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

iamanengine

iamanengine wrote: »

Also do people think I will lose much marks for only referring to English cases on that Q? Question said to make reference to the jurisprudence of Irish courts and where appropriate to the jurisprudence of courts of other jurisdictions. I only had 1 Irish case in my notes but forgot it

Anyone think this is a big deal? Would hate to fail just cos of that

Jeremiah25

iamanengine wrote: »

Anyone think this is a big deal? Would hate to fail just cos of that

Highly doubt you'd fail just on that regard. Once you have shown a broad knowledge of the applicable law I'm sure you'd get most marks!

jewels652

CiaranS93 wrote: »

What's peoples thoughts/predictions for EU?

For Eu my main topics are:


Citizenship
Direct Effect
Competition Art 101 and 102
Goods
Judicial review
Institutions

Thinking of adding:

Workers
Preliminary reference procedure
General principles

leavingcert17

rightytighty wrote: »

I did

Thank you ðŸ™ðŸ»

godfather2

iamanengine wrote: »

Anyone think this is a big deal? Would hate to fail just cos of that

No, I think you will be fine. Now get ready for the next one. Dissecting the paper too much is never a good thing. You never know with equity, it's the biggest coin toss of all of them apparently.
Get the head down or the coffee on, you've got the next mountain on the horizon to deal with, forget the last one. Does you no good.

iamanengine

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

Highly doubt you'd fail just on that regard. Once you have shown a broad knowledge of the applicable law I'm sure you'd get most marks!

godfather2 wrote: »

No, I think you will be fine. Now get ready for the next one. Dissecting the paper too much is never a good thing. You never know with equity, it's the biggest coin toss of all of them apparently.
Get the head down or the coffee on, you've got the next mountain on the horizon to deal with, forget the last one. Does you no good.

Thanks guys, over thinking things. Feel like I did well on the question despite having no Irish cases and my other 4 Q's were all decent, so should be fine, just worrying!

On to Company

Jeremiah25

iamanengine wrote: »

Thanks guys, over thinking things. Feel like I did well on the question despite having no Irish cases and my other 4 Q's were all decent, so should be fine, just worrying!

On to Company

What topics are you sticking to for company?

nmurphy1441

Contract

Interpreting express terms??? Is that The Plain meaning rule, the Factual Matrix rule and the Contra Proferentem rule?

The Parol Evidence rule is there too if I’m right above but it’s always asked not to mention it!

CiaranS93

jewels652 wrote: »

For Eu my main topics are:


Citizenship
Direct Effect
Competition Art 101 and 102
Goods
Judicial review
Institutions

Thinking of adding:

Workers
Preliminary reference procedure
General principles

Yea I can't do competition but I know it comes up every year ugh I hate it.

I'm doing:

General principles
Institutions
FMG
FMW
Direct Effect and Supremacy
Citizenship
Equality
Infringement

Hoping that will have me covered but open to suggestions that don't involve competition

godfather2

Currently brain dumping equity with a quiet acceptance I've done all I could. Will get it in October, duck it. Getting ready for contract and tort. Two more boils on my ass to deal with before I can sit down easy again. Onwards it is.

iamanengine

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

What topics are you sticking to for company?

Focus is on:

5 main changes/LTD v DAC/Summary Approval Procedure
Directors
Borrowing
Winding up
Realisation of Assets
Minority Protection
Receivership
Corporate Authority

I have a decent knowledge of:
Restriction/Disqualification
SLP

Terrible knowledge of:
Membership
Share Transfer

jewels652

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Yea I can't do competition but I know it comes up every year ugh I hate it.

I'm doing:

General principles
Institutions
FMG
FMW
Direct Effect and Supremacy
Citizenship
Equality
Infringement

Hoping that will have me covered but open to suggestions that don't involve competition

I think those topics will have you covered maybe add in preliminary reference procedure. Does infringement usually comes up?

CiaranS93

jewels652 wrote: »

I think those topics will have you covered maybe add in preliminary reference procedure. Does infringement usually comes up?

Think it came up last sitting but just did it because pretty straight forward. Are preliminary ref and judicial quite short?

sm333

For people worried about equity this morning I sat it straight out of college, barely understood half the principles or cases, didn’t know the night before notes existed and still passed with 50 on the dot.

