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

lsheehaneire

Constitution- Equality

Anybody got a brief outline of

A/I/S V Minister for Justice and Equality

Udaras Uchtala v M

Google is only giving me the full judgement , which at this stage of the day is like trying to climb everest so a one or two liner would be greatly appreciated ! Thanks

FE1Nov20

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Anyone that's sat Constitutional before, how much sway does Carolan's lecture actually have on the paper?

Scared of lulling myself into a fall sense of security!

I'm personally sticking to whatever topics I have and not focusing too much on what was discussed in that lecture.. I think i'll skim some of the cases mentioned but I'm not taking his word for it

corbrian1998

Any topics I'm safe to leave out for constitutional ? Trying to narrow mine down

lsheehaneire

for the 2019 lecture he covered
Standing -LS and Jus trertii
Kerins & O`Brien
Shatter
People (dpp) v CC
AC V CUH
AM V HSE

FE1s2021

lsheehaneire wrote: »

for the 2019 lecture he covered
Standing -LS and Jus trertii
Kerins & O`Brien
Shatter
People (dpp) v CC
AC V CUH
AM V HSE

Was the 2019 lecture held on the same time last year - just thinking that these topics featured on the November paper rather than the March?

lawgrad49

LawStudent999 wrote: »

I think I'm going to take a fairly balanced approach for Constitutional so as not to put all my eggs into one basket. Focusing mainly on the notes I have as I just felt as though it was a bit late in the day to suddenly bank on Carolan's lecture especially not knowing how much weight it carries. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some reference to what he discussed but I won't be banking on the paper replicating the seminar. At least I hope not anyway as I feel it is a bit late to be placing all my focus on the areas he has discussed as opposed to balancing the work out.

I think that's definitely the right approach, I'm doing the same. I've seen split opinions on here before regarding his annual seminar being useful or not. No doubt some of the stuff will appear on the exam but there are so many other parts of the course that weren't even mentioned.

fe1prep2021

lsheehaneire wrote: »

for the 2019 lecture he covered
Standing -LS and Jus trertii
Kerins & O`Brien
Shatter
People (dpp) v CC
AC V CUH
AM V HSE

This formed a majority of the paper last year I think? So I am thinking now it would be wise to cover as much as he spoke about on Monday as possible

NewFe1

LawStudent999 wrote: »

I think I'm going to take a fairly balanced approach for Constitutional so as not to put all my eggs into one basket. Focusing mainly on the notes I have as I just felt as though it was a bit late in the day to suddenly bank on Carolan's lecture especially not knowing how much weight it carries. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some reference to what he discussed but I won't be banking on the paper replicating the seminar. At least I hope not anyway as I feel it is a bit late to be placing all my focus on the areas he has discussed as opposed to balancing the work out.

I'm the same. 2 days to try cram the cases he mentioned on top of all my notes just isn't really doable.

FE1Hopefully1

FE1s2021 wrote: »

Was the 2019 lecture held on the same time last year - just thinking that these topics featured on the November paper rather than the March?

Think some appeared in March too - essay on Kerrins and O’Brien

LawStudent999

At the end of the day I'm sure we've all covered a lot of the course. I wouldn't let a last minute seminar throw you off or second guess yourself. Go with what you've covered all along and if you can throw in a case or topic from the seminar all well and good, but I can't justify reformulating my entire strategy for tackling this exam for a seminar that was given yesterday. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong but as I say, bit late in the day and just gotta trust the process.

FE1s2021

FE1Hopefully1 wrote: »

Think some appeared in March too - essay on Kerrins and O’Brien

Thank you.

I am taking the same approach as the previous posters, I am sure something will appear on the exam that was mentioned yesterday but it's not all going to be there so I am not placing too much weight on it.

DUMSURFER

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Anyone that's sat Constitutional before, how much sway does Carolan's lecture actually have on the paper?

Scared of lulling myself into a fall sense of security!

I'm pretty sure that there were 7 cases from his lecture last year on the November paper and at least 2 of them on the March paper.

laworlawww

does anyone have the slides/notes from the seminar? Would be greatly appreciated!

EmmaO94

fe1prep2021 wrote: »

This formed a majority of the paper last year I think? So I am thinking now it would be wise to cover as much as he spoke about on Monday as possible

This is helpful to hear, thank you!

Yeah I'm not going to take the seminar as gospel, but luckily I had most of the cases in my notes (they were in NBN & highlighted as being new) so not going to radically alter my study but will just lean in more to what he mentioned.

ejm47

FE1s2021 wrote: »

Do people think there is going to be a whole question on non-justiciability?

