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

keelfe1s

P.O.POLLY wrote: »

Anyone frantically cramming property? Why did I leave it this late.

Keep going!!! It will all be over in a few hours!

legallyginger

https://www.myerson.co.uk/news-insights-and-events/a-guide-to-adverse-possession
Very quick read on English position for adverse possession (if you left it until this morning like me hah:D )

caius97

Hey, see other than s111, s117, s90 as the big succession questions, is it just attestation and revocation that are also asked? Is their anything big i'm missing ?

taralawfe1

Id include intestacy also

caius97

oh yeh forgot to type that, thanks !! eek good luck everyone today !

fe12020grad

The amount of headings and subheadings and lists and ways of doing things in property is starting to hurt my brain. Best of luck everyone. Hopefully it will be a nice paper.

ruby1998

Very best of luck today everyone hopefully it’s a fair paper!

eLawGirl

BBall2015 wrote: »

In relation to EU - DE/MSL, if it was a problem q, would you mention Francovich and Factortame for the 3 step test for damages or only Factortame, as that's the most recent one used and developed the original test?

I’ve noticed in the exam reports he says things like - a good answer would trace the development of the law from x to x

Seems that the examiner like you to show knowledge about how EU law has developed starting from the treaties or ‘constitution’ and how the CJEU have expanded it or dealt with cases

I’m sure we’d all pass an answer with current law, he seems like a fair marker but it’s no harm to know the cases and tests etc to show you understand the bigger picture I think he’d be happy to give extra marks for something like that

Anyone who had sat EU might let us know if that’s totally wrong but it’s what I’ve noticed

P.O.POLLY

Can we still log on at 11?

awsah

P.O.POLLY wrote: »

Can we still log on at 11?

it is not stated that we can log on at 11 although some people have been successful in doing so. If you want to risk it you can absolutely log on at 11 but there is no guarantee that your time will be extended

Ais20

Am I right in saying that under the pre-2009 act the short user period was 20 years for prescription, so you would have to have this right registered before the commencement of the new 2009 act, if not it is extinguished and you would have to then establish a new user period of 12 years before Dec 2021 from 2009 (which would be exactly 12 years then) or am I even right in saying that?

awsah

Ais20 wrote: »

Am I right in saying that under the pre-2009 act the short user period was 20 years for prescription, so you would have to have this right registered before the commencement of the new 2009 act, if not it is extinguished and you would have to then establish a new user period of 12 years before Dec 2021 from 2009 (which would be exactly 12 years then) or am I even right in saying that?

I have understood this to mean that if the easment is not registered prior to dec 2009 that after a 12 year non user period the right of easement will be extingusihed, but I could be wrong, it is actually very confusing

Ais20

awsah wrote: »

I have understood this to mean that if the easment is not registered prior to dec 2009 that after a 12 year non user period the right of easement will be extingusihed, but I could be wrong, it is actually very confusing

That’s the way I interpreted it aswell, that if it’s not registered prior to the enactment of the 2009 Act they basically are given a transitionary period of 12 years to register it which would lead them right up to Dec 2021, can’t wait for this to be over

awsah

Ais20 wrote: »

That’s the way I interpreted it aswell, that if it’s not registered prior to the enactment of the 2009 Act they basically are given a transitionary period of 12 years to register it which would lead them right up to Dec 2021, can’t wait for this to be over

yes but is it the case if they are using it within the 12 year period that this doesn't apply? like really wish I could log on now, even though I am going going over succession now!

lawDani

murray132 wrote: »

EU

Is it safe to leave capital out of FMOP? And just cover workers, services and establishment!

That’s exactly what I’m doing so I hope so breeze over equality maybe

RebeccaM90

fe12020grad wrote: »

The amount of headings and subheadings and lists and ways of doing things in property is starting to hurt my brain. Best of luck everyone. Hopefully it will be a nice paper.

I’m absolutely terrified! Fingers crossed it will be ok

FE1Hopefully1

eLawGirl wrote: »

I’ve noticed in the exam reports he says things like - a good answer would trace the development of the law from x to x

Seems that the examiner like you to show knowledge about how EU law has developed starting from the treaties or ‘constitution’ and how the CJEU have expanded it or dealt with cases

I’m sure we’d all pass an answer with current law, he seems like a fair marker but it’s no harm to know the cases and tests etc to show you understand the bigger picture I think he’d be happy to give extra marks for something like that

Anyone who had sat EU might let us know if that’s totally wrong but it’s what I’ve noticed

He’s definitely a fair marker ! Came out of the exam thinking I definitely failed was awful and got 62

fe1time

https://beauchamps.ie/publications/847

This provides a good explanation of how easements will work from December

awsah

fe1time wrote: »

https://beauchamps.ie/publications/847

This provides a good explanation of how easements will work from December

that was very helpful thank you

Al1501

Here we go, best of luck everyone!

Iso_123

Does anyone else find citizenship/workers confusing in EU law? I find some of the problem questions so confusing/difficult

eLawGirl

Iso_123 wrote: »

Does anyone else find citizenship/workers confusing in EU law? I find some of the problem questions so confusing/difficult

They are very long scenarios, I think an idea might be to copy the question into the answer box and delete any irrelevant information to be left with the main facts, throw down the treaty provision and cases and apply the facts as best you can. I can't deal with the scrolling up and down so it might save time too.

I think he's a fair marker, once we can identify the relevant treaty provisions, talk about the development to the current law and apply the facts in the problem question to similar cases I think we'll be sorted. Take a holistic view of the course we could even add in some fundamental principles relating to human rights and equality in those questions for some marks

tommyq94

Anyone else still not seeing their EU exam in the BetterExaminations calendar for tomorrow?

catonafence

tommyq94 wrote: »

Anyone else still not seeing their EU exam in the BetterExaminations calendar for tomorrow?

Same here, but others have posted here that it didn't appear until the evening before around 6pm.

murray132

Would anybody happen to have straightforward notes on judicial review and Direct effect/MSL, I’m getting myself confused!

TIA

Fe1user5555

Anyone leaving out professional negligence for tort

54321zz

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Anyone leaving out professional negligence for tort

No I'm doing it. My lecturer said it could be important in the context of medical negligence because of Morrissey v HSE case

murray132

54321zz wrote: »

No I'm doing it. My lecturer said it could be important in the context of medical negligence because of Morrissey v HSE case

Medical negligence came up in November, it’ll be interesting to see will it appear twice.

Lealaw

54321zz wrote: »

No I'm doing it. My lecturer said it could be important in the context of medical negligence because of Morrissey v HSE case

Could also come up under vicarious liability (Contractors) or standard of care..

murray132

Does anybody have the Nov 2020 EU paper please