Much appreciated, thanks for taking the time...

On Sep 15, 8:46 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ok, react however you want to this, but I teach contract in
> Griffith.
>
> I appreciate the difficulty many have in doing these exams, and I
> appreicate that grinds / our classes etc may be out of the reach of
> some for time / work reasons or many other reasons.  I do, however,
> empathise with "trying to get into the law profession" for personal
> reasons and I think its important that good karma get done in this
> world and that if you need help, someone should give it...Obviously
> nothing here is new to GCD students, but look...if it helps anyone
> reach their goals (as corny as this sounds) I'm that bit happier....
>
> Please note:  the formatting in a post like this is difficult, and I'm
> typing this relatively fast and i'm not really sure my spelling is as
> accurate as can be and I may not include everything from the April
> 2008 paper below.
>
> General Tip
>
> Always integrate the facts in the problem questions in your answer.
> Examiner needs to see you're not just writing "all i know" about a
> subject.
>
> Note that there are often problems in contract with the problem
> questions.  Sometimes they are very long, and sometime have "peculiar"
> aspects.  I would always turn the page immediately and see what essays
> I could do before wasting time reading problem questions I dont end up
> doing.
>
> It’s a trend to ask students to have insights on how law should be
> reformed in certain issues and not just to ask straight forward “write
> all you know” essays.
>
> Re tips, its odd with contract because so much comes up each and every
> year.  I’m going to use letters to represent that I which I think
> should be your focus in order of importance:
>
> A = Critical
> B = Do after the critical
> C = If the exam is on the next day, leave out for A and B, otherwise
> still include
> D = Less important
> E = don’t worry, and I only think this about Agency.
>
> The main difficulty is some issues can (and have been mixed) with
> others.  So, whereas consumer protection comes up less offer and
> acceptance on its own, any given year could see them mixed.
>
> Offer and Acceptance = A
>
> Q.1 Oct 2007 / Q.2,5,6 March 2007 / Q.1 Oct 2006, Q2 April 2006/Q2 &
> Q4 Oct 2005 / Q. 1 April 2005 / Q.1  April 2004 /Q. 1 Oct 2003 / Q. 1
> Oct. 2002 / Q. 1 Sept. 2001 / Q.1 March 2001 / Q.1 April 2000 / Q. 1
> April 1999
>
> Absolutely 100% required.  Often comes up in problem questions which
> require ability to deal in a concise basis with facts.  Can arise in
> conjunction with mistake (see Q2 of March 2007) or consumer protection
> issues.  Very important to be able to deal with how acceptance applies
> in the context of modern communication (e.g. one person accepts by
> post on Monday, the other by fax on Tuesday, post arrives on Friday,
> fax arrives on Wednesday – that sort of thing!).  Be able to write
> essays on sub-issues like revocation of offers etc.
>
> Intention to Create Legal Relations = B
>
> Q. 6 Oct 2007 / Q.2 March 2003 / Q.2 April 2002 / Q.1 Oct. 1999 / Q.2
> April 1999 / Q. 2 April 2000.
>
> Know more than one case!  Be able to deal effectively with fact
> situations where this may arise.  Remember its about more than family
> issues and one has to consider commercial issues and “agreements to
> agree”.
>
> Consideration = A
>
> Q.3 April 08, Q.5 & Q. 6 Oct 2007 / Q.3 March 2007 / 5 Oct 2006/ Q.5
> April 2006 / Q. 2 Oct 2005 / Q. 1 Oct. 2004 / Q. 2 Oct. 2002 / Q. 1
> April 2002 / Q. 1 Oct. 2000
>
> Incredibly important that you understand relationship between
> consideration, promissory estoppel and Williams v Roffey.  See
> questions 6, Oct 2007, and 5(a) of October 2006.  This is a favourite
> of examiner.
>
> Statute of Frauds = B
>
> Q. 1 Oct 2005 / Q. 2 April 2005 / Q. 2 Oct. 2004 / Q.2 April 2004 / Q.
> 1 October 2003 / Q. 1 March 2003 / Q. 3 April 2002 / Q.2 March 2001 /
> Q. 2 Oct. 2000 / Q.3 October 1999
>
> Fundamental to know how it applies and the role of “subject to
> contract”.  Remember that the statute only comes in when there is a
> valid oral contract – i.e. in some cases there is no contract!  In
> that regards, know about the Supermacs case and whether agreement on a
> deposit is essential for a contract (see Q1, Oct 2005)
>
> Privity = B
>
> Q5, April 2008 / Q.8 Oct 2007 / Q. 5 Oct 2006 / Q. 8 March 2003 / Q. 7
> Oct. 1999
>
> Arisen mainly in essay based form.  Be able to deal with possible
> reform of the area.  Be aware that examiner is asking a “special”
> question which deals with how a party to a contract (i.e. one privy to
> it) can sue for damages occasioned by a third party.  I.e. q.5 April
> 2008).
>
> Capacity = C
>
> Q. 8 Oct 2006/ Q.7 April 2004 / Q.3 March 2003 / Q. 7 October 2000
>
> Minors, drunks, mentally ill!  All important and know the role of
> equity and unconscionable bargains!
>
> Terms (including the Oscar Chess / Dick Bentley issue, Parol Evidence,
> and relative importance of terms) = B
>
> Q7, April 2008 Q.7 April 2007 / Q. 4 Oct 2007/ Q.8 March 2007 / Q.8
> April 2006, Q 3 Oct 2005 / Q.3 April 2004 / Q. 4 March 2001 / Q. 4
> Oct. 2000 / Q. 4 March 2001
>
> Be aware the examiner has an unusual syntax when it comes to
> misrepresentation.  Be aware that something can be a term of a
> contract and be an actionable misrepresentation and be able to provide
> advice on the remedies for misrep.  Otherwise, essays on Parol
> evidence should be do-able, and students should understand the
> difference between conditions and warranties and the consequences of
> such.
