Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1121122124126127289

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 58 ✭✭fe1prep2021


    Dropin wrote: »
    Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

    Thats what I answered on anyway


  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    Dropin wrote: »
    Was the Protest question your standard Expression , Assembly and Association ?

    That was my angle anyway!

    Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?


  • Registered Users Posts: 58 ✭✭fe1prep2021


    EmmaO94 wrote: »
    That was my angle anyway!

    Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?

    I said this also but only like three sentences about it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Fe123


    **** that exam


  • Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭mydogwentroof


    I touched on that too. Also said s.4(1) offence mighe be vague. I was struggling in that Q tho
    EmmaO94 wrote: »
    That was my angle anyway!

    Also went down a bit of a rabbit hole saying 'section 4' might be disproportionate as it would so severely limit protests with the cost & notice of the permit?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 105 ✭✭Iconic10


    will be back in oct for constitutional


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 205 ✭✭Diamond_Hands


    Looks like it went well.


  • Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭mydogwentroof


    Judicial independence. I actually only had one case but i took a stab anyway and discussed golf gate
    Fe179user wrote: »
    What was the first question about for constitutional?? I 100% just failed that exam


  • Registered Users Posts: 37 FE1Pleb


    I touched on that too. Also said s.4(1) offence mighe be vague. I was struggling in that Q tho

    I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?


  • Registered Users Posts: 28 kayleee123


    My answers looked so short in the little boxes and I literally wrote everything I could - really don't know how to feel after that, shocked there was no religion, AG, interpretation bleugh so glad its over


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    NewFe1 wrote: »
    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

    I just did that on liberty?? What did you answer it on? Couldn't remember My liberty cases so I was comparing it to prison conditions ffs! Smh


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 FEONE


    Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning


  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    FE1Pleb wrote: »
    I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?

    Ya I just said that there was nothing in the act about being a criminal offense so it was probably ultra vires the act for the garda to arrest and then assembly and proportionality. I said that as the question doesn't gove into on how many people it's hard to even say that he wants complying with the act, very weird question


  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭NewFe1


    FE1Pleb wrote: »
    I avoided expression. Couldn't see how it was applicable. Focussed on Assembly, Vagueness and proportionality?

    I was the same, I didn't see how freedom of expression was applicable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 80 ✭✭bluerthanu


    FEONE wrote: »
    Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

    no that was spot on i'd say, squarely within the application of McDonald v Bord na gCon was my thinking anyway


  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    FEONE wrote: »
    Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

    No I think that's where I went with that too!


  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭NewFe1


    awsah wrote: »
    I just did that on liberty?? What did you answer it on? Couldn't remember My liberty cases so I was comparing it to prison conditions ffs! Smh

    I did it on liberty also


  • Registered Users Posts: 46 Lozg


    I panicked when I first read the questions but I think it ended up being ok. Wasn’t a big fan of the essay questions, so ended up doing 3 problem questions, the ECHR question (my answer on this was extremely short), and the case note question.

    The amount of prep I put into the Friends of the Environment case because of his lecture on Monday, almost laughing at myself now lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    Lozg wrote: »
    I panicked when I first read the questions but I think it ended up being ok. Wasn’t a big fan of the essay questions, so ended up doing 3 problem questions, the ECHR question (my answer on this was extremely short), and the case note question.

    The amount of prep I put into the Friends of the Environment case because of his lecture on Monday, almost laughing at myself now lol

    Absolute same as that! I literally never want to hear the phrase friends of the Irish environment ever again in my life.

    Honestly I'm not happy with my answers but I'm hoping that he seems to be a fair maker and I answered 5 questions that I will get over the line at 50%!


  • Registered Users Posts: 31 Dropin


    NewFe1 wrote: »
    I did this but couldn't really see how there was anything to do with freedom of expression there?

    I don't think there was but I needed to fill that box so I referenced the grouping of assembly, association and expression in the together in constitution and took a punt. Felt it was a question that should have been easy, but yet I made it hard.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    FEONE wrote: »
    Chris the vet question - was I wrong in advising Chris firstly on whether the tribunal/board came within article 37.1? I went onto to talk about fair procedures after but idk why I felt the need to talk about whether its a a board within 37 meaning

    Oops I missed that!

    Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Fe123


    What did people write for the 1st question?


  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭NewFe1


    EmmaO94 wrote: »
    Oops I missed that!

    Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?

    I also discussed right to silence and the case of DPP V M where they drew inferences from his unwillingness to add anything to his statement. Same happened with Chris.


  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    Trying to quell my nerves here - do ya generally pass Constitutional if you answer 5 qs with a decent amount of case law, having identified the issues?

    If his seminar cases had have appeared I would have been flying - had snazzy quotes & articles ready to go. So just stressing now wondering if my fine but pretty bog standard answers will be enough?


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭Lawlz


    EmmaO94 wrote: »
    Oops I missed that!

    Just went deep in fair procedures then also compared with Law Soc v Carroll ie they didn't have the power to strike off a solicitor so this Committee may not have the power to strike off Chris?


    I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental :/


  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    NewFe1 wrote: »
    I also discussed right to silence and the case of DPP V M where they drew inferences from his unwillingness to add anything to his statement. Same happened with Chris.

    Yesss same but couldn't remember the case name! I was like, in THAT case lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 31 Dropin


    Case Note question was the hero I never thought it would be. I take back everything I ever said about them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    Lawlz wrote: »
    I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental :/

    Oh damn well-spotted re livelihood! Totally missed that. Wouldn't have had time to write about it though even if I realised though haha very down to the wire with this one


  • Registered Users Posts: 31 Dropin


    Lawlz wrote: »
    I did half half on judicial functions and right to earn a livelihood! Didn’t do fair procedures. Hopefully not detrimental :/

    Nice, I went Livelihood too and then was feeling myself so talked about his vet licence in light of Muldoon... no clue how applicable that was.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 45 Fe179user


    The first question I definitely answered wrong I started talking about SOP and Art 15, can’t believe I wasted so much time stressing about the seminar cases and didn’t focus on my original topics


Advertisement