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

ullaw22

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

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

Thanks! Definitely they're applicable in some form... Q is from 2013 so hoping it's been too long for it to crop up again but honestly not a notion how you'd go about answering it. I'd imagine there's been an easement case at some point sometime about a right to a view but if there is I cannot find it.

nmurphy1441

ullaw22 wrote: »

Thanks! Definitely they're applicable in some form... Q is from 2013 so hoping it's been too long for it to crop up again but honestly not a notion how you'd go about answering it. I'd imagine there's been an easement case at some point sometime about a right to a view but if there is I cannot find it.

Right to light can be argued under s3 prescription act 1858...
Right to a view has been held not to be an easement as it is too vague in Phipps v Pear!!

Iso_123

equity

I would appreciate an opinion from someone on this Q, it's a part of question 2 on the march 2020 paper re trustees:

Anne also bequeathed €100,000 to Bridget and Clare on trust for her eldest child for life and
thereafter to her eldest grandchild. The Will provided that the two trustees shall have an
absolute discretion in relation to the investment of those monies. Bridget is a committed
environmentalist and decides, without discussing the matter with Clare, to invest the monies
in a fledgling cosmetics company that makes its products primarily from compost.
Unfortunately, Bridget failed to research the potential for, and likelihood of, economic growth
of these investments and the company performs very poorly, making considerable losses
before going into liquidation.
Advise the beneficiaries

Would you talk about the rule in Hastings v Bass here as well as the cases on a trustees duty to invest?

Lcork23

AlexTG356 wrote: »

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?

Mostly ya only once did I get logged out and a tiny bit of the answer wasn't saved.

caius97

Folks, what are people covering for Tort? Absolute mammoth of a course, starting to panic! I'm thinking about covering:
1. DOC/Causation/Breach
2. Standard of care
3. Negligence - general
4. Negligence misstatement/professional negligence
5. Defamation
6. Products liability
7. Res Ipsa
8. Nuisance
9. Employers and vicarious liability

Would this cover me? Am I missing anything huge?

nmurphy1441

caius97 wrote: »

Folks, what are people covering for Tort? Absolute mammoth of a course, starting to panic! I'm thinking about covering:
1. DOC/Causation/Breach
2. Standard of care
3. Negligence - general
4. Negligence misstatement/professional negligence
5. Defamation
6. Products liability
7. Res Ipsa
8. Nuisance
9. Employers and vicarious liability

Would this cover me? Am I missing anything huge?

I’d throw in trespass the person and damages personally!!!

caius97

thank you!

fe12020grad

Iso_123 wrote: »

equity

I would appreciate an opinion from someone on this Q, it's a part of question 2 on the march 2020 paper re trustees:

Anne also bequeathed €100,000 to Bridget and Clare on trust for her eldest child for life and
thereafter to her eldest grandchild. The Will provided that the two trustees shall have an
absolute discretion in relation to the investment of those monies. Bridget is a committed
environmentalist and decides, without discussing the matter with Clare, to invest the monies
in a fledgling cosmetics company that makes its products primarily from compost.
Unfortunately, Bridget failed to research the potential for, and likelihood of, economic growth
of these investments and the company performs very poorly, making considerable losses
before going into liquidation.
Advise the beneficiaries

Would you talk about the rule in Hastings v Bass here as well as the cases on a trustees duty to invest?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but personally I think you would have more than enough cases under duties in relation to investment, you've got the types of investments authorized/ discretion in relation to investment, liability for breach and cases on ethical investment to cover pretty much all the issues. So I can't see how Hastings Bass would be too relevant here and would probably take up too much time.

ullaw22

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

Right to light can be argued under s3 prescription act 1858...
Right to a view has been held not to be an easement as it is too vague in Phipps v Pear!!

Ah okay! That's such a huge help, thank you thank you!

Lealaw

AlexTG356 wrote: »

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?

How I would take it, if the answer / part of the answer is not there when you log back in it is gone.

Only what you see will be saved. I would notify the Law Society if you notice any issues with missing parts on logging back in.

Al1501

ullaw22 wrote: »

Ah okay! That's such a huge help, thank you thank you!

I found these articles on it helpful as well.

https://www.irishlegal.com/article/georgina-wallace-let-there-be-light

https://www.childandchild.co.uk/legal-guides/party-walls-rights-of-light-and-boundary-disputes/rights-to-light-an-outline-guide/

And here's Dennings' full quote from Phipps and Pears:

“Suppose you have a fine view from your house. You have enjoyed the view for many years. It adds greatly to the value of your house. But if your neighbour chooses to despoil it, by building up and blocking it, you have no redress. There is no such right known to the law as a right to a prospect or view.”

arubamuuu

Is Equity showing up as an upcoming exam for anyone?

I remember from the last sitting I could see all my upcoming exams a few days in advance but now it says I have no upcoming exams so I'm not sure if I should be contacting the LS.

Iso_123

fe12020grad wrote: »

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but personally I think you would have more than enough cases under duties in relation to investment, you've got the types of investments authorized/ discretion in relation to investment, liability for breach and cases on ethical investment to cover pretty much all the issues. So I can't see how Hastings Bass would be too relevant here and would probably take up too much time.

