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

FE1Pleb

Hot brandy and bed for me.

Dreams of no essay on mootness or justicability.

Lighting a candle for nice questions on SOP, Due Course, standing and something sexy like equality

jus_me

Would anyone have a brief explanation of the friends Case mentioned in the thread for constitutional? Just to get an idea !! Last min cramming as I haven’t had time to cover it

kayleee123

jus_me wrote: »

Would anyone have a brief explanation of the friends Case mentioned in the thread for constitutional? Just to get an idea !! Last min cramming as I haven’t had time to cover it

Send me your email I did a page on it earlier today can send you a picture of it

ihatethesea

I'll be up late tonight and back up early unfortunately, hoping i'm not the only one!!

awsah

jus_me wrote: »

Would anyone have a brief explanation of the friends Case mentioned in the thread for constitutional? Just to get an idea !! Last min cramming as I haven’t had time to cover it

in my own opinion, I beleive that if that case appears on the paper you will need to know the full thing in order to answer it, it makes such specific comments about standing and unenumerated rights and non-justibility that a quick synopis probably won't be benifical to you I would relaly recommend finding a summary version and ready it

https://www.irishlegal.com/article/supreme-court-government-s-climate-change-plan-quashed

Hamerzan Sickles

Good luck tomorrow all. It has been a pleasure posting with you all over the last few weeks.

fe1fi20

hey guys, can someone please explain how O'Shea v Legal Aid Board relates to the AG?

Creg12

catonafence wrote: »

Katniss1998 wrote: »

So I was thinking of covering the following for EU, am I covered?
Competition Law- Art 101, 102, 107 (not doing mergers or 106 because they came up recently)
FMOG both Art 34-36 and Art 30 and Art 110
Institutions- Hoping it is a banker
General Principles + Sources of EU law as back up
Judicial Review- essay on individual concern test
Direct Effect, Indirect effect and MS liability

Am I cutting it a bit close?"

I can only speak for EU - I am doing the same list as you, except I'm trying to complete FMOW and Citizenship instead of Art 101/102. I think you are better offhaving covered Art 101/102 as its a banker. You seem well covered.

i have same list as first poster

Fedone

Any last minute tips for picking up marks in constitutional from anyone who’s sat it would be much appreciated.

RaffRiff01

kayleee123 wrote: »

Send me your email I did a page on it earlier today can send you a picture of it

Hi, any chance I could have this as well? sent you a pm just there! thanks so much!

LawNerd2020

I would really appreciate this as well Kaylee. Just PM'ed you my email address. Thank you!!

ullaw22

PROPERTY

Conscious that tomorrow is Constitutional day but could anyone lend a hand in answering this Q? Thought I had a handle on easements but this has me stumped. Obviously apply Ellenborough Park and Latimer then maybe try bring in Wong v Beaumont. I have Scott v Goulding and Gaw v CIE too but doesn't really answer it. All thoughts and comments welcome/

In 1970, Peter built a house on a site adjacent to Ken’s land. Since the driveway of this
house was liable to serious flooding, Peter asked Ken in 1971 if he could pass through
Ken’s field as his normal way of access to the main roadway. Ken said that he had no
problem with that. Peter has continued to use this alternative access route ever since,
although there was one period of six months in 2001 when he tried an alternative way
over a field belonging to another neighbour. However, that proved unsatisfactory and
Peter reverted to crossing Ken’s field.

In January 1993, Peter built an extension to his house, consisting of a new kitchen with
one large window overlooking Ken’s field. The field contains some beautiful old oak trees,
which was why Peter positioned the window where he did. This year, Ken has sold the
field to a developer whose plans for development include the erection of a ten foot high
boundary wall. The wall will not only cut off Peter’s access to the road via the field, but it
will considerably reduce the amount of light received through the kitchen window
destroying the view in the process.

Advise Peter.

EmmaO94

Wishing everyone the best tomorrow morning :-)

This thread has helped me massively with Constitutional - not just re the substantive issues on the course but also with all the moral support. Really really rooting for you guys, let's hope we smash it tomorrow.

ihatethesea

EmmaO94 wrote: »

Wishing everyone the best tomorrow morning :-)

This thread has helped me massively with Constitutional - not just re the substantive issues on the course but also with all the moral support. Really really rooting for you guys, let's hope we smash it tomorrow.

You too Emma! You were really kind to share the seminar slides with everyone!! Really appreciated it!

