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

fe1fi20

PROPERTY

hey guys, does anyone have a sample answer to the 2019 spring paper - particularly the co ownership question? thanks

Lallers96

irishmisile wrote: »

Same. Mine was roughly half the length of the other answers. I had a tiny intro, a few paras and a 5 line conclusion just baffling on about how sacred s31 is lol there is not a whole lot of material to cover for it

I thought so too, there really wasn't a whole lot to say on the topic

LeagleEagle747

Found company to be mainly a complete rehash of previous exam questions, like the separate legal entity with holdings and subsidiaries, Paul and the cars, Harry, Jackie and Tim or whatever his name was. Hopefully things go well for all of us in terms of results because I cannot face sitting company again.

kayleee123

Jenosul wrote: »

Hi everyone. I hope the exams are going well. Can someone please tell me how the answered the question on the judicatory in Constitution. I am feeling a bit anxious that I made a mess of it. Thank you

This was the last question I did as I didn't really want to do it so was my worst but I talked about the provisions which stipulate the judiciary is independent, then I went on to look at past cases where interference of the independence of the judiciary was struck down so Sinn Fein Funds case, Maher v AG and State v O'Brien and then looked at instances regarding misconduct of judges so golfgate and that justice Curtin not being removed from his position despite the child pornography.

bluerthanu

LeagleEagle747 wrote: »

Found company to be mainly a complete rehash of previous exam questions, like the separate legal entity with holdings and subsidiaries, Paul and the cars, Harry, Jackie and Tim or whatever his name was. Hopefully things go well for all of us in terms of results because I cannot face sitting company again.

Yeah, and that exact question was the sample question that came up for the mock exam on better examinations for setting up a few weeks ago. I thought SLP would come up but thought surely he’d change it. Great either way!

nmurphy1441

I think I’ve 3 very good answers and 2 middle of the road answers so here’s hoping!!

Fe1user5555

kayleee123 wrote: »

This was the last question I did as I didn't really want to do it so was my worst but I talked about the provisions which stipulate the judiciary is independent, then I went on to look at past cases where interference of the independence of the judiciary was struck down so Sinn Fein Funds case, Maher v AG and State v O'Brien and then looked at instances regarding misconduct of judges so golfgate and that justice Curtin not being removed from his position despite the child pornography.

I said the same as this! Then a little bit about the sanction like if they were planning on removing judges would the council have the power to do that etc! Just threw anything in in the hopes of scraping a few marks in it

kayleee123

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

I said the same as this! Then a little bit about the sanction like if they were planning on removing judges would the council have the power to do that etc! Just threw anything in in the hopes of scraping a few marks in it

Oh thank god, the whole time I was writing it I was like I don't know if this is what you were looking for but this is what you are getting

RebeccaM90

Can anyone please help with regard to possible areas of reform for adverse possession? Help would be much appreciated, last past paper question to do and I’ve hit a brick wall...

AA247

Can anyone summarise what came up in Company today 1-8 please?

lawgrad49

bluerthanu wrote: »

Yeah, and that exact question was the sample question that came up for the mock exam on better examinations for setting up a few weeks ago. I thought SLP would come up but thought surely he’d change it. Great either way!

Yeah I think that was sound enough on his behalf throwing on the same essay. Ultra Vires too was a nice one to come up as well as Floating Charges- carbon copies from previous years.

Still found myself running out of time lol haha it's very hard to know where you stand with these typed exams!

Fe1user5555

kayleee123 wrote: »

Oh thank god, the whole time I was writing it I was like I don't know if this is what you were looking for but this is what you are getting

Judging from what I heard from people who have passed the exam he seems to give a little bit of wiggle room with regards those kind of q’s! Fingers crossed for us anyway!

lawgrad49

AA247 wrote: »

Can anyone summarise what came up in Company today 1-8 please?

4 essays:
Ultra Vires
SLP
S. 31 Contract
Crystallisatoin

4 Problems:
Fixed charge over book debts & Registrations
Directors Duties
Receivers
Restrictions problem

It's still too fresh in my head for my liking!

FE1new

Honestly I'm not sure how that went. I answered 5 but my crystallisation felt really short compared to the rest. SLP, S228 and S819 were nice though.

Flynner999

fe1fi20 wrote: »

PROPERTY

hey guys, does anyone have a sample answer to the 2019 spring paper - particularly the co ownership question? thanks

PM me your email and will send it on

mcdurh

What are peoples thoughts on contact?

I'm thinking I'll be more than covered if I have Offer/Acceptance, Consideration, Certainty, Terms, Consumer Protection, Exemption Clauses, Illegal Contracts, Mistake, Misrepresentation, Discharge of Contracts and Remedies.

