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

SwD

Does anyone have notes on institutions they’d be willing to share?

EAL2019 wrote: »

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.

iana2017

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks

bobbyness

iana2017 wrote: »

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks

Would also be looking for a tort grid if anyone can help out. Thanks for asking

iamanengine

Are ROT clauses a regular feature in the borrowing question?

They're kind of annoying, could do without them

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

Are ROT clauses a regular feature in the borrowing question?

They're kind of annoying, could do without them

I have a feeling they’ll be on the paper. March 19 was the Causes of Crystallisation, I THINK October was late registration. ROT is the only other large section of the area that comes to mind.

Jeremiah25

It's going to be a long night...

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

I have a feeling they’ll be on the paper. March 19 was the Causes of Crystallisation, I THINK October was late registration. ROT is the only other large section of the area that comes to mind.

I'm hoping for a nice book debts Q

Jeremiah25 wrote: »

It's going to be a long night...

Yep, I'm absolutely shattered and I have 3 coffees in me

rightytighty

iamanengine wrote: »

I'm hoping for a nice book debts Q



Yep, I'm absolutely shattered and I have 3 coffees in me

For FCOBD is it just s92(b) Accounting Act 17, Keenan Bros, Wogan, Holidair, Spectrum?

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

For FCOBD is it just s92(b) Accounting Act 17, Keenan Bros, Wogan, Holidair, Spectrum?

I also have Siebe Gorman v Barclays Bank and Re Brightlife Ltd

Breacnua

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!

know the bare bones of capacity - what it is 2-3 cases

know the re with estoppel and consideration

you will do fine with that

jewels652

SwD wrote: »

Does anyone have notes on institutions they’d be willing to share?

I am using the night before notes you can get them online if you subscribe to their website.

supercreative

Does anyone know when the Summary Approval Procedure last came up for Company? Trying to get an idea for how it'll be asked.

Edit: also, LTDs vs DACs?

nmurphy1441

With exclusion clauses....

If a defendant includes in its terms and conditions that a plaintiff is excluded from bringing a claim in tort in negligence, is the plaintiff bound by it and therefore can’t bring a claim due to the terms and conditions? Assuming that the exclusion clause has been incorporated correctly...

supercreative

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

With exclusion clauses....

If a defendant includes in its terms and conditions that a plaintiff is excluded from bringing a claim in tort in negligence, is the plaintiff bound by it and therefore can’t bring a claim due to the terms and conditions? Assuming that the exclusion clause has been incorporated correctly...

I think so, assuming that it isn't an unfair term under the 1995 Regulations and that it has been signed properly etc. Not my strongest area though.

coalition

supercreative wrote: »

Does anyone know when the Summary Approval Procedure last came up for Company? Trying to get an idea for how it'll be asked.

Edit: also, LTDs vs DACs?

LTD v DAC and SAP came up together in October 2017

supercreative

coalition wrote: »

LTD v DAC and SAP came up together in October 2017

Cheers!

godfather2

supercreative wrote: »

I think so, assuming that it isn't an unfair term under the 1995 Regulations and that it has been signed properly etc. Not my strongest area though.

If the clause is properly incorporated he can rely upon unfair contract terms directive which states unfair consumer terms a contract are illegal. There is list of terms presumed to be unfair under the directive, exclusion of liability for personal injury is one of them.
Or
S.39 and s.40 sale of goods supply of services id also of use but the directive is broader.

Kellyg248

Send your email and I will forward to you if you like ...

Hi all,

Any predictions for Tort?? Also, I can't get my hands on a tort grid...would appreciate if anyone is willing to share one. Thanks[/quote]

nmurphy1441

godfather2 wrote: »

If the clause is properly incorporated he can rely upon unfair contract terms directive which states unfair consumer terms a contract are illegal. There is list of terms presumed to be unfair under the directive, exclusion of liability for personal injury is one of them.
Or
S.39 and s.40 sale of goods supply of services id also of use but the directive is broader.

So would this be under the Canada Steamship Line case?

Jeremiah25

Anyone any idea what the company marker is like?

godfather2

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

So would this be under the Canada Steamship Line case?

I would be more inclined to stick to legislation on that question. Except for whether the clause was specifically brought to his attention and done so before the contract was concluded. I would use your case law there

Law1997

Hi it’s the worrier again...

For Contract, will I pass if I have knowledge of offer & acceptance, consideration, intention to create, estoppel, capacity, terms, duress, mistake, misrep, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, undue influence, discharge & remedies

By knowledge I mean I know as much of it as is in my manual but when reading the reports there’s a few nitty gritty bits in problem qs that I don’t have info on, and then she sometimes will ask an entire essay on duty to mitigate loss when it’s such a tiny section in my chapter on remedies.

Will this get me the pass? I feel like I nearly should have gone outside the manual but no time for that now feel like I’m at a disadvantage - my manual is up to date but there’s always something I’m missing.

CarrigView

Anybody have an idea where's handy to park around Neptune Stadium? Don't venture over to the North side so often!

iamanengine

Brain capacity has never been lower...am ded

Law1997

iamanengine wrote: »

Brain capacity has never been lower...am ded

Me too

rightytighty

Mental that people have passed 8 in one sitting.

iamanengine

rightytighty wrote: »

Mental that people have passed 8 in one sitting.

I'll never understand how that is possible. This is my first time having two on consecutive days and finding it very very tough to concentrate, reading the same sentences over and over but not taking anything in...would not recommend!

Fe119

Law1997 wrote: »

Hi it’s the worrier again...

For Contract, will I pass if I have knowledge of offer & acceptance, consideration, intention to create, estoppel, capacity, terms, duress, mistake, misrep, exclusion clauses, consumer contracts, undue influence, discharge & remedies

By knowledge I mean I know as much of it as is in my manual but when reading the reports there’s a few nitty gritty bits in problem qs that I don’t have info on, and then she sometimes will ask an entire essay on duty to mitigate loss when it’s such a tiny section in my chapter on remedies.

