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

awsah

i am thinking something to do with right to travel based on ryanair and state(m) case, hoping for a question on 42A but that is just my dreams, not basing it off of anything, I think liberty might be thrown in there. it is so hard to predict as literally all our personal rights are being restricted so I am trying to focus more on the ones that also has the most recent case law. im kinda just holding out until monday to see how this lecture goes, but that might be leaving it too late!!

Hamerzan Sickles

kayleee123 wrote: »

Thinking AG, Constitutional Interpretation, some kind of question around assembly/ association/ freedom of expression, property rights, right to die, SOP - either delegated legislation or interference in judiciary

AG - Y
CI - Y
A/S/E - Y
PR - Y
Right to die - what makes you think this will come up?
SOP - Agreed, or International Relations a la Crotty/Pringle. Chances of Oireachtas coming up three times in a row? I doubt it.

FEONE wrote: »

Although might mean nothing religion is a topic that has followed a pattern of two up and two off for years now, hasn't been up the last two papers so could be due now

Y.

FE1swag wrote: »

Any thoughts on the Separation of Powers qs?

See above.

awsah wrote: »

i am thinking something to do with right to travel based on ryanair and state(m) case, hoping for a question on 42A but that is just my dreams, not basing it off of anything, I think liberty might be thrown in there. it is so hard to predict as literally all our personal rights are being restricted so I am trying to focus more on the ones that also has the most recent case law. im kinda just holding out until monday to see how this lecture goes, but that might be leaving it too late!!

Right to travel is too niche imo.

42A is possible considering Family/Children didn't appear on the last paper.

Liberty - very topical, Y.

NewFe1

Would be really helpful if anyone could name some of the relevant recent Constitutional cases. Really annoying how some of them are not included in this years manuals... I don't know what I'm looking for when trying to find them.

legallyginger

FEONE wrote: »

Although might mean nothing religion is a topic that has followed a pattern of two up and two off for years now, hasn't been up the last two papers so could be due now

I noticed this too. Also for the past while right to life/abortion has been a casenote every two years but then again I'm trying to find any sort of prediction I can haha

Fe1user5555

Have left myself 2 days to cram all of criminal wonder if that’s even possible!

Lealaw

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Company

Is receivership worth covering? Came up in March 2020. Have examinership and liquidation covered and trying to cut one or two topics!

I'm covering all 3. I think examinership or receivership will be there in some form and then liquidation could come up as a separate question. Just my own thoughts. Examinership is very topical atm

nmurphy1441

Lealaw wrote: »

I'm covering all 3. I think examinership or receivership will be there in some form and then liquidation could come up as a separate question. Just my own thoughts. Examinership is very topical atm

Examinership hasn’t come up in a few sittings too! I’m definitely covering that! Might just cover all three altogether... they’re pretty straight forward. I’ll cut something else!

Lealaw

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Examinership hasn’t come up in a few sittings too! I’m definitely covering that! Might just cover all three altogether... they’re pretty straight forward. I’ll cut something else!

Finding it tough to know where to cut, the topics have very different questions that could be asked and I feel there is a in-depth level of detail needed.

I haven't covered advantages and disadvantages of incorporation, Foss v Harbottle (mainly just covered s212), Director transactions, Rule in Turquands, ultra vires and meetings.

I aim to cover meetings briefly and maybe director transactions but any idea if I am crazy leaving any of these out?

bluerthanu

Lealaw wrote: »

Finding it tough to know where to cut, the topics have very different questions that could be asked and I feel there is a in-depth level of detail needed.

I haven't covered advantages and disadvantages of incorporation, Foss v Harbottle (mainly just covered s212), Director transactions, Rule in Turquands, ultra vires and meetings.

I aim to cover meetings briefly and maybe director transactions but any idea if I am crazy leaving any of these out?

I would advise (personally) to cover Foss v Harbottle. It hasn’t appeared as a standalone essay question since October 2018 and its come up quite a few times. Again my opinion but I think covering examinership, receivership and liquidation is pointless because all three won’t appear together. Liquidation probably very likely and then a toss up between examinership and receivership (both won’t appear together I would think). Worth bearing in mind Courtney is not an examiner who puts up things that are topical, it’s literally just a rehashing of certain parts of the syllabus. Just my two cents.

