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

Wonderstruck

user115 wrote: »

Was it not question 7 the catholic constit question, as in the interpretation re natural law would have been relevant because some people may view it and interpret it in context of religion.

I haven't looked at Constitut in couple of weeks so not sure and it's a very difficult subject to be confident on so would appreciate if anyone had any thoughts on other ways that Q on catholic constit could be approached.

Take a look at catholic's views of natural rights and our unemurated rights.

Compare our freedom of religion cases to the ECHR and the USA (the really famous ones you can just watch a YouTube video on!) and you can see our view is more that one religion is quite different. One that comes to mind is that one can indeed have experts who can establish their position as right (Superquinn, mcnally v ireland and min for the gaeltacht, mcgrath v maynooth uni etc).

Anything on the preamble, special position (and why it was taken out), women in the home etc could be of discussion too.

Thats just off the top of my head but hopefully will help!

user115

Wonderstruck wrote: »

Take a look at catholic's views of natural rights and our unemurated rights.

Compare our freedom of religion cases to the ECHR and the USA (the really famous ones you can just watch a YouTube video on!) and you can see our view is more that one religion is quite different. One that comes to mind is that one can indeed have experts who can establish their position as right (Superquinn, mcnally v ireland and min for the gaeltacht, mcgrath v maynooth uni etc).

Anything on the preamble, special position (and why it was taken out), women in the home etc could be of discussion too.

Thats just off the top of my head but hopefully will help!

Thanks that'really helpful, so that was more of a general question on how catholicism runs through different parts of constit and you bring in things you listed. That's actually not bad question, would just be so stressed in exam that I have to zone in on a certain area, esp since most other exams are like that. Really hate that about constit, a Q could be just about 1 topic or about many.....so dreading it.

Thanks for this though, good approach to keep in mind for exam. Really hoping it is not as bad as I think on the day

iamanengine

Does anyone have any info on Zalewski v Minister for Justice & Equality?

Doesn't seem to be anything popping up on google

rightytighty

In the Spring 2019 Company paper he asked the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating as a private company limited by shares. Would you just answer as benefit of incorporation? Eg SLP, continuity, raising capital etc - or are there specific advantages for a company limited by shares?

Breacnua

law_struggles wrote: »

Does anyone have Property sample answers? Can swap for other subjects!

send me ur email

rightytighty

Has anyone got any company predictions from the courses etc? I think Corporate Authority is due a run.

sm333

Breacnua wrote: »

Themes from 2019 as per UCD Lecture

Standing

Fair procedures and the limits of judicial scrutiny.

The right not to be deprived of liberty save in accordance with law.



CASES

Mohan v Ireland
Zalewski v Minister for Justice & Equality
P v Judges of the Circuit Court
A.C. v Cork University Hospital
People (DPP) v CC
Sweeney v Ireland
Simpson v Governor of Mountjoy Prison

Are people covering the 3 above - Locus Standi, Fair Procedures and Liberty or am I totally off?

Louis Litt

iamanengine wrote: »

Does anyone have any info on Zalewski v Minister for Justice & Equality?

Doesn't seem to be anything popping up on google

Think it involves Locus Standi, found it on google. Do any of the cases involve Liberty, don't think they do but omly going off google..

ahhhhhFE1s

Louis Litt wrote: »

Think it involves Locus Standi, found it on google. Do any of the cases involve Liberty, don't think they do but omly going off google..

AC v Cork University Hospital is to do with therapeutic detention.. Trying to detain someone who wanted to leave hospital but hospital thought was unfit to go.. Went to SC I believe.. Not sure about the rest though!