I feel as though I may be covering too much there and could trim it down?

Fe1user5555

mcdurh wrote: »

What are peoples thoughts on contact?

I'm thinking I'll be more than covered if I have Offer/Acceptance, Consideration, Certainty, Terms, Consumer Protection, Exemption Clauses, Illegal Contracts, Mistake, Misrepresentation, Discharge of Contracts and Remedies.

I feel as though I may be covering too much there and could trim it down?

I’m doing this but not doing illegal contracts and doing capacity and privity instead!

FE1Nov20

mcdurh wrote: »

What are peoples thoughts on contact?

I'm thinking I'll be more than covered if I have Offer/Acceptance, Consideration, Certainty, Terms, Consumer Protection, Exemption Clauses, Illegal Contracts, Mistake, Misrepresentation, Discharge of Contracts and Remedies.

I feel as though I may be covering too much there and could trim it down?

I'm doing the exact same but leaving out illegal contracts!

mcdurh

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

I’m doing this but not doing illegal contracts and doing capacity and privity instead!

Yeah, it such a pain of a topic as you kind of just have to have 80% of the course covered in order to be able to attempt it. Nothing is particularly difficult, there's just so much mixing of topics and they all seem to just melt into one.

Fe1user5555

mcdurh wrote: »

Yeah, it such a pain of a topic as you kind of just have to have 80% of the course covered in order to be able to attempt it. Nothing is particularly difficult, there's just so much mixing of topics and they all seem to just melt into one.

Yep literally! Hoping to be able to cram it all in over the weekend

Lealaw

Katniss1998 wrote: »

Lovely paper. Thought the book debts question was a little tricky. I said that the charge over the bank account did not need to be registered because it was not a registerable charge. Does that sounds ok?

I went with section s1001 tax consolidation act 1997 revenue can take what is due from the account. If not registered under that I understand it is invalid. Catch 22 - Either way I think revenue should be able to get what was due. Not 100% sure on this but read it somewhere and I know he is a fan of s.1001.

ejm47

mydogwentroof wrote: »

It was a lengthy question. What did you say for the bit about the books getting stolen?

I said it probably wasn't dishonest or irresponsible basically lol because it was only one year and cited a case I now can't remember where 2 years of having no books was incompetent I think? Honestly have amnesia after it haha

Iso_123

I was wondering if anyone could help me out with EU and FMOG - There's nothing in my manual about article 34 and purely internal situations and I see this come up sometimes in questions and the examiner mentions that it needs to be discussed in the report for those questions. Does anyone have some notes on art 34 in relation to purely internal situations/cases or anything? I have loads of materials to swap!

catonafence

Iso_123 wrote: »

I was wondering if anyone could help me out with EU and FMOG - There's nothing in my manual about article 34 and purely internal situations and I see this come up sometimes in questions and the examiner mentions that it needs to be discussed in the report for those questions. Does anyone have some notes on art 34 in relation to purely internal situations/cases or anything? I have loads of materials to swap!

Pm me your email and I’ll send you my notes

awsah

RebeccaM90 wrote: »

Can anyone please help with regard to possible areas of reform for adverse possession? Help would be much appreciated, last past paper question to do and I’ve hit a brick wall...

I think the city college NBN talks about this and how reform is needed to clarify if it is the intention of squatter or future intention of owner

murray132

catonafence wrote: »

Pm me your email and I’ll send you my notes

Can I please get notes off you as well, I would be most thankful 🙈

Dancing Obsession

murray132 wrote: »

Can I please get notes off you as well, I would be most thankful 🙈

I would recommend to watch City Colleges short lecture on EU exam.

awsah

AA21 wrote: »

Would anyone have a sample answer on illegal contracts? And the courts approach in refusing to enforce such contracts?? There’s been a few recent enough cases on it so defo going to cover it as an essay question ! Any help would be appreciated

I would appreciate thisnalso!

mydogwentroof

Lealaw wrote: »

I went with section s1001 tax consolidation act 1997 revenue can take what is due from the account. If not registered under that I understand it is invalid. Catch 22 - Either way I think revenue should be able to get what was due. Not 100% sure on this but read it somewhere and I know he is a fan of s.1001.

He is categorically not a fan of s.1001...In his book he says that if there was a prize for the most tortuous, cryptic and rambling enactment it would go to s.1001

bobbyness

mydogwentroof wrote: »

He is categorically not a fan of s.1001...In his book he says that if there was a prize for the most tortuous, cryptic and rambling enactment it would go to s.1001

Still comes up in the marking scheme as worth noting for marks!