Also, just to add, restrictions on directors transactions is very much due a run (hasn’t appeared since March 19). I’d think that’s something to cover over and leave out the whole who are the duties owed to stuff.

nmurphy1441

bluerthanu wrote: »

I would advise (personally) to cover Foss v Harbottle. It hasn’t appeared as a standalone essay question since October 2018 and its come up quite a few times. Again my opinion but I think covering examinership, receivership and liquidation is pointless because all three won’t appear together. Liquidation probably very likely and then a toss up between examinership and receivership (both won’t appear together I would think). Worth bearing in mind Courtney is not an examiner who puts up things that are topical, it’s literally just a rehashing of certain parts of the syllabus. Just my two cents.

Also, just to add, restrictions on directors transactions is very much due a run (hasn’t appeared since March 19). I’d think that’s something to cover over and leave out the whole who are the duties owed to stuff.

I would agree with a lot of this! Personally I think examinership is due a run. I think liquidation will too. Foss and Harbottle definitely cover. I think director loans will come up (238 & 239). Separate corporate personalities specific to holding companies and subsidiaries. Retention of title clauses and s409! After these then, I don’t know!

bluerthanu

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I would agree with a lot of this! Personally I think examinership is due a run. I think liquidation will too. Foss and Harbottle definitely cover. I think director loans will come up (238 & 239). Separate corporate personalities specific to holding companies and subsidiaries. Retention of title clauses and s409! After these then, I don’t know!

haha great, that’s literally exactly what i’ve written down! the two remaining topics i’d put up as likely possibilities is some form of 2014 Act reform essay question (the five advantages one hasn’t come up with years) and something random like distributions/capital maintenance or s 158. I’d be fairly confident restriction/DQ won’t appear (would be the fourth continuous year, which seems out of kilter with the trend). anyway, gives me peace of mind to exchange our speculations!

fluffysocks91

Hi everyone . I know you are all extremely busy with exam preparations. I recently returned to college and have an essay to complete which is titled “The misuse and manipulation of ICT to facilitate sexual misconduct is an ever-growing concern - and one with which the Law struggles to keep abreast” .

I’ve been proof reading it non-stop and feel like I’m so off track , haven’t handed in an essay for grading in so long .

Would anyone have any pointers on what to include/leave out ?

Thank you in advance

fe1fi20

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Have left myself 2 days to cram all of criminal wonder if that’s even possible!

haha this is me rn

awsah

fluffysocks91 wrote: »

Hi everyone . I know you are all extremely busy with exam preparations. I recently returned to college and have an essay to complete which is titled “The misuse and manipulation of ICT to facilitate sexual misconduct is an ever-growing concern - and one with which the Law struggles to keep abreast” .

I’ve been proof reading it non-stop and feel like I’m so off track , haven’t handed in an essay for grading in so long .

Would anyone have any pointers on what to include/leave out ?

Thank you in advance

I'm not sure you are going to get the answer to your question here today as the exams start tomorrow. You might be better off starting your own thread and the lovely boards members can assist you! All the best with your easy, returning to college is a tough decision so fair play!

FE1s2021

Would this be enough to cover for company or should I try cram anything else:
SLP
Corporate Capacity - Ultra Vires
Directors
Corporate Borrowing
Examinership
Receivership
Winding up
Realisation of corporate assets
Minority protections - Foss v Harbottle
Restriction

fe12020grad

bluerthanu wrote: »

haha great, that’s literally exactly what i’ve written down! the two remaining topics i’d put up as likely possibilities is some form of 2014 Act reform essay question (the five advantages one hasn’t come up with years) and something random like distributions/capital maintenance or s 158. I’d be fairly confident restriction/DQ won’t appear (would be the fourth continuous year, which seems out of kilter with the trend). anyway, gives me peace of mind to exchange our speculations!

Sorry if I'm a bit late to this conversation but would you all recommend leaving out distribution of assets on winding up and cover just winding up/liquidation on its own? I know distribution has come up in the last two sitting as just distribution but I want to make sure its not too risky to cover one without the other.

nmurphy1441

bluerthanu wrote: »

haha great, that’s literally exactly what i’ve written down! the two remaining topics i’d put up as likely possibilities is some form of 2014 Act reform essay question (the five advantages one hasn’t come up with years) and something random like distributions/capital maintenance or s 158. I’d be fairly confident restriction/DQ won’t appear (would be the fourth continuous year, which seems out of kilter with the trend). anyway, gives me peace of mind to exchange our speculations!

Let’s hope we’re right though, that’s the main thing!!!

LawBoy2018

How are people narrowing down equity?

It's an absolute mammoth..