Thanks for this! I was thinking the same ie that the cases on discretion re investments, the standard of care needed and breach cases would take up a fair bit of time so probably no time for hastings and bass. the only thing that threw me is the way the examiner says that she failed to research the potential of growth for these companies so i thought that was maybe a prompt for hastings v bass as she didn't take into account all relevant considerations

can I just ask as well what cases you have on ethical investments? I dont have anything for this in my notes. Thanks!

AlexTG356

Lealaw wrote: »

How I would take it, if the answer / part of the answer is not there when you log back in it is gone.

Only what you see will be saved. I would notify the Law Society if you notice any issues with missing parts on logging back in.

Thanks, hasn't happened to me yet thankfully, but I'm just trying to pre-empt what my answer boxes should look like when I log back in.

Zlatorog

Iso_123 wrote: »

Thanks for this! I was thinking the same ie that the cases on discretion re investments, the standard of care needed and breach cases would take up a fair bit of time so probably no time for hastings and bass. the only thing that threw me is the way the examiner says that she failed to research the potential of growth for these companies so i thought that was maybe a prompt for hastings v bass as she didn't take into account all relevant considerations

can I just ask as well what cases you have on ethical investments? I dont have anything for this in my notes. Thanks!

I have two for this:

Cowan v Scargill - Some of the Trustees had been appointed by the National Union of Miners and they rejected a planned investment scheme where it increased overseas investments and investments in energies in competition with coal. The Court held that they couldn't take these considerations into regard but had a duty to get the best financial return.


Harries v Chrurch Commissioners for England - Trustees argued that if they were representing the Christian faith in England they should not invest in a manner opposing those aims. The Court again found that moral/ethical concerns should have no impact but rather the best financial return for the Beneficiary. They said if there was no monetary difference between two investments, then the Trustees could pick the ethical one.

tommytimber

Tort

Are people covering Rylands v Fletcher for Tort?

LS3

arubamuuu wrote: »

Is Equity showing up as an upcoming exam for anyone?

I remember from the last sitting I could see all my upcoming exams a few days in advance but now it says I have no upcoming exams so I'm not sure if I should be contacting the LS.

not coming up for me either

Iso_123

Zlatorog wrote: »

I have two for this:

Cowan v Scargill - Some of the Trustees had been appointed by the National Union of Miners and they rejected a planned investment scheme where it increased overseas investments and investments in energies in competition with coal. The Court held that they couldn't take these considerations into regard but had a duty to get the best financial return.


Harries v Chrurch Commissioners for England - Trustees argued that if they were representing the Christian faith in England they should not invest in a manner opposing those aims. The Court again found that moral/ethical concerns should have no impact but rather the best financial return for the Beneficiary. They said if there was no monetary difference between two investments, then the Trustees could pick the ethical one.

Thanks so much for this

murray132

tommytimber wrote: »

Tort

Are people covering Rylands v Fletcher for Tort?

I’m taking the chance of not coming it as it came up in November

Lallers96

How did everyone find Constitutional?

Personally happy enough with it, although my answer for the ECHR was very short tbh.

Didn't like the COVID bait questions. I really wanted to comment on how the government have essentially delegated law making powers by influence to NPHET (possibly wrong there) but didn't want to take the bait in case the marker is very opinionated one way or the other in relation to COVID lol

fe1fi20

constitutional was actually a doable paper for once - but none of the lecture cases were needed for the questions i did. shouldnt have bothered and just stuck to my original topics lol

Dropin

Anyone find that when they finish an answer they have a feeling of relative satisfaction only to review the question and see how small it looks in that question box?

fe1prep2021

I panicked so much at the beginning because I read all the questions at once and couldn't figure out what any of them were asking, so annoying he didn't include anything from the seminar?

awsah

While the paper itself seemed lovely, I took a gamble on some topics which did not pay off, no family or equality or constitutional interpretation really killed me, I answered 5 questions but to what standard I have no idea all i read was waffle waffle waffle

nothing i can do about it now...on to equity (after a quick nap!)

EmmaO94

EmmaO94 wrote: »

You're so welcome!

I found the seminar helpful & hopefully very telling!

Will eat my hat if there isn't a q on Friends...

Well consider my hat eaten!

I freaked at that start because Carolan's lecture ended up being SO irrelevant but thankfully covered enough of the course to actually write (hopefully) alright answers when it came to it.

Thought the essays & case note kinda sucked though? Just ended up doing the non-delegation one and problem qs for the rest, yucky.

Dropin

Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

NewFe1

Was stuck for a question so gave the infectious disease one a punt, hoping he might mark it nicely because it was an odd one

Fe179user

What was the first question about for constitutional?? I 100% just failed that exam

Lallers96

Dropin wrote: »

Anyone find that when they finish an answer they have a feeling of relative satisfaction only to review the question and see how small it looks in that question box?

Yeah and when I got my papers back from November I thought they looked so small on paper

NewFe1

Dropin wrote: »

Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

I did this but couldn't really see how there was anything to do with freedom of expression there?