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
1122123125127128289

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 31 Dropin


    Fe179user wrote: »
    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

    I think SOP was applicable. It would be a gov body dictating to the judiciary so you would get marks there I think.


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 FE1Nov20


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

    Honestly same! Only for it I really would've been struggling for 5th Q


  • Registered Users Posts: 118 ✭✭AA247


    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?

    Thought this was one of my better questions and I didn’t know about article 37.1 and Law Soc case fml


  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭jus_me


    Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)


  • Registered Users Posts: 105 ✭✭Iconic10


    literally none of the topics i expected to appear came up and the small amount chapters i left out did. it really threw me when i saw no family, equality, religion, interpretation AG or anything that was in his seminar


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Fe123


    jus_me wrote: »
    Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

    Yep and I only prepared 2 cases for it lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    jus_me wrote: »
    Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

    yup but it was probably my worst question!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3 MonikaCh84


    On Equity undue influence
    Can someone explain how Clarke J in Ulster v Roche & Buttimer did not fully agree with decision in Etrige? was it on the steps the banks need to take?


  • Registered Users Posts: 229 ✭✭Fe1user5555


    My computer crashed randomly in the exam (my ****ty computer’s fault not better examinations). I logged straight back in but do I need to email the law society to tell them this?


  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭jus_me


    awsah wrote: »
    yup but it was probably my worst question!

    What did you address as the issues I literally winged it


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 34 LawStudent999


    Thought a few questions were fair but struggled with the Vet question. Took the angle of questioning the power of the committee in line with the law society solicitors case and M v. Medical. Other than that I thought the paper was fair but missing a few expected topics


  • Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭BigSprogs


    jus_me wrote: »
    Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

    Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22 Lawlawblahblah


    Did everyone get 3.5 hours for the exam?


  • Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭FE1Hopefully1


    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

    Same


  • Registered Users Posts: 143 ✭✭ruby1998


    BigSprogs wrote: »
    Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

    Same here! I kept reading that Q thinking there must be some other issue in this, but went with delay and duty to seek out and preserve and the role of the trial judge in these areas


  • Registered Users Posts: 143 ✭✭ruby1998


    I did association assembly and included expression because it referred to media attention so the duty of the press to report on matters in the public interest, then said it may be a vague offence, and then property rights because of the fee involved

    For the vet I said A37, then A34 and Gilchrist bc there was something about a redacted name, fair procedures and livelihood.

    The disease case did Cityview, liberty, the S v HSE case and Enhorn, then for some reason threw in about habeas corpus and how this would not be open to her bc of the really high threshold in recent cases and her detention was not unlawful

    I can't remember what else I even did now haha melted


  • Registered Users Posts: 135 ✭✭NewFe1


    BigSprogs wrote: »
    Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

    I did the exact same


  • Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭awsah


    BigSprogs wrote: »
    Aye I did, used 4 or 5 cases on delay. Also brought in Garda duty to seek and preserve evidence because Gardai failed to get evidence from the witness.

    That's what I did also,new test in the CC case came in handy


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 iana2017


    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 referred to the mental health cases and prevention detention...🀷*♀️🀞


  • Registered Users Posts: 23 Lawwww2020


    How did people answer q7 on non-delegation? Thought the other essays were difficult!


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


    Did everyone get 3.5 hours for the exam?

    Ya I had no issues with the exam software, I actually think I got an extra min, I looked at the clock toward the end and it was red and said like 00.36 so I had a quick scan through one of my questions


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 FEONE


    Lawwww2020 wrote: »
    How did people answer q7 on non-delegation? Thought the other essays were difficult!

    I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it


  • Registered Users Posts: 23 Lawwww2020


    FEONE wrote: »
    I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it

    Phew thanks! Yeah me too just went through all those cases on the legislature


  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭EmmaO94


    iana2017 wrote: »
    I referred to the mental health cases and prevention detention...��*♀️��

    I did that too and talked about detention for the 'common good' which I said was applicable to the q, eeek


  • Registered Users Posts: 45 Fe179user


    jus_me wrote: »
    Did anyone attempt the question on the delayed proceedings on the assault charge! (Can’t remember the rest of the facts)

    Was this question not very similar to DPP v CC?


  • Registered Users Posts: 101 ✭✭lawgrad49


    Went into that paper with the plan of doing all three essays and oh how that changed! Think the problem questions were fair and you could pick out the issues okay but judicial immunity and ECHR is so left field, given all the other topics he omitted.

    Very surprised he omitted Friends of the Irish Environment or even an essay on derived rights.

    That paper probably just emphasises how broad a course it really is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭vkfe1


    Company

    Restriction --- La Moselle Clothing is this an absolute test whereby the director must satisfy all elements to be subject to a restriction order? Or just 1 of the elements?


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 FE1Nov20


    FEONE wrote: »
    I waffled an unholy amount in this - could be very wrong but I talked about excessive delegation on the legislature side bringing in leontajava etc that they cant further delegate it

    Same here I said the minister power to enact the regulations was unconstitutional and breach of Art 15.2.1 but I don’t know if that’s right


  • Registered Users Posts: 65 ✭✭fe12020oct


    equity

    just finished constitutional, any advice on what topics to cram for equity? super stressed


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 80 ✭✭bluerthanu


    vkfe1 wrote: »
    Company

    Restriction --- La Moselle Clothing is this an absolute test whereby the director must satisfy all elements to be subject to a restriction order? Or just 1 of the elements?

    well, they’re just factors to be taken into account, so i guess neither? as in, a court would probably want to satisfy more than one. it’s at the discretion of the judge so wouldn’t need to satisfy them all.


Advertisement