Will this get me the pass? I feel like I nearly should have gone outside the manual but no time for that now feel like I’m at a disadvantage - my manual is up to date but there’s always something I’m missing.

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

Law1997

Fe119 wrote: »

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

Thank you! That’s a good way of thinking of it

Breacnua

Fe119 wrote: »

You will be grand. Think of what the average exam candidate in the exam will have covered and realise you will have more than enough to pass the exam!

duty to mitgate -- there is many cases that u learn for other parts that can be used here - she just wants u to think outside the box

Law1997

Breacnua wrote: »

duty to mitgate -- there is many cases that u learn for other parts that can be used here - she just wants u to think outside the box

Are there? What cases from other areas?

nmurphy1441

CarrigView wrote: »

Anybody have an idea where's handy to park around Neptune Stadium? Don't venture over to the North side so often!

If you get there early enough, there’s a few spaces there. Maybe enough for 20 cars!

iamanengine

Final topic count, had to cut some stuff:

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

Just gunna have to hope that gets me over the line

20082014

I am just wondering how many cases do you tend to mention per exam question? I know it differs depending on the question itself but for a general problem question on a specific topic, what should the average be?

Also, if you're short on time in the exam would it be sufficient to scribble down a case name beside a test for example, just to show that the case relates to that test, if you don't have time to go into any other details of it?

ihatethesea

20082014 wrote: »

I am just wondering how many cases do you tend to mention per exam question? I know it differs depending on the question itself but for a general problem question on a specific topic, what should the average be?

Also, if you're short on time in the exam would it be sufficient to scribble down a case name beside a test for example, just to show that the case relates to that test, if you don't have time to go into any other details of it?

I think the general rule is for each significant and important point you make in an answer you should be able to give 3 cases to back it up, for smaller points one case should do.

If your running out of time you should scribble everything you know, you wont lose marks for it and you might gain some if the case is relevant, whereas you defo wont gain marks for a blank page I ran out of time in criminal and at the end I just did bullet points with cases and concise information, hoping i get some marks for it!

jewels652

ihatethesea wrote: »

I think the general rule is for each significant and important point you make in an answer you should be able to give 3 cases to back it up, for smaller points one case should do.

If your running out of time you should scribble everything you know, you wont lose marks for it and you might gain some if the case is relevant, whereas you defo wont gain marks for a blank page I ran out of time in criminal and at the end I just did bullet points with cases and concise information, hoping i get some marks for it!

I did the same for criminal in March 2019 and passed

saphiradragon

rightytighty wrote: »

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

Pm me and I can send it to you

Sineaddh

CONTRACT

offer/acceptance, consideration, promissory estoppel, consumer protection, exemption clauses, misrep/mistake, remedies.


Think Ill be ok with this?
Any other recommendations of must-cover?
Thanks!

Breacnua

Sineaddh wrote: »

CONTRACT

offer/acceptance, consideration, promissory estoppel, consumer protection, exemption clauses, misrep/mistake, remedies.


Think Ill be ok with this?
Any other recommendations of must-cover?
Thanks!

Terms
Capacity

Wonderstruck

Best luck with Company whoever is sitting it here!

I am so burned out! I will have sat every Fe1 exam once I sit company! Now to get those last two passes! Not looking forward to dragging my companies act home as I have the OPW version....

DFMCD190384

Would I be safe with the following in Property:

Succession
Finding
AP
Changes brought about with 2009 Act
Co ownership
Reg of land
Family
Mortgages


Any advice is very welcome. #braindead

JimmyJazzz

DFMCD190384 wrote: »

Would I be safe with the following in Property:

Succession
Finding
AP
Changes brought about with 2009 Act
Co ownership
Reg of land
Family
Mortgages


Any advice is very welcome. #braindead

Of course. Easements and LL/Tenant are the only 'big ticket' topics missing from that list which I can think of but you should be fine with what you've got. Especially so considering that between AP and Succession alone you'll likely have three questions covered.

CiaranS93

Tort

Is tort similar to criminal where the questions are mixed so you can just learn the main tests and cases per topic?

Breacnua

CiaranS93 wrote: »

Tort

Is tort similar to criminal where the questions are mixed so you can just learn the main tests and cases per topic?

as far as i can see, there isn't to much overlap between topics...

CiaranS93

Anyone have Tort exam grid?

DRMC

Hi,

Would any kind soul be willing to send me Family Property notes, please? I feel like I haven’t got enough covered.

Thank you very much.

sm333

Anyone else getting really confused between common and mutual mistake for contact??

ahona

sm333 wrote: »

Anyone else getting really confused between common and mutual mistake for contact??

I dont know if this will help but


COMMON MISTAKE -
A wants to sell Corn, B wants to buy ---> but corn has perished.

MUTUAL MISTAKE
A has two cars Audi and Ford
B wants to buy a car. B thinks A is selling Audi. But A actually meant Ford.


(sorry if I ended up infantalising the confusion)

bobbyness

ahona wrote: »

I dont know if this will help but


COMMON MISTAKE -
A wants to sell Corn, B wants to buy ---> but corn has perished.

MUTUAL MISTAKE
A has two cars Audi and Ford
B wants to buy a car. B thinks A is selling Audi. But A actually meant Ford.


(sorry if I ended up infantalising the confusion)

Sums it up perfectly

nmurphy1441

sm333 wrote: »

Anyone else getting really confused between common and mutual mistake for contact??

Common mistake is both parties making the same mistake as one another...

Mutual mistake is both parties still make a mistake but they are different mistakes....

If that’s any help! What’s confusing you?