FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) No trading

FE1swag

Any predictions what area of Corporate Borrowing will be examined?

Fe1new4

My current company topics, if anyone has anything I should add/remove please let me know!

Incorporation / advantages and disadvantages
Reforms of 2014 Act
SLP
Corporate borrowings
Receivership
Examinership
Winding up
Shareholder remedies / s212
Restriction & disqualification
Directors duties

fe12020grad

Does anyone know if you can use a laptop with a Bluetooth key board and mouse for the online exams? Did anyone use them during the last set out exams and have any hassle? Just a little worried it will be flagged for looking down too much.

murray132

What topics are people covering for Eu and Tort ?

LS3

fe12020grad wrote: »

Does anyone know if you can use a laptop with a Bluetooth key board and mouse for the online exams? Did anyone use them during the last set out exams and have any hassle? Just a little worried it will be flagged for looking down too much.

I did this with no issues for november exams.

DUMSURFER

DUMSURFER wrote: »

Does anyone have an up-to-date criminal grid and an exam paper/report from November? Can swap anything and everything that anyone needs!

Please, does anyone have up-to-date criminal gird or the recent paper. Still looking and desperate beyond belief!

Al1501

For tort I'm doing

Duty of care
Standard of Care
Causation
Negligence
Nervous Shock
Professional Negligence
Public Authority Liability
Employers Liability
Vicarious Liabilty
Defective products
Defamation
Trespass to person
Nuisance
Passing off

Does anyone have suggestions for what to leave out/put in?

flepetch

murray132 wrote: »

Did anybody notice that the NBN 2021 for Tort were outdated. He spoke about vicarious liability coming up as it hadn’t been up since October 2018, when in fact it came up on the last two papers ?

yeah this really confused me as he was up to date re the august paper. seems like it was recorded recently but not sure what exam grid they are going off?
i think i will still cover vicarious liability just because of how much he emphasised it!

flepetch

Al1501 wrote: »

For tort I'm doing

Duty of care
Standard of Care
Causation
Negligence
Nervous Shock
Professional Negligence
Public Authority Liability
Employers Liability
Vicarious Liabilty
Defective products
Defamation
Trespass to person
Nuisance
Passing off

Does anyone have suggestions for what to leave out/put in?

is there any reason you're covering public authority liability? i have it crossed off in my mind just going off the grid i have lol and defective products came up in november as an essay so i think i'll only cover it lightly
i've prepared an essay on the statute of limitations and i'm also going to have a look at liability for animals and fire as it could be one of the random infrequent topics that gets thrown!
NBN lecture said that concurrent wrongdoing and pure economic loss could be due a run over passing off as well

TCPIP

***EU***

If you were to narrow down FMOP/FMOG in EU this sitting what would you focus on?

FE1new

DUMSURFER wrote: »

Please, does anyone have up-to-date criminal gird or the recent paper. Still looking and desperate beyond belief!

I think that was posted a few pages back by awash around 185 or 186 if that helps.

KingofTheFE1s

nicolesd wrote: »

can anyone explain the case and the main significance of the friends of the environment v board pleanala for constitutional law ?

https://www.algoodbody.com/insights-publications/friends-of-the-irish-environment-v-an-bord-pleanala

Found that helpful. Bit late in the day to be trawling through judgements.

NewFe1

Thought I remembered seeing somebody say there was a question on personal liberty recently. My exam grid says last time it came up was 2016. Is it wrong?

murray132

flepetch wrote: »

is there any reason you're covering public authority liability? i have it crossed off in my mind just going off the grid i have lol and defective products came up in november as an essay so i think i'll only cover it lightly
i've prepared an essay on the statute of limitations and i'm also going to have a look at liability for animals and fire as it could be one of the random infrequent topics that gets thrown!
NBN lecture said that concurrent wrongdoing and pure economic loss could be due a run over passing off as well

I think negligence misstatement maybe got pure economic loss and may be an essay on Res Ipsa Locquiter ! It’s so hard to know....

Al1501

flepetch wrote: »

is there any reason you're covering public authority liability? i have it crossed off in my mind just going off the grid i have lol and defective products came up in november as an essay so i think i'll only cover it lightly
i've prepared an essay on the statute of limitations and i'm also going to have a look at liability for animals and fire as it could be one of the random infrequent topics that gets thrown!
NBN lecture said that concurrent wrongdoing and pure economic loss could be due a run over passing off as well

For public authority, Its been up twice since 2017 and I thought it could be due a run.

My grid must be wrong, as it says defective products didn't come up at all in November!

DUMSURFER

FE1new wrote: »

I think that was posted a few pages back by awash around 185 or 186 if that helps.