Below is the summary I have..
• AC v Cork University Hospital and Ors [2018] In this case the COA ruled that the Defendant hospital had no power in law to keep a patient in hospital against his or her wishes even if it may have been in the patient’s best interests. Applications were made in this case under Article 40 of the Constitution to inquire into the lawfulness of the detention of AC by the hospital. The High Court found that AC was detained by the hospital in accordance with law. On appeal the Court of Appeal overturned the judgments of the High Court and declared that AC’s detention by the hospital had been unlawful. The Court found that there was no statutory power which the hospital could rely on equal to s23 of the Mental Health Act 2001, which provides for the restraint of patients in psychiatric hospitals. The Court also held that there is no common law power to prevent a patient from leaving a hospital and, even if such common law power did exist, its constitutional status would be questionable.
• Following this an application was made and leave was granted for an appeal to the Supreme Court in relation to the wardship aspect of the case and the High Court orders previously made.

sm333

Can anyone explain how to identify when a question is asking about Fair Procedures/Natural Justice as opposed to Trial in Due Course?? Getting really confused between the two.

ahhhhhFE1s

sm333 wrote: »

Can anyone explain how to identify when a question is asking about Fair Procedures/Natural Justice as opposed to Trial in Due Course?? Getting really confused between the two.

From my understating Fair Procedures is more abstract like no bias, reasons given for decisions, representation and could be for both civil and criminal (or maybe just civil open to correction?) where trial in due course I believe is more practical and just criminal so like unconstitutionally obtained evidence, undue delay, right to have access to a solicitor, presumption of innocent, right to silence etc

vid36

iamanengine wrote: »

Right, this is my 3rd crack at Tort. Last two times I didn't cover enough and couldn't answer 5 Qs.

So this time, I'm covering

Negligence
Trespass to Person
Nuisance/Rylands/Land
Passing Off
Products
Economic Loss/Negligent Misstatement
Nervous Shock
Occupiers
Vicarious
Damages
Defamation
Limitations
Res Ipsa
Animals/Fire
Professional Negligence
Concurrent Wrongdoers

Surely, SURELY, I am well covered here? If I can't answer 5 Q's this time I might cry

I would also cover Employer's Liability, it has proved a moderately popular topic in recent years.

rightytighty

vid36 wrote: »

I would also cover Employer's Liability, it has proved a moderately popular topic in recent years.

I’m going to leave it off as it was on the last paper.

vid36

rightytighty wrote: »

I’m going to leave it off as it was on the last paper.

Honestly, I would still cover it, it was also on the paper I passed last spring.

tommyq94

Is there anywhere in particular I can find summaries/notes on the most important 2019 Constitutional cases, or is everyone just searching them on Google?

supercreative

Anyone have any clue how to answer Constitutional Q1 October 2018? I don't get how it affects Alice's property rights and equally I don't know how it's affecting her freedom of expression since she's being prosecuted for what somebody else said, but my grid says both of these issues come up in the question.

iamanengine

supercreative wrote: »

Anyone have any clue how to answer Constitutional Q1 October 2018? I don't get how it affects Alice's property rights and equally I don't know how it's affecting her freedom of expression since she's being prosecuted for what somebody else said, but my grid says both of these issues come up in the question.

The Act is prohibiting publication of anything encouraging taking pharmaceutical products and one of her vendors advertises a website doing that which is an offence under the Act, you can argue the Act breaches freedom of expression here and right to communicate.

Property rights = right to earn a living. Presumably Alice makes money off running the website and the act could be considered to be interfering with that.

HappyKitten62

supercreative wrote: »

Anyone have any clue how to answer Constitutional Q1 October 2018? I don't get how it affects Alice's property rights and equally I don't know how it's affecting her freedom of expression since she's being prosecuted for what somebody else said, but my grid says both of these issues come up in the question.

Do you have the report for October 18 and maybe sample answers?? I’m so stuck

supercreative

HappyKitten62 wrote: »

Do you have the report for October 18 and maybe sample answers?? I’m so stuck

No sample answers but I can email you the report if you PM me?

user115

Equity

I'm finished equity and think I am happy enough with what I am covering, I think I'm just leaving out constructive trusts and resulting, my list:

- All injunctions
- Rescission
- Undue influence
- Trusteeship
- Secret trusts
- 3 certainties
- Charitable trusts
- Cy pres
- Prop Estoppel
- SP
-DMC
-Rule in Strong v Bird
- Satisfaction

If I have time I might skim over rectification.