Think about how frustrated you’ll be with all this time spent worrying if you actually have passed and try not to sweat it

jewels652

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Think it came up last sitting but just did it because pretty straight forward. Are preliminary ref and judicial quite short?

They are short and straight forward handy topics.
I want to add in general principles but is a long topic. I wonder do I have enough anyway?

cowboy123456

hey guys, for anyone who has previously sat eu how hard is it compared to others or has anybody an idea of pass rates for it?

user115

Equity was actually okay!! Got 4 good answers and 1 okay answer, hoping that is the last ever fe1 I sit!! Thanks everyone for sharing on this, found it so helpful, didn't know anyone doing the exams so this was really a great support. Hope exams go great for ye all, hang in there!

CiaranS93

jewels652 wrote: »

They are short and straight forward handy topics.
I want to add in general principles but is a long topic. I wonder do I have enough anyway?

Tbh currently thinking about dropping general principles because it's quite long. Might take up judicial review instead

sm333

cowboy123456 wrote: »

hey guys, for anyone who has previously sat eu how hard is it compared to others or has anybody an idea of pass rates for it?

Definitely one of the easier ones to pass. The examiner is well aware how broad the course is and marks accordingly. Best of luck!

supercreative

cowboy123456 wrote: »

hey guys, for anyone who has previously sat eu how hard is it compared to others or has anybody an idea of pass rates for it?

Oct 19 paper wasn't too fun but generally it's pretty predictable and the pass rates haven't fallen below 70% since Oct 13 as far as I know. I don't really understand EU law completely and it was not my ideal paper but got 61, know the main areas and look at some past papers and you'll be grand.

Jeremiah25

Anyone tell me if opression needs to be suffered qua member or not? Thanks!

CiaranS93

Thinking about taking a case against the law society for making me pass subjects I've passed in College already, who's with me? 😂

coalition

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

Anyone tell me if opression needs to be suffered qua member or not? Thanks!

Oppression under s. 212 (1) (a) must be suffered by a member but can be suffered in that member’s capacity as director

Disregard of interests under s. 212 (1) (b) must be suffered by a member in their capacity as member

I think!

Lawgrad101

What are the topics people are banking on for Contract?

mydogwentroof

What's the Contract Law pass rate?

iamanengine

Having exams two days in a row just reminded me that I actually had 2 exams on the same day in final year of college! No idea how I got through that

jewels652

supercreative wrote: »

Oct 19 paper wasn't too fun but generally it's pretty predictable and the pass rates haven't fallen below 70% since Oct 13 as far as I know. I don't really understand EU law completely and it was not my ideal paper but got 61, know the main areas and look at some past papers and you'll be grand.

I feel Eu is more predictable like you can get away with covering 8 topics and the questions are clear and easily to understand. Unlike constitutional where you have to cover the bones of 17 to 25 topics and it is very difficult to identify the questions. The Eu lecturer is not getting out of his way to catch us unlike the other lecturer.

EAL2019

When discussing terms, I've noticed that some manuals/cases talk about distinguishing between "conditions and warranties" and some talk about distinguishing between "warranties and mere representations".


Am I right in saying that conditions, warranties and mere representations are three different things?


Its just that sometimes they seem to be used interchangeably and its confusing

ahhhhhFE1s

EAL2019 wrote: »

When discussing terms, I've noticed that some manuals/cases talk about distinguishing between "conditions and warranties" and some talk about distinguishing between "warranties and mere representations".


Am I right in saying that conditions, warranties and mere representations are three different things?


Its just that sometimes they seem to be used interchangeably and its confusing

Ya I've them as three separate things..
 Conditions - are terms that are deemed sufficiently important enough grant party right of election, can be used either to end/affirm a contract or sue for damages if breached.
 Warranties – are less important terms that entitle a party to sue for damages if breached.
 Innominate terms – are unclassified terms which are only labelled when consequences of their breach become known.
 Mere Representations - statements designed to induce parties into the contract are not a binding term, false statements give rise to action in misrepresentation.

godfather2

Lawgrad101 wrote: »

What are the topics people are banking on for Contract?

I heard bankers didn't appear last year so trying to cover a broad array.

Offer, acceptance and consideration.
Penalty, exclusion and liquidated damages.
Privity, skeleton level.
Discharge from contractual obligations.
Termination of contract
Contract interp
Implied terms
Consumer protection
Mistake/ misrepresentation
Illegality.
Estoppel.
Final three as crossed over with equity.