LawBoy2018

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I would agree with a lot of this! Personally I think examinership is due a run. I think liquidation will too. Foss and Harbottle definitely cover. I think director loans will come up (238 & 239). Separate corporate personalities specific to holding companies and subsidiaries. Retention of title clauses and s409! After these then, I don’t know!

Foss v Harbottle came up in November, did it not?

corbrian1998

Has liability of strangers under constructive trusts ever come up in equity ? My exam grid says it never has and I’m wondering if that’s a mistake

awsah

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

How are people narrowing down equity?

It's an absolute mammoth..

was studying it yesterday and I wanted to cry, I am taking a gamble and leaving out estoppel and undue influence and doing specific performance and rectification. i have my fingers crossed for 2 questions on injunctions. I am looking at tracing, leaving out DMC but looking at resulting trusts and an essay on cy pres. I have no idea what else. going to look over some case notes that came up in past years that are not the ones that came up in November

LawBoy2018

corbrian1998 wrote: »

Has liability of strangers under constructive trusts ever come up in equity ? My exam grid says it never has and I’m wondering if that’s a mistake

Mine says that it hasn't also.

Iso_123

corbrian1998 wrote: »

Has liability of strangers under constructive trusts ever come up in equity ? My exam grid says it never has and I’m wondering if that’s a mistake

Mine also says that it's never come up but I know for a fact that I saw an essay Q on it when I was looking through papers

nmurphy1441

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

Foss v Harbottle came up in November, did it not?

Pretty certain it didn’t! It hasn’t come up in the specific essay style way in a few sittings now. Oppression came up in a problem question I think but I was referring to the essay type. Should have been clearer with that

LawBoy2018

awsah wrote: »

was studying it yesterday and I wanted to cry, I am taking a gamble and leaving out estoppel and undue influence and doing specific performance and rectification. i have my fingers crossed for 2 questions on injunctions. I am looking at tracing, leaving out DMC but looking at resulting trusts and an essay on cy pres. I have no idea what else. going to look over some case notes that came up in past years that are not the ones that came up in November

Rectification came up as a note in November! I haven't started UI or proprietary estoppel yet. I'm currently prepping the secret trusts/joint accounts problem question and will also look at the specific performance/rectification problem question.

You should look at the mixed charitable trusts/cy-pres problem question from October 2017! That could be due a run.

LawBoy2018

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Pretty certain it didn’t! It hasn’t come up in the specific essay style way in a few sittings now. Oppression came up in a problem question I think but I was referring to the essay type. Should have been clearer with that

Apologies, I was thinking of Percival v Wright! Best of luck with it.

corbrian1998

awsah wrote: »

was studying it yesterday and I wanted to cry, I am taking a gamble and leaving out estoppel and undue influence and doing specific performance and rectification. i have my fingers crossed for 2 questions on injunctions. I am looking at tracing, leaving out DMC but looking at resulting trusts and an essay on cy pres. I have no idea what else. going to look over some case notes that came up in past years that are not the ones that came up in November

I’m doing kinda the same I’m leaving out proprietary estoppel, undue influence (hoping only one of them will come up) and tracing (heard it can be a difficult question to do well in and I don’t have the time). I’m giving most of my attention to trusteeship, charitable trusts, injunctions, specific performance and rectification I’m hoping there’s at least 4 questions there and then I’m looking over all the other smaller topics to cover myself for a fifth question like the note question.

Iso_123

What do ppl think the likelihood is of estoppel making an appearance on thursday for equity? It's been up 3 times in a row now and from what I can see it hasn't been examined more than 3 times in a row yet. I have most of the rest of the course covered bar tracing, constructive trusts and the bit of complete constitution that doesn't seem to come up (rule in milroy v lord etc). I'm wondering is it worth covering estoppel too?

Legalapples

Can I ask for those who sat the online exams in November and got unexpectedly logged out of the exam ... did you use the spell check facility? I’m thinking this is why I was logged out of two of my exams and I’m now afraid to use spell check for this upcoming sitting

NewFe1

corbrian1998 wrote: »

I’m doing kinda the same I’m leaving out proprietary estoppel, undue influence (hoping only one of them will come up) and tracing (heard it can be a difficult question to do well in and I don’t have the time). I’m giving most of my attention to trusteeship, charitable trusts, injunctions, specific performance and rectification I’m hoping there’s at least 4 questions there and then I’m looking over all the other smaller topics to cover myself for a fifth question like the note question.

I would recommend looking at tracing. There's a repetitive essay question that comes up and is fairly short/easy to learn off an answer for.