Do you think I would be covered with this?

jus_me

Anyone know the key points discussed at the Constitutional lecture in UCD in jan?

iamanengine

jus_me wrote: »

Anyone know the key points discussed at the Constitutional lecture in UCD in jan?

Locus Standi
Fair Procedure
Right to Liberty

Wonderstruck

Anyone doing EU, catch the repeat of the RTE News at 6:01 they have a guest on who gives a great summary of the Dwyer judgement which happened today and about referring up to the CJEU works!

user115

Constitutional

What was the Autumn 2017 question 1? It looks like right to property and proportionality but not really sure at all, that's just a guess

Also question 7 in that sitting, looks like access to justice but not sure where that lots in re topics

leavingcert17

It’s so hard to prepare for the case note question for constitutional w/o ending up with like 40 cases to learn

leavingcert17

user115 wrote: »

Constitutional

What was the Autumn 2017 question 1? It looks like right to property and proportionality but not really sure at all, that's just a guess

Also question 7 in that sitting, looks like access to justice but not sure where that lots in re topics

Question 1 is judicial power Cassidy case! And right to property

iamanengine

user115 wrote: »

Constitutional

What was the Autumn 2017 question 1? It looks like right to property and proportionality but not really sure at all, that's just a guess

Also question 7 in that sitting, looks like access to justice but not sure where that lots in re topics

Q1 is freedom of assembly and freedom of expression

I think Q7 is SOP, Non-Delegation Doctrine, Principle and Policies test etc and internal rules of the Oireachtas. I'm also thinking maybe something related to special criminal court, but not sure what topic that is

Edit - Art 38.3 is in relation to special courts, I don't have anything on this though so not sure if that forms a big part of the question

Edit again - I was looking at March 2017 whoops

user115

leavingcert17 wrote: »

It’s so hard to prepare for the case note question for constitutional w/o ending up with like 40 cases to learn

I decided I won't do that but will prob regret it It would be worth doing I think if you have a good memory for case names and what judge said why it is important and any dissenting opinions but I really only can remember parties not always both, the general principle flowing from it an very basic facts, duno if that would be enough

leavingcert17

user115 wrote: »

I decided I won't do that but will prob regret it It would be worth doing I think if you have a good memory for case names and what judge said why it is important and any dissenting opinions but I really only can remember parties not always both, the general principle flowing from it an very basic facts, duno if that would be enough

Yes I’m the same. There’s so many, be such a pity to have one and not the other, that’s why I’m so tempted to cover more. How is constitutional study going?
There’s so much to get done in time

user115

leavingcert17 wrote: »

Yes I’m the same. There’s so many, be such a pity to have one and not the other, that’s why I’m so tempted to cover more. How is constitutional study going?
There’s so much to get done in time

Casenote might be grand on the day but it's not one I'm gonna bank on.

Study going very slow for constit been going through papers til 2015 to work out what topics are usually up and its so hard to know, questions are so specific and topics are so broad. I'm really hoping it won't be that bad in exam, really think he must be an alright marker if there is usually about 65-70 pass rate

I have yet to cover:
- Privacy, FOE, FOA, very popular
- Liberty
- Family and 42A, i think 42A is a fairly popular question
- Equality
- Unconstit
- Amending constit

Have already done:
- Interpret
- SOP
- Property rights
- Right earn livihood
- President and AG
- Locus Standi
- Fair procedures

Going to have to drink a serious amount of coffee to do 8 topics in space 4-5days....

How are you set, what topics you covering? Do you think I should cut anything from list above or anything I should really have done?

leavingcert17

user115 wrote: »

Casenote might be grand on the day but it's not one I'm gonna bank on.