Hey, thanks for replying but I have already gone back and checked and the grid that was posted only goes up to Spring 2019 and the exam paper was from March 2020, not the November 2020 Criminal paper

murray132

Al1501 wrote: »

For tort I'm doing

Duty of care
Standard of Care
Causation
Negligence
Nervous Shock
Professional Negligence
Public Authority Liability
Employers Liability
Vicarious Liabilty
Defective products
Defamation
Trespass to person
Nuisance
Passing off

Does anyone have suggestions for what to leave out/put in?

I really think defamation is due a run and possibly negligent misstatement for economic loss. I’m going to cover what you’ve there except professional negligence comes up as med neg 90% of the time and came up like that in Nov! I’ve covered N.S, but it came up as a problem Q in August so I doubt it’ll show again. I think an essay on res ipsa locquiter might be due up, as it hasn’t been up in two papers and that seems to be the trend with it !

Al1501

murray132 wrote: »

I really think defamation is due a run and possibly negligent misstatement for economic loss. I’m going to cover what you’ve there except professional negligence comes up as med neg 90% of the time and came up like that in Nov! I’ve covered N.S, but it came up as a problem Q in August so I doubt it’ll show again. I think an essay on res ipsa locquiter might be due up, as it hasn’t been up in two papers and that seems to be the trend with it !

Thanks for this. I've just checked my grid against the November paper and it's catastrophically wrong

FE1s2021

Are people covering constructive trusts for equity?

awsah

DUMSURFER wrote: »

Hey, thanks for replying but I have already gone back and checked and the grid that was posted only goes up to Spring 2019 and the exam paper was from March 2020, not the November 2020 Criminal paper

its definitely there somewhere as I have posted it twice already but here it is one last time...

murray132

Al1501 wrote: »

Thanks for this. I've just checked my grid against the November paper and it's catastrophically wrong

This is the grid I’m going off

bluerthanu

KingofTheFE1s wrote: »

https://www.algoodbody.com/insights-publications/friends-of-the-irish-environment-v-an-bord-pleanala

Found that helpful. Bit late in the day to be trawling through judgements.

FYI, I think there may be a bit of confusion about the case being referred to here. As far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong) the case that’s important for constitutional law is Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland etc (which was a SC decision handed down last summer).

Friends of the Irish Environment v An Bord Pleanala is a case concerning planning law of some kind (I think). This case also happened to be handed down early last year by the SC.

I think the CC NBN confuses the two. It’s the former case, not the latter, that is important for constitutional law issues.

WesternC123

bluerthanu wrote: »

FYI, I think there may be a bit of confusion about the case being referred to here. As far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong) the case that’s important for constitutional law is Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland etc (which was a SC decision handed down last summer).

Friends of the Irish Environment v An Bord Pleanala is a case concerning planning law of some kind (I think). This case also happened to be handed down early last year by the SC.

I think the CC NBN confuses the two. It’s the former case, not the latter, that is important for constitutional law issues.

Can someone please tell me what topic this relates to?

nicolesd

anyone have any condensed/brief notes on property rights they can send me for constitutional law?

legallyginger

bluerthanu wrote: »

FYI, I think there may be a bit of confusion about the case being referred to here. As far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong) the case that’s important for constitutional law is Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland etc (which was a SC decision handed down last summer).

Friends of the Irish Environment v An Bord Pleanala is a case concerning planning law of some kind (I think). This case also happened to be handed down early last year by the SC.

I think the CC NBN confuses the two. It’s the former case, not the latter, that is important for constitutional law issues.

https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-supreme-court-of-irelands-decision-in-friends-of-the-irish-environment-v-government-of-ireland-climate-case-ireland/

this is a link to the first case, the second seems to be regarding peat extractions from a brief glance

Lawlawblahblah

Are people focusing on natural law for constitutional interpretation q? Thank you!

FE1Nov20

WesternC123 wrote: »

Can someone please tell me what topic this relates to?

I have Friends of the Irish Environment v An Bord Pleanala in notes for right to bodily integrity - brief line stating that right to an environment consistent with human dignity or right to healthy environment is impressible vague and does not bring matters beyond the right to bodily integrity

Al1501

murray132 wrote: »

This is the grid I’m going off

Thank you so much!

Lealaw

FE1Nov20 wrote: »

I have Friends of the Irish Environment v An Bord Pleanala in notes for right to bodily integrity - brief line stating that right to an environment consistent with human dignity or right to healthy environment is impressible vague and does not bring matters beyond the right to bodily integrity

I looked at it under unenumerated rights 40.3.1 and a comment by Clarke CJ on separation of powers in the SC Friends of the Irish environment v government of Ireland.

The Merriman v Fingal CC and Friends of the Irish environment v Fingal CC argument was around the right to an environment as an unenumerated right and Barrett J also discussed the right to an environment being consistent with human dignity.

LS3

FE1s2021 wrote: »

Are people covering constructive trusts for equity?

im leaving it out because it has only come up twice in the last 6/7 sittings. I know the examiner has said though that it is consistently poorly answered or not answered at all and therefore easy to get marks in if you have the knowledge on it