Act by replacing s2 and s3 and has a new definition of a person in authority under this section, it has repealed the 1993 Act in relation to the mentally impaired and now relates to protected persons, and it changed s1 of the Incest Act 1908. It has a few new offences in respect of children as well but I think the rest of the law (rape, rape under s4 and sexual assault) are still the same?

sls16

Robbie25808 wrote: »

Constitutional Law:

In terms of equality, it has to relate to the human personality. What is the human personality it relates to in the case of Kelly v Minister for Environment (cap on electoral expenses case)

I would imagine that it was decided on a similar basis as McKenna v An Taoiseach - that they couldn't use public funds to promote a particular outcome of the referendum - and the court held that it was a breach of equality in respect of those who held the opposite view. So, in my opinion, in Kelly they placed a cap on electoral expenses that could come out of a public fund, so therefore they were limiting the means that they could promote or influence the outcome of the election

Robbie25808

sls16 wrote: »

I would imagine that it was decided on a similar basis as McKenna v An Taoiseach - that they couldn't use public funds to promote a particular outcome of the referendum - and the court held that it was a breach of equality in respect of those who held the opposite view. So, in my opinion, in Kelly they placed a cap on electoral expenses that could come out of a public fund, so therefore they were limiting the means that they could promote or influence the outcome of the election

Many thanks but what is the human personality that it is relating to?

coolusername95

sls16 wrote: »

As far as I could see, it has made changes to the 2006 Act by replacing s2 and s3 and has a new definition of a person in authority under this section, it has repealed the 1993 Act in relation to the mentally impaired and now relates to protected persons, and it changed s1 of the Incest Act 1908. It has a few new offences in respect of children as well but I think the rest of the law (rape, rape under s4 and sexual assault) are still the same?

Is it correct to say the incest by females is now removed? I can’t find anything to say that females over 17 can be found guilty... or any requirement that the male needs to be aware of the blood relationship? Would anyone know? Thanks!

sls16

coolusername95 wrote: »

Is it correct to say the incest by females is now removed? I can’t find anything to say that females over 17 can be found guilty... or any requirement that the male needs to be aware of the blood relationship? Would anyone know? Thanks!

My assumption would have been that, because incest by females wasn't in the Act, that the definition is the same from the old Act - but I could be wrong. In terms of blood relationship for the new definition re males, it has inserted "to his knowledge" into the offence