Study going very slow for constit been going through papers til 2015 to work out what topics are usually up and its so hard to know, questions are so specific and topics are so broad. I'm really hoping it won't be that bad in exam, really think he must be an alright marker if there is usually about 65-70 pass rate

I have yet to cover:
- Privacy, FOE, FOA, very popular
- Liberty
- Family and 42A, i think 42A is a fairly popular question
- Equality
- Unconstit
- Amending constit

Have already done:
- Interpret
- SOP
- Property rights
- Right earn livihood
- President and AG
- Locus Standi
- Fair procedures

Going to have to drink a serious amount of coffee to do 8 topics in space 4-5days....

How are you set, what topics you covering? Do you think I should cut anything from list above or anything I should really have done?

I haven’t gone through the papers that much at all. I think we need to know as broad an area as we can. Yes I’m having lots of difficulty understanding questions so I hope I can get 5 on the Day. Are you condensing notes a lot? I am getting through those topics you mentioned just trying to cover all then hope I can revise very well a few days before. I’ve trial and due course to cover, but only picking a few from it and just reading the rest. Proportionally also.
Are you covering referendum law? It’s so big! I’m wanting to not do it

user115

leavingcert17 wrote: »

I haven’t gone through the papers that much at all. I think we need to know as broad an area as we can. Yes I’m having lots of difficulty understanding questions so I hope I can get 5 on the Day. Are you condensing notes a lot? I am getting through those topics you mentioned just trying to cover all then hope I can revise very well a few days before. I’ve trial and due course to cover, but only picking a few from it and just reading the rest. Proportionally also.
Are you covering referendum law? It’s so big! I’m wanting to not do it

Ya prob will do

LJones18

Where can i buy the legislative sources? (Constitution, Succession Act, Land and Conveyancing Reform Act?)

nimcdona

LJones18 wrote: »

Where can i buy the legislative sources? (Constitution, Succession Act, Land and Conveyancing Reform Act?)

You can call the government publications office and pay over the phone and they'll post them out. Takes up to 5 working days to deliver so you should do that soon to be safe. You can buy the constitution in book shops either

Wonderstruck

user115 wrote: »

Thanks that'really helpful, so that was more of a general question on how catholicism runs through different parts of constit and you bring in things you listed. That's actually not bad question, would just be so stressed in exam that I have to zone in on a certain area, esp since most other exams are like that. Really hate that about constit, a Q could be just about 1 topic or about many.....so dreading it.

Thanks for this though, good approach to keep in mind for exam. Really hoping it is not as bad as I think on the day

Yeah I think he's a somewhat generous marker he was pretty sound in undergrad from what I recall though that's nearly 10 years ago!!!

A question like that is so vague there's quite a few angles to approach it, there is enough there to even discuss different interpretative methods in that q it could be a good way to approach religion in the constitution (as judges now may unintentionally draw a more secular approach than they would have in the past etc). I've passed it twice and both times I honestly hadn't covered that many topics. Other than first principles (interpretation, admin law principles like judicial review etc) I just stuck very rigidly to topical stuff, recent sc and echr cases as I figured they might have been inspiring to him!

illy.m

Anyone willing to sell their company legislation please pm

TheLawGuy

Could someone please let me know what Q4 March 2019 Property Law was? I dont have that exam paper and was just wondering what the question was in relation to Family Property. Thanks

PerryMason2020

TheLawGuy wrote: »

Could someone please let me know what Q4 March 2019 Property Law was? I dont have that exam paper and was just wondering what the question was in relation to Family Property. Thanks

Hi,
It was:
Discuss the situations where a conveyance by a spouse/civil partner of an interest in the family/shared home will be valid despite the absence of prior written consent by the other spouse/civil partner. Your answer should be supported by relevant legal authority.

TheLawGuy

PerryMason2020 wrote: »

Hi,
It was:
Discuss the situations where a conveyance by a spouse/civil partner of an interest in the family/shared home will be valid despite the absence of prior written consent by the other spouse/civil partner. Your answer should be supported by relevant legal authority.

Thanks very much

rightytighty

Does anybody have the Examiner’s Report for October’s EU Paper?