I hope not to be honest, I don't know why but I don't feel I'd be able to do a solid enough essay on it

PostHog

twitter.com/ronanlupton/status/1374134011770122241 decent synopsis on this thread

LeagleEagle747

Lallers96 wrote: »

How did everyone find Criminal?

I answered 5 but found it awful tight for time...I really hate those multiple part questions they end up being double the work of other Qs. My own fault for starting one and getting flummoxed by the 3rd part (man who fell during work and died due to defective machine).

I found timing was definitely an issue, especially where I realised with 9 minutes of the exam left that I had answered a question incorrectly and had to redo it.

My main issue is I feel my answers are too short, I don't like that it's just a text box, doesn't give me a good indicator as to how much I've written...

LeagleEagle747

bigchungus wrote: »

I found it alright until it logged me out midway through!! was so freaked. I did:
Q1 - necessity and self-defence
Q2 - Vehicular manslaughter, criminal and dangerous act, and gross negligence
Q5(i think?) - attempted rape, consent and the other offences
can't remember the numbers of the other two but the characterisation of crimes one and then right to silence/bail

Isn't he an alright marker for criminal anyway?

Hopefully he's a decent marker this time because I was confused. I've never opened an exam paper before and not wanted to even try attempt any of the questions in it.

fe1prep2021

I am leaning more towards doing the case note question now, I was going to avoid it at all costs but now hoping he puts in 2 of the newer cases he mentioned Monday in it

vkfe1

Buttonbean123 wrote: »

Not sure if this is of any benefit to anyone but I logged on at 11am for today’s exam and in November for two of my exams and it still allowed me the full 3.5 hours. Just after finishing my exam there at 2.15pm so just in case anyone’s looking for extra cramming time on the morning of the exam!

I sat some exams in November and just want to err caution on this that this might not be the case for all exams.
It was allowable for Criminal and i think maybe Property but definitely not for Contract or Equity - so unless you get an email from Law Soc, enter the lobby for before 10

rebecca1177

Anyone have the criminal law questions from today? 😊

phildub

rebecca1177 wrote: »

Anyone have the criminal law questions from today? 😊

You can't save the paper so people will have to wait until they get the scripts back or the law society release the paper

ihatethesea

Could someone kindly advise what topics these cases in the seminar come under:

1. Damache v Min for Justice & Equality
2. Ryan v Gov of Mountjoy
3. O'Shea v Legal Aid Board

Thanks!

NewFe1

I have never covered so much for one subject and felt so completely unprepared. Dreading tomorrow.

Lealaw

phildub wrote: »

You can't save the paper so people will have to wait until they get the scripts back or the law society release the paper

Yeah always wondered this with online not sure how it is possible to have the paper. Always too afraid to take a screenshot that you could impact the submission. Would love to get a copy of the answers straight away to ensure nothing was missing but that is wishful thinking. Also wouldn't have time to take the photos if it was possible.

Paraeagle

rebecca1177 wrote: »

Anyone have the criminal law questions from today? 😊

In no particular order (I’ve only listed the 5 I did as I can’t remember the other 3):

- Essay question on defence of duress

- Problem question on homicide. 3 scenarios to advise on regarding various manslaughter offences.

- Problem question on the (a) the right to silence and (b) whether a person’s previous convictions can be considered in a bail hearing (I haven’t worded that well)

- Problem question on strict liability offences.

- Problem question covering burglary, sexual assault, threats to kill, attempted rape, unlawful detention and possibly a few other issues I’ve forgotten.

LeagleEagle747

Quick question re the Kerins case and O'Brein. How is it that O'Brien succeeded yet Kerins didn't in what are quintessentially identical cases? Been googling around but I'm down a rabbit hole and beyond confused

LeagleEagle747

NewFe1 wrote: »

I have never covered so much for one subject and felt so completely unprepared. Dreading tomorrow.

Join the club, braindead from criminal today and dreading tomorrow. I feel timing will be a major issue and I will run out of time well before I get any form of a comprehensive answer down.

examsfe12021

constitutional

hi starting to stress for tomorrow!! do people think this would be enough to cover?

property
family
equality
religion
personal rights
SOP
interpetation
ag/pres
basic knowledge on justicibility
mootness/locus standi
the friends of the irish evironment v gov case
liberty
foexpression and assembly
and a brief knowledge of due course

thanks for any help in advance!

Dropin

LeagleEagle747 wrote: »

Quick question re the Kerins case and O'Brein. How is it that O'Brien succeeded yet Kerins didn't in what are quintessentially identical cases? Been googling around but I'm down a rabbit hole and beyond confused

I could be very wrong, but I was under the impression that with regards to bringing a claim for utterances in the Oireachtas they did both fail. In Kerins however, PAC breached fair procedures and as such damages were awarded.

I would wait for someone to affirm this though.