EmmaO94

ihatethesea wrote: »

You too Emma! You were really kind to share the seminar slides with everyone!! Really appreciated it!

Not at all :-) Just trying to pay back all the helpful advice I've got from the thread over the last year or two! Lighting a proverbial candle for tomorrow.

nmurphy1441

ullaw22 wrote: »

PROPERTY

Conscious that tomorrow is Constitutional day but could anyone lend a hand in answering this Q? Thought I had a handle on easements but this has me stumped. Obviously apply Ellenborough Park and Latimer then maybe try bring in Wong v Beaumont. I have Scott v Goulding and Gaw v CIE too but doesn't really answer it. All thoughts and comments welcome/

In 1970, Peter built a house on a site adjacent to Ken’s land. Since the driveway of this
house was liable to serious flooding, Peter asked Ken in 1971 if he could pass through
Ken’s field as his normal way of access to the main roadway. Ken said that he had no
problem with that. Peter has continued to use this alternative access route ever since,
although there was one period of six months in 2001 when he tried an alternative way
over a field belonging to another neighbour. However, that proved unsatisfactory and
Peter reverted to crossing Ken’s field.

In January 1993, Peter built an extension to his house, consisting of a new kitchen with
one large window overlooking Ken’s field. The field contains some beautiful old oak trees,
which was why Peter positioned the window where he did. This year, Ken has sold the
field to a developer whose plans for development include the erection of a ten foot high
boundary wall. The wall will not only cut off Peter’s access to the road via the field, but it
will considerably reduce the amount of light received through the kitchen window
destroying the view in the process.

Advise Peter.

Don’t have any notes in front of me but maybe Copeland v Greenhalf??? And Maybe regency villas v diamond resorts!!!???

ruby1998

Up to my f****** eyeballs in unenumerated rights and family, I will in fact be pulling an all-nighter hoping I'm not alone and that I don't fall asleep mid exam lol

P.O.POLLY

LeagleEagle747 wrote: »

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...

Oh my god the criminal paper so unexpectedly difficult I thought. No theft and fraud offences came up which is a core area. Nasty mixed qs with multiple main topics. I ran out of time so couldn't go over my answers. I'm hoping for a pass because I answered 5 questions (just about) the CAB q was off-putting as well as that first Garda bombing one. Wtf.
Only good thing is that if everyone found it tough maybe it will be marked a bit easier??

johnnash2020

If anyone is worried about criminal, please know he marks about 10% higher than the others do. Statistically, it's one of the two easiest exams to pass (alongside property) x

P.O.POLLY

johnnash2020 wrote: »

If anyone is worried about criminal, please know he marks about 10% higher than the others do. Statistically, it's one of the two easiest exams to pass (alongside property) x

Thank you kind human, I'm also doing property so luck might be on my side. Good luck to all in the morning with constitution!!

Fe1user5555

Is anyone planning on logging in a bit late

FE1Hopefully1

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Is anyone planning on logging in a bit late

I personally wouldn’t chance it

phildub

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Is anyone planning on logging in a bit late

It's pretty risky, personally I just want to get this over with my head is fried so il be logging in as soon as I can!

Iconic10

will log on at ten. wouldn’t chance logging on later either

EmmaO94

On my BE homepage it says 0 exams ready to be taken now but if I scroll down, Constitutional is there as 'upcoming' & in my calendar - is this just because it's not 8.30am yet? Sorry I can't remember if this was how it was in November!!

Murphs122

EmmaO94 wrote: »

On my BE homepage it says 0 exams ready to be taken now but if I scroll down, Constitutional is there as 'upcoming' & in my calendar - is this just because it's not 8.30am yet? Sorry I can't remember if this was how it was in November!!

Mine is the same, but you can still see the exam if you click into in the calendar?

EmmaO94

Murphs122 wrote: »

Mine is the same, but you can still see the exam if you click into in the calendar?

Exactly yeah, thank you! Seems all good. Best of luck!

awsah

best of luck today everyone! it will be such a relief when it is over!

LeagleEagle747

johnnash2020 wrote: »

If anyone is worried about criminal, please know he marks about 10% higher than the others do. Statistically, it's one of the two easiest exams to pass (alongside property) x

Normally that would make me feel more confident, but I managed to fail property in November so god knows how criminal will go

AlexTG356

For those of you who got logged out yesterday, when you logged back in were your previous answers still viewable or were they gone but saved?