>
> Exclusion Clauses = B
>
> Q.6 April 2008 / Q. 4 Oct 2007 / Q. 7 Oct 2006./ Q.7 April 2006 / Q. 3
> October 2003 / Q.4 April 2002 / Q. 3 Sept. 2001 / Q.3 Oct. 2000 / Q.3
> April 1999
>
> I myself don’t understand what the examiner really meant in q6 of
> April 2008 asking you to distinguish exemption from limitation
> clauses.  See e.g. Q4 of Oct 2007 where she seems to equate a
> limitation clause with one that limits rather than excludes
> liability.  Otherwise, understand the principles relating to
> incorporation (especially that signature incorporates!) and be able to
> interrelate the effect of consumer law and the non-consumer aspects of
> the Sale of Goods legislation on exclusion clauses.
>
> Consumer Protection = B
>
> Q.2 Oct. 2007 / Q. 3 Oct 2005 / Q. 3 April 2005 / Q. 4 April 2004 / Q.
> 4 March 2003 / Q. 5 October 2002 / Q.4 April 2002 / Q.4 Sept. 01 / Q.5
> March 01 / Q.3 April 2000 / Q. 3 Oct. 1999 / Q.4 April 1999
>
> Can arise interwoven with questions on offer and acceptance etc.  Some
> ask me can they leave this out and just look at the questions it arose
> in! So, no!.
>
> Illegal Contracts = B
>
> Q. 8 April 2008 / Q.4 March 2007 / Q 6 Oct 2005 / Q. 8 Oct. 2004 / Q.6
> Sept 2001 / Q.6 Oct. 2000 / Q.6 April 2000
>
> Good students point out that the examiners questions are something
> hard to understand.  They are right.  Nothing more I can say than you
> have to know how the common law deals with contracts which are
> “illegal” in the broad sense of the word or which are otherwise held
> to be unenforceable.  Statutory illegality not to be neglected either!
>
> Void Contracts = C
>
> Q 8 April 2005 / Q. 5 October 2003 / Q.6 Oct 2002 / Q.7 March 2001 / Q.
> 6 April 2000 / Q.4 Oct. 1999
>
> Generally about restraint of trade which can be a problem question.
> But still have to know it all!
>
> Duress and Undue Influence = A
>
> Q. 4 April 2008 / Q. 5 Oct 2007 / Q. 5 April 2006 / Q. 7 April 2005 /
> Q. 8 April 2004 / Q.7 Sept. 2001 / Q.5 April 2000 / Q.7 April 1999 / Q.
> 8 April 2002
>
> Absolutely critical.  Can arise in problem questions or straight
> essays.  Essay on economic duress asked in q5 of October 2007.
>
> Misrepresentation = B
>
> Q. 2 Oct 2007 / Q.5 March 2007 / Q.2 Oct 2006 / Q.1 April 2006 / 3 Oct
> 2005 / Q. 5 Oct. 2004 / Q.4 Oct. 2002 / Q.6 March 2001 / Q.5 Oct.
> 2000 / Q.5 April 1999
>
> See my above comments on misrep.
>
> Mistake = A
>
> Q. 1 April 2008 / Q.7 Oct 2007 / Q2 March 2007 / Q.3 Oct 2006 / Q.1
> April 2006 / Q. 8 Oct 2005 / Q. 5 April 2005 / Q. 6 Oct. 2004 / Q.5
> April 2004 / Q.6 March 2003 / October 2002 / Q.5 Sept. 2001 / Q.8
> October 1999
>
> After offer and acceptance the second thing you should study…has
> appeared on every exam so far under new examiner.
>
> Discharge of a Contract = A
>
> Q.2 April 2008 / Q.3 Oct 2007 / Q.1 March 2007 / Q.2 Oct 2006/ Q3 and
> Q4 April 2006 / Q. 7 Oct 2005 / Q. 4 April 2005 / Q. 4 October 2004 /
> Q. 6 October 2003 / Q.4 Oct. 2002 / Q.6 March 2001 / Q.5 Oct. 2000 /
> Q. April 1999
>
> Again, the amount of questions speaks for itself!  Interelates with
> conditions and warranties.
>
> Remedies = A
>
> Q.2 Oct 2007 / Q.4 March 2007 / Q.6 April 2006 / Q. 5 October 2005 /
> Q. 6 April 2005 / Q. 7 October 2004 / Q.  6 April 2004 / Q. 8 October
> 2003 / Q. 7 March 2003 / Q.7 October 2002 / Q.8 October 2002 / Q.7
> April 2002 / Q.8 Sept. 2001 / Q.8 Oct. 2000 / Q.8 April 2000 / Q.8
> April 1999
>
> Very important that students have a good handle on the principles
> governing damages and know more cases than just Hadley and Victoria
> Laundries…I can’t emphasise that enough…
>
> On Sep 14, 8:27 pm, yelloweyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > If anyone does get hold of tips for tort or contract it would be
> > really appreciated if you could forward them to me as well pleease!!
> > Thank you!
>
> > On 13 Sep, 21:50, legalegal08 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > hey guys just wondering does anyone have an uptodate tort or contract
> > > grid. Also wondering if anyone has the griffith tips on the afore
> > > mentioned.
> > > Would really appreciate it if you could e-mail them to me :) as have
> > > to cut down on the topics- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 
Study Group" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to