Alternatively, I’m wondering how people would’ve gone about the Member State Liability essay - particularly given its specific reference to equivalence, effectiveness, and practical possibility.

Any help appreciated! Thx

Jeremiah25

What do we reckon for contract my good people?

CarrigView

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

What do we reckon for contract my good people?

Just judging by past papers and reports it doesn't seem hugely possible to leave many areas out, aside from those that never come up/haven't been examined in the last decade. Seems as though even a question that's based 80% on one main topic will have have hints of another niche topic throw in to make it possible to pick up extra marks. I'd like to leave out a few more but feel like I could be doing myself out of a few handy marks by doing so!

OMGWACA

Hi all,

That time again!

Looking to cut down for tort. Thinking of just covering the following;

Trespass/Nuisance/Rylands
Duty of Care
Vicarious Liability
Causation/Remoteness
Negligence/Standard of Care
Defamation
Occupier's Liability
Trespass to the Person/Wilkinson v Downton
Products Liability
Damages/Quantum
Nervous Shock
Negligent Misstatement
Passing Off

Anything I'm missing/any predictions/anything to really focus on?

Predictions for Company
Ltd v DAC
Corproate Authority
SAP
Minority Oppression & Winding Up
Directors Duties
Corporate Borrowing
Receivership
Realisation of Assets

Predictions for Property
Succession
Adverse Possession (would appreciate if anyone had a sample answer on reforms please!)
Co-Ownership
Easements
Findings
Landlord & Tenant
Licences

Please help me and give me a steer for Tort!

Law1997

Anyone panicking yet? 😅😅😅

iamanengine

OMGWACA wrote: »

Hi all,

That time again!

Looking to cut down for tort. Thinking of just covering the following;

Trespass/Nuisance/Rylands
Duty of Care
Vicarious Liability
Causation/Remoteness
Negligence/Standard of Care
Defamation
Occupier's Liability
Trespass to the Person/Wilkinson v Downton
Products Liability
Damages/Quantum
Nervous Shock
Negligent Misstatement
Passing Off

Please help me and give me a steer for Tort!

I think Limitations might be a shout for Tort. I wouldn't cut down if possible tbh, it's so unpredictable and anything can come up.

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

I think Limitations might be a shout for Tort.

I think limitations will come up up yeah, also hoping for damages and passing off

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

I think limitations will come up up yeah, also hoping for damages and passing off

Limitations, damages, passing off, nervous shock, vicarious and a trespass to person question are my hopefuls.

Also think Causation will probably come up.

PerryMason2020

rightytighty wrote: »

Does anybody have the Examiner’s Report for October’s EU Paper?

Alternatively, I’m wondering how people would’ve gone about the Member State Liability essay - particularly given its specific reference to equivalence, effectiveness, and practical possibility.

Any help appreciated! Thx

Has anyone come back to you re EU Examiner Report? I can send it on to you if not.

Would anyone have a sample answer for any question in Property, Equity, or Criminal that they could send me? Even just one sample answer so I can get an idea as to how people are structuring them. Not sure I'm going about answering them the right way!

Breacnua

PerryMason2020 wrote: »

Has anyone come back to you re EU Examiner Report? I can send it on to you if not.

Would anyone have a sample answer for any question in Property, Equity, or Criminal that they could send me? Even just one sample answer so I can get an idea as to how people are structuring them. Not sure I'm going about answering them the right way!

Pm email

user115

Family Constitutional

Does the defacto family have any rights under Irish Constitution? Does Article 40.3 impact on them some way?

I know they are not recognized as having the protection under Art 41 because it is not a family based on marriage, this confirmed in MCD v L 2009 but is there some way that Article 40.3 unemnumerated rights gives them some sort of protection?

I'm really confused about family, only going to briefly do it and focus on 42a and definition on family, there is a lot in my manual about right to protection from unjust attack but like there is so much dunno if I'll cover that part seems to never be asked and so caught for time