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

lawDani

Dear god what a same my last two questions where. I only answered four questions and just jotted down the cases I could remember for one. Currently sobbing from the cramming and stress I put on myself.

Anybody ever passed with four? hello October goodbye life .... haha

Diamond_Hands

FE1Hopefully1 wrote: »

Tbf I thought the same in November and ended up with 62

Literally came out of it near crying

Hope this guy catches me on a good day because my last answer was incomprehensible when I read it back.

keelfe1s

Captainsatnav wrote: »

Sorry now but these are professional exams. It's not appalling, it's what you're expected to know to be a solicitor.Qualified myself in 2015 so I know what I'm talking about. Hard exams though, I agree.

Didn’t think a qualified Solicitor would even have time to look at an FE1 exam thread or bother for that matter!!

Iso_123

Did anyone talk about the evidence of the department of health for the goods question? I know that q came up in the 2017 paper and in his report from that paper he said this was important to talk about but Im beyond pissed off at myself becsuse I ran out of time and literally only had time to put a bullet point with a case name in it with no context hahaha I literally just said: important re evidence - vitamins and minerals case

Hate myself for running out of time here! Also the more I think about my fmop question the more I was to cry. it was so bad and just had no structure or coherence at all

RaffRiff01

Iso_123 wrote: »

Did anyone talk about the evidence of the department of health for the goods question? I know that q came up in the 2017 paper and in his report from that paper he said this was important to talk about but Im beyond pissed off at myself becsuse I ran out of time and literally only had time to put a bullet point with a case name in it with no context hahaha I literally just said: important re evidence - vitamins and minerals case

Hate myself for running out of time here! Also the more I think about my fmop question the more I was to cry. it was so bad and just had no structure or coherence at all

yeah i did! i then linked it to the Scotch Whiskey case before concluding

FE1Hopefully1

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

Hope this guy catches me on a good day because my last answer was incomprehensible when I read it back.

Hahah I got my paper back and I’ve no idea what he read because I thought it was awful

Iso_123

RaffRiff01 wrote: »

yeah i did! i then linked it to the Scotch Whiskey case before concluding

Yeah I used scotch whiskey case and talked about proportionality etc and a decent amount of cases for the health exceptions and consumer protection cases and stuff but as I remembered the evidence point there was literally 20 seconds left on the clock so had to just throw down the case name and leave it at that

FE1Eire

Literally only got 3 good questions and scrambled the last 2, devastated I'll be seeing EU again in October!

nmurphy1441

FE1Eire wrote: »

Literally only got 3 good questions and scrambled the last 2, devastated I'll be seeing EU again in October!

I sat and passed in August! To be fair, I had 3 very good answers! My fourth was a FMOP that I half completed and made a complete mess of. My fifth was the case note and I only managed to get 2 done! There’s still hope, believe me! Thought I failed too!

RaffRiff01

Iso_123 wrote: »

Yeah I used scotch whiskey case and talked about proportionality etc and a decent amount of cases for the health exceptions and consumer protection cases and stuff but as I remembered the evidence point there was literally 20 seconds left on the clock so had to just throw down the case name and leave it at that

i think that should be enough.. as longs as you have the vitamins case and the scotch whiskey! i hope so that is

FE1Eire

nmurphy1441 wrote: »

I sat and passed in August! To be fair, I had 3 very good answers! My fourth was a FMOP that I half completed and made a complete mess of. My fifth was the case note and I only managed to get 2 done! There’s still hope, believe me! Thought I failed too!

This gives me some hope, haha thanks for letting me know:)

RaffRiff01

Did anyone else did the Case Note question as well? I just need to know that I'm not alone haha

Law101

RaffRiff01 wrote: »

i think that should be enough.. as longs as you have the vitamins case and the scotch whiskey! i hope so that is

No I didn’t have those! Bloody hell. I talked about milk substitute case and the butter block ones and some other ones. I said they could get away with it but If proportionate. But the ECJ might tell them to use a lesser application like stick a few warning labels on it. I thought it was actually really confusing. Same with the De/MSL wasn’t sure if it was the drivers fault regardless of the directive but then I thought I was getting too criminal on it lol. It was a hard paper. Totaly waffles on the last one too.

examgrid

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Our lecturer has put it on low priority to learn so I don’t think you’re mad! It’s an annoying topic IMO.

Would you mind if I asked what the lecturer regarded as high on the priority list?

Fe1user5555

examgrid wrote: »

Would you mind if I asked what the lecturer regarded as high on the priority list?