Basically working through last four exam papers and hoping for miracles.

bobbyness

EAL2019 wrote: »

When discussing terms, I've noticed that some manuals/cases talk about distinguishing between "conditions and warranties" and some talk about distinguishing between "warranties and mere representations".


Am I right in saying that conditions, warranties and mere representations are three different things?


Its just that sometimes they seem to be used interchangeably and its confusing

Think you're mixing up s12/13 etc sale by description. Those contain conditions and warranties.

Mere representation is when someone says something in connection with a contract, which induces the other into the contract. Is it a warranty = IE Binding, or just a mere representation (sales puff) = Not binding

Example - Carey v Independent Newspaper - It was important to her, and stated as a reason for her entering her new contract employment, she could come in later in the morning as she had to organise her children before work.

Question of whether warranty or mere representation - As she had stated it was important, had relied on it and had induced her into contract = Court held warranty and binding.

EAL2019

ahhhhhFE1s wrote: »

Ya I've them as three separate things..
 Conditions - are terms that are deemed sufficiently important enough grant party right of election, can be used either to end/affirm a contract or sue for damages if breached.
 Warranties – are less important terms that entitle a party to sue for damages if breached.
 Innominate terms – are unclassified terms which are only labelled when consequences of their breach become known.
 Mere Representations - statements designed to induce parties into the contract are not a binding term, false statements give rise to action in misrepresentation.

That really clarifies things, thank you!

ihatethesea

Lawgrad101 wrote: »

What are the topics people are banking on for Contract?

Offer/Acceptance
Consideration
Consumer Protection
Terms/Exemption Clauses
Remedies
Discharge
Mistake/Misrep

I feel like its the bare minimum but i don't have time to do more!

ahhhhhFE1s

ihatethesea wrote: »

Offer/Acceptance
Consideration
Consumer Protection
Terms/Exemption Clauses
Remedies
Discharge
Mistake/Misrep

I feel like its the bare minimum but i don't have time to do more!

Ya I've these and undue influence which i doubt will come up.. Could be wrong but think you'd be covered most of the last few papers with this?

EAL2019

bobbyness wrote: »

Think you're mixing up s12/13 etc sale by description. Those contain conditions and warranties.

No, within the category of "term" there are conditions and warranties. Both are legally binding, ie terms rather than mere representations, but a breach of a condition allows you to repudiate the contract whereas breach of a warranty only allows damages.



Your analysis of the terms/representations distinction is correct but the conditions/warranties distinction applies to all contracts, not just goods/services.


Assuming they obviously have specific definitions in the Sale of Goods Act though (haven't got to revising that yet eek, so thanks for the heads up!)


Open to correction but like 95% sure thats corrects thanks to ahhhhhFE1s comment

nmurphy1441

Contract

Interpreting express terms??? Is that The Plain meaning rule, the Factual Matrix rule and the Contra Proferentem rule?

The Parol Evidence rule is there too if I’m right above but it’s always asked not to mention it!

Breacnua

mydogwentroof wrote: »

What's the Contract Law pass rate?

Changes every sitting but 60% on a fairly good sitting

She looks for precise answers, avoid waffle and plenty case law.

Reports are good and from my memory she likes following;

Terms are a feature on most papers with a reference to RECENT case law

Innominate term is rarely to her satisfaction so it’s asked a lot

Exclusion clauses and S14 comes up a lot

Dakota packaging - getting out of a long understanding goodwill oral contract

Remedies question is rarely mixed with other chapters and worth spending time on

Don’t rely on mistake coming up in a big way

Ensure capacity privity illegal undue influence are known enough for Pq

Consideration I feel will be an essay question or full pq

supercreative

Company

Anyone have any clue about Q7 March 2017 (changes to types of securities that are required to be registered)? I could waffle something about retention of title clauses and all sums due and how they probably haven't changed but from the report it seems to require knowledge of s99 of the 1963 Act. Any ideas?

ahhhhhFE1s

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Contract

Interpreting express terms??? Is that The Plain meaning rule, the Factual Matrix rule and the Contra Proferentem rule?

The Parol Evidence rule is there too if I’m right above but it’s always asked not to mention it!

