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

bazu

LoJB wrote: »

Does anyone know how tough the equity marker is? I put so much work into equity but definitely feel I won’t have passed.
3 of my questions, I would think were definitely passable
1 of my questions contained very little case law so I’m unsure whether it will pass
1 of my questions was a problem question that I didn’t know how to answer so essentially wrote what I would have for an essay and tried to keep referring to the question

It's a new examiner no? Last one was tough anyway. Equity has a high failure rate, about 50%. Anecdotal, but even with the new examiner last time, it did seem as if they were a harsh marker

jjjjjop

Did anyone count their paragraphs in their online answers? i counted mine this morning and on average each answer was 6-8 paragraphs.. this sounds very short to me haha

Fe10000

awsah wrote: »

heres the griffith sample answer

Thank you, appreciate it!

FE1Hopefully1

LoJB wrote: »

Does anyone know how tough the equity marker is? I put so much work into equity but definitely feel I won’t have passed.
3 of my questions, I would think were definitely passable
1 of my questions contained very little case law so I’m unsure whether it will pass
1 of my questions was a problem question that I didn’t know how to answer so essentially wrote what I would have for an essay and tried to keep referring to the question

It’s really hard to tell how you do in these exams

I 100% thought I failed EU in November and got 62

Just put it behind you and don’t worry about it

orlaghs

does anyone know what happens if the system thinks you were cheating? i was really stumped for a lot of that equity exam and stared at the table/out the window a lot. also went to the bathroom twice so i'm worried it will be flagged

Katniss1998

AA247 wrote: »

Company

Guys can anyone confirm incase i'm reading it wrong, that in Frank Bell & Co; Shaws Application that Shaws were allowed late registration of the charge but Frank Bell's still ranked in priority as it was validity registered in 2013?

No it ranks in priority from the date of the application to the court on rather than from the original date of creation of the charge.

awsah

Law101 wrote: »

I said Deirdre and michael will hold the holiday home together

I said same not sure if its right but it sounded good to me!

Lallers96

jjjjjop wrote: »

Did anyone count their paragraphs in their online answers? i counted mine this morning and on average each answer was 6-8 paragraphs.. this sounds very short to me haha

I've been using my fingers to measure the length of the little scroll bar on the side to compare the length of my answers haha

Lallers96

For anyone worried about leaving for the toilet too much, I wouldn't. I went to the bathroom twice in one of my exams in November and it was never flagged or anything

tommytimber

Tort

Is it possible that Pure Economic Loss could come up as a standalone question or is it really just intertwined with Negligent Misstatement?

ruby1998

Does corporate borrowing typically come up as either an essay, or problem Q where you're the liquidator on the enforceability of security - as in whether it was validly registered, whether they would be granted late reg, book debts etc

In what type of question would you have to set out a list of priority for the liquidator?

Thanks!!

AA247

Katniss1998 wrote: »

No it ranks in priority from the date of the application to the court on rather than from the original date of creation of the charge.

Thanks for replying. Ok sorry still confused. So to cut it short the charge the applicant (Shaws) were looking to register late was created in 2003 or around that (not registered). Frank Bell validly registered a charge in 2013. Shaw's wanted the charge created in 2003 to be registered in priority to Frank's as it was created first and they argued he knew this etc. but court didn't agree to retrospectively register in priority of Frank's, but agreed to register from date of app which was 2014. Correct or not correct?

ALK2!

I wouldn’t worry about the toilet. I’ve went a couple of times and same in November. I really hurry so I’m usually gone for less than a minute but nothing was ever flagged. I’d say as long as your not gone for ages.

Also for secret trust q- I said that William would hold the property in trust for Deirdre and Michael as benificiaries. I also mentioned about them being TIC. But I think I may have completely misread the re Stead case and kind of regretting putting that in now.

Fingers crossed it went well. It’s so hard to know. And good luck to anyone with other exams left to take.

AA247

Company

Also if somebody could briefly explain conclusion in Cosslett's case please (Smith v Bridgend CoCo 2002). I don't get it, the examiner's case was dismissed but the floating charge was deemed void. How come then the Council weren't required to either pay rent or give the property back to the company in examinership? I seem to be reading these all wrong!

FEONE

AA247 wrote: »

Thanks for replying. Ok sorry still confused. So to cut it short the charge the applicant (Shaws) were looking to register late was created in 2003 or around that (not registered). Frank Bell validly registered a charge in 2013. Shaw's wanted the charge created in 2003 to be registered in priority to Frank's as it was created first and they argued he knew this etc. but court didn't agree to retrospectively register in priority of Frank's, but agreed to register from date of app which was 2014. Correct or not correct?