Of course! So he split the topics up into how much knowledge he thinks we would need on each topic. So in ‘excellent knowledge’ he put - duty of care (he thinks an essay on the judicial development of the fair and reasonable part of DOC test is due especially with UCC v ESB), economic loss, nuisance, professional negligence, defamation, nervous shock and public authorities/affirmative duties. In ‘detailed knowledge’ he put product liability, damages, employers liability, trespass to the person, passing off, occupiers liability and limitation of actions!

tommyq94

I accidentally closed Chrome when using the key-command to put my case names in bold, which meant my desktop was shown for about 10 seconds before I realised what I did.

Has this happened to anyone else? I just hope I don't get flagged for that now..

RaffRiff01

Law101 wrote: »

No I didn’t have those! Bloody hell. I talked about milk substitute case and the butter block ones and some other ones. I said they could get away with it but If proportionate. But the ECJ might tell them to use a lesser application like stick a few warning labels on it. I thought it was actually really confusing. Same with the De/MSL wasn’t sure if it was the drivers fault regardless of the directive but then I thought I was getting too criminal on it lol. It was a hard paper. Totaly waffles on the last one too.

id say those are still relevant, I just remembered by the past examiners report he wanted that case in so i did haha. For the DE, I just said she cant sue the garage but she could sue the MS

fe1555

tommyq94 wrote: »

I accidentally closed Chrome when using the key-command to put my case names in bold, which meant my desktop was shown for about 10 seconds before I realised what I did.

Has this happened to anyone else? I just hope I don't get flagged for that now..

I wouldn't worry at all, the whole thing is screen recorded so they'll see that you weren't off looking something up. Plus they'll probably have your confused reaction recorded too haha. I doubt very few of them get flagged and if they do I doubt very little of them get watched to be honest!

Diamond_Hands

fe1555 wrote: »

I wouldn't worry at all, the whole thing is screen recorded so they'll see that you weren't off looking something up. Plus they'll probably have your confused reaction recorded too haha. I doubt very few of them get flagged and if they do I doubt very little of them get watched to be honest!

I wonder how the flagging system even works

Katniss1998

Did you guys talk about direct effect for that member state liability question?

Diamond_Hands

What are cases everyone used for Scott Whisky question?

examgrid

Fe1user5555 wrote: »

Of course! So he split the topics up into how much knowledge he thinks we would need on each topic. So in ‘excellent knowledge’ he put - duty of care (he thinks an essay on the judicial development of the fair and reasonable part of DOC test is due especially with UCC v ESB), economic loss, nuisance, professional negligence, defamation, nervous shock and public authorities/affirmative duties. In ‘detailed knowledge’ he put product liability, damages, employers liability, trespass to the person, passing off, occupiers liability and limitation of actions!

Thanks so much! I have covered most of those but not all. Here's hoping it will be enough!

Fe1nov

Does anyone else feel totally deflated after that EU paper ? So disappointed

Fe1user5555

examgrid wrote: »

Thanks so much! I have covered most of those but not all. Here's hoping it will be enough!

Same I have left out a few on that list there’s just too much to cover otherwise and I wouldn’t have a proper knowledge of anything! Hopefully we’ll be ok

Iso_123

Katniss1998 wrote: »

Did you guys talk about direct effect for that member state liability question?

Are you talking about the problem question on the directive for the bluetooth in the cars?

Diamond_Hands

Katniss1998 wrote: »

Did you guys talk about direct effect for that member state liability question?

You mean did I talk about member state liability for the direct effect question?

Katniss1998

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

You mean did I talk about member state liability for the direct effect question?

But the question just asked about any claims for compensation?

Iso_123

Katniss1998 wrote: »

But the question just asked about any claims for compensation?

No i'm a bit freaked out now after reading this hahah

I'm pretty sure it was about DE and MSL though because he asked about remedies against the garage (DE and Indirect effect i think?) and then against the state (MSL?)

Diamond_Hands

Katniss1998 wrote: »

But the question just asked about any claims for compensation?

The first part is about the direct effect of directives; second part is about direct effect and member state liability. At least that's how I read it.

eLawGirl

Iso_123 wrote: »

No i'm a bit freaked out now after reading this hahah

I'm pretty sure it was about DE and MSL though because he asked about remedies against the garage (DE and Indirect effect i think?) and then against the state (MSL?)

This conversation will scare us all omggg. I noticed when I was finished the question it actually said advise on remedies for the garage or the state

the word - or - wasn't in bold or too obvious or anything but it made me think is it one or the other not marks for both did anyone else notice that