I've those under construction of terms.. I've warranty v mere representation under express terms and the parole evidence rule.. But look wouldn't be entirely confident what I have is right!

LawStudent96

As Undue Influence came up in Equity do we think it won't for Contract then?

nmurphy1441

Breacnua wrote: »

Changes every sitting but 60% on a fairly good sitting

She looks for precise answers, avoid waffle and plenty case law.

Reports are good and from my memory she likes following;

Terms are a feature on most papers with a reference to RECENT case law

Innominate term is rarely to her satisfaction so it’s asked a lot

Exclusion clauses and S14 comes up a lot

Dakota packaging - getting out of a long understanding goodwill oral contract

Remedies question is rarely mixed with other chapters and worth spending time on

Don’t rely on mistake coming up in a big way

Ensure capacity privity illegal undue influence are known enough for Pq

Consideration I feel will be an essay question or full pq

Have you seen a consideration essay come up in any other way other than to discuss the relationship between it and promissory estoppel?

ahhhhhFE1s

LawStudent96 wrote: »

As Undue Influence came up in Equity do we think it won't for Contract then?

Ya and it came up in October 2019 with non est factum so thinking fairly unlikely

jewels652

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Tbh currently thinking about dropping general principles because it's quite long. Might take up judicial review instead

So my notes for the institutions are long so I decided to memorise the night before notes verbatim is that too short then ?? I just memorised the roles I didn’t bother with the other bits such as legislative procedures, democratic deficit and separation of powers. Am I taking the piss

iamanengine

jewels652 wrote: »

So my notes for the institutions are long so I decided to memorise the night before notes verbatim is that too short then ?? I just memorised the roles I didn’t bother with the other bits such as legislative procedures, democratic deficit and separation of powers. Am I taking the piss

I haven't looked at EU in about a week so I could be wrong but I think when institutions comes up a lot of the time it will ask how the institutions have been effected by Lisbon, and that is inviting you to talk about the changes to the legislative procedures and how that lessens the democratic deficit. Not sure if that is a common question, or maybe that is just one question that is sticking out in my mind!

Sorry don't mean to put you off, maybe have a look at the exam papers to check just in case

Breacnua

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Have you seen a consideration essay come up in any other way other than to discuss the relationship between it and promissory estoppel?

I would watch out for the relationship with part payment of a debt and pinnells

Sineaddh

Does anyone have an up to date contract grid? Or even tell me what came up in 2019 sittings? Mine only goes as far as spring 2018

rightytighty

Does anyone have the October 19 Company Exam Report? Or even any guidance on what they were looking for on the Corporate Borrowing Q?

jewels652

iamanengine wrote: »

I haven't looked at EU in about a week so I could be wrong but I think when institutions comes up a lot of the time it will ask how the institutions have been effected by Lisbon, and that is inviting you to talk about the changes to the legislative procedures and how that lessens the democratic deficit. Not sure if that is a common question, or maybe that is just one question that is sticking out in my mind!

Sorry don't mean to put you off, maybe have a look at the exam papers to check just in case

Thanks for that.

like I added a line on each as how they changed post Lisbon but that’s all. Maybe I should just face the music and quit the short cuts

EAL2019

jewels652 wrote: »

Thanks for that.

like I added a line on each as how they changed post Lisbon but that’s all. Maybe I should just face the music and quit the short cuts

Thats more or less all I'll have for them too! Main Treaty Articles, composition, functions and how they were changed under Lisbon. Like theres only so much you can really know about them.



For the democratic deficit angle its mostly about whether the Lisbon changes were sufficient etc and whether the role of the Parliament in particular is sufficient, so you'd basically have that covered anyway.

EmmaO94

Sineaddh wrote: »

Does anyone have an up to date contract grid? Or even tell me what came up in 2019 sittings? Mine only goes as far as spring 2018

Just went through the Oct '19 paper and the questions were:

Q1 - Exclusion clause, sale of goods act, incorporation (P)
Q2 - Consideration, promissory estoppel (P)
Q3 - Misrep, remedies (rescission) P
Q4 - Undue influence, non est factum, auction without reserve (P)
Q5 - Duty on plaintiff to mitigate loss by breach of contract (E)
Q6 - Repudiatory breach, anticipatory beach & breach of innominate terms (E)
Q7 - Reform of privity in Ireland (E)
Q8- Choose A or B - express terms or implied terms (E)