I could be wrong but I think there is a case called Re Monolithic Buildings which holds that intention should not restrict someone from validly asserting their rights. He properly registered a charge after someone else who he knew had not registered it properly but it did not matter that he knew because by registering his own charge properly he has sufficient legal rights. That was my take from it anyway but I could be wrong

vkfe1

orlaghs wrote: »

does anyone know what happens if the system thinks you were cheating? i was really stumped for a lot of that equity exam and stared at the table/out the window a lot. also went to the bathroom twice so i'm worried it will be flagged

I'm the kind of person who will go to the bathroom like 3 times during a normal exam sitting because i drink so much water. I sat two exams in November and went to the bathroom SO much but i was really quick. I asked the law soc beforehand and they said it shouldn't be a problem. It wasn't an issue at all and i passed both.

Also re. the day dreaming - i wouldn't worry. Even if you did have exam notes pinned to your wall (i know you didn't but for argument sake), they need absolute proof to fail you for that reason. So don't worry

AA247

FEONE wrote: »

I could be wrong but I think there is a case called Re Monolithic Buildings which holds that intention should not restrict someone from validly asserting their rights. He properly registered a charge after someone else who he knew had not registered it properly but it did not matter that he knew because by registering his own charge properly he has sufficient legal rights. That was my take from it anyway but I could be wrong

Yep that's right so is my understanding of it correct then? The courts agreed to late registration but not retrospectively so as to rank in priority to Frank, but only from date of application?

orlaghs

vkfe1 wrote: »

I'm the kind of person who will go to the bathroom like 3 times during a normal exam sitting because i drink so much water. I sat two exams in November and went to the bathroom SO much but i was really quick. I asked the law soc beforehand and they said it shouldn't be a problem. It wasn't an issue at all and i passed both.

Also re. the day dreaming - i wouldn't worry. Even if you did have exam notes pinned to your wall (i know you didn't but for argument sake), they need absolute proof to fail you for that reason. So don't worry

thanks for replying! im the same i had a coffee and loads of water so was always going to need to go in 3.5 hours lol really have psyched myself out over the day dreaming but you make a good point. no point in worrying i suppose

Iso_123

ALK2! wrote: »

I wouldn’t worry about the toilet. I’ve went a couple of times and same in November. I really hurry so I’m usually gone for less than a minute but nothing was ever flagged. I’d say as long as your not gone for ages.

Also for secret trust q- I said that William would hold the property in trust for Deirdre and Michael as benificiaries. I also mentioned about them being TIC. But I think I may have completely misread the re Stead case and kind of regretting putting that in now.

Fingers crossed it went well. It’s so hard to know. And good luck to anyone with other exams left to take.

I’m trying not to worry about the toilet but now I’m thinking did I take too long.. I only went once and was probably gone for about 3ish minutes as I had to go to the upstairs one. I am definitely being paranoid now though lol it’s just because out of all my online exams so far this is the first time I’ve went hahah

stav

Panic setting in majorly, can't seem to remember if I read the Equity questions correctly today because I was dealing with the system logging me out constantly.

Can someone confirm that we only had to answer only 2 parts of the last question (trustees) and 2 parts of the note question? Or did I screw up?

jjjjjop

stav wrote: »

Panic setting in majorly, can't seem to remember if I read the Equity questions correctly today because I was dealing with the system logging me out constantly.

Can someone confirm that we only had to answer only 2 parts of the last question (trustees) and 2 parts of the note question? Or did I screw up?

The trustee q was only 2 parts

13545327

For the Question on half secret trusts I mentioned mostly everything even the two canadian cases (Chin and Glasspool) but I failed to mention the rule in stead which is absolutely crucial lol
Two of my other answers were at a decent level and the other two were okay in that I mentioned a lot of cases but some weren't 100% accurate.
Would missing the Rule in Stead be an automatic fail with this examiner considering he's tough as old boots ?

Katniss1998

Does it matter if I speak to myself during the exam?

stav

jjjjjop wrote: »

The trustee q was only 2 parts

Omg thank you, I think I'm going crazy lmao! And we had to only answer 2 parts of the notes question, right?

jjjjjop

qDid anyone do the quistclose q? I concluded that its an automatic RT and they can get the money.. is this right?

LoJB

Equity

How did people answer the problem Q on undue influence?

flepetch

company
i need to choose between receivership and examinership does anyone have any idea which would be better to cover?

law77335255252

Trying to remember, is this right?

Equity - Qs not in order
Q1 - Proprietary estoppel - essay on unconscionability

Q2 - Secret trusts PQ

Q3 - Mareva injunction essay

Q4 - Tracing PQ

Q5 - Undue influence PQ

Q6 - Note Q 2/3 - (i) When purpose trusts for non-charitable purposes will be upheld, (ii) Meaning of poverty under common law and 2009 Act (iii) Doctrine of Satisfaction

Q7 - Did not look at this Q

Q8 - Trustees note - duty of investment & duty to exercise discretion properly

FE1s2021

Company - should I be covered with the below topics or is there anything that I need to add? A bit panicked now !

SLP
Corporate Capacity - Ultra Vires
Directors
Corporate Borrowing
Examinership
Receivership
Winding up
Realisation of corporate assets
Minority protections - Foss v Harbottle
Restriction

CMUL

When do the upcoming exams appear? Mine still isn't up for company?