EU Law is by far my worst subject but I think this paper was fair. With regard the syllabus I do not see any argument for an easier paper.
Question 1 on the Commission asked how the Commission is appointed, what the commissioners duties are and how it is involved in the legislative process. How could anybody claim to be worthy of a pass if they can not write for 35 mins on this? Question 2 required application of direct effect, supremecy, equivalence of judicial systems to national and community law and an understanding of how damages may be recovered. The beginning was obviously mandatory for the course and although I found myself lost when it came to damages it can hardly be argued that any student could not have been expected to be able to outline such a procedure. Question 3 (a) was on Art 95 and how it should be applied in contrast to how the Commission has ought to apply it. It required reliance on at most 4 cases in the area that are completely covered on both the Griffith and Independant College notes. If you had this prepared the question could not have been put any simpler. If not, there was another option that was similarly basic in its requirements. Between the two they covered an entire area of the syllabus and so, an inability to answer either question could only be based in a complete lack of knowledge as to an entire area of the course. An entire question on the Free movement of Goods was expected and delivered. Sure, the facts were tricky but you either know how to apply the Articles and case law or you do not. The method of application is a serious of questions you put to the facts and as long as you go through this method of analysis it matters not whether you achieve a 'right' answer as you will have undoubtedly have achieved more then 50%. The fact that he tells you to confine your answer to Art 25, 28-30 and 90 means you simply can't go wrong. An entire question on Union citizenship was expected and delivered. This required the simple application of equality principles, Directive 2004/38 and the free movement of workers. Some understanding of the ambiguous development of the ECJ's attitude towards purely internal matters would have assured high marks as would their invocation of the rights of the family. I regard my knowledge in EU Law as very low and am worried I may have failed the paper but if I do fail it will not have been as a result of the examiner's paper. If I, or anyone, couldn't glean 50% from the above questions (let alone the fact that EC Competition was guaranteed and not complex) then the simple fact is that we do not have a sufficient understanding of EU Law. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
