did the exact same as you in relation to article 87 and then took art
88 out of  the book.  Hopefully that was what he was looking for.  Had
a few cases in State Aid against the Commission done so hopefully that
will do.  Awful paper tho.



On Apr 4, 3:50 pm, wayne o sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey guys
>  
> Just in relation to Question 8 and Article 88 EC...How did ye approach it..I 
> wrote mainly on Article 87 EC and in the end tried to rope that into the 
> Commission role of Article 88 EC. You know the way they say answer the 
> question asked, well i didnt do that in the strict sense cause theres not 
> alot on 88 EC solely...What people think?
>
> --- On Fri, 3/4/09, b05bf1e4 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: b05bf1e4 <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: EU Post Mortem
> To: "FE-1 Study Group" <[email protected]>
> Date: Friday, 3 April, 2009, 8:35 PM
>
> I actually thought the paper was easy. I did the Commission question
> which was straight forward, as was the question on citizenship. The
> question on state aid was also...it was a very relevant question
> considering the recent guarantee schemes etc. Question 7 on Article 81
> was the easiest. It was based verbatim on the case Irish competition
> authority v BIDS. He was testing whether we were up to date on our
> caselaw...The last question i did was on the case notes...[Zhu &
> Chen], [Laval un] but i actually forgot the facts in [van gend en
> loos] I couldn't believe it, but as soon i was finished i remembered.
> I could remember the judgment though "new legal order" and all
> that!!!
>
> On Apr 3, 7:32 pm, "Notorious B.I.G" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I thought the paper was deeply flawed.
>
> > The Free Movement of goods problem was obscure and at times non-
> > sensical.
> > Mopeds towing trailers?
> > The Institutuions question was pigeon-holed and gave students little
> > scope.
> > The essay in question 2 was over-elaborate.
> > Question three on equality/citizenship was vast and too time
> > consuming.
> > Direct effect had two many isolated parts and it was difficult not to
> > overlap advice.
>
> > I just hope the marking scheme isn't as unfair!
>
> > > On Apr 3, 5:19 pm, aviationhead <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I agree. That was defo the most challenging paper I have come
> accross.
> > > > Much worse than Company last week and I was sure I had failed
> that.
> > > > Perhaps not so sure any more!!
>
> > > > Why he put up a question on the Commission, which I would think
> is the
> > > > institution that has the least talking points, is beyond me.
>
> > > > As for The sources question, I had prepared in detail the areas
> of
> > > > discrimination and the fundamental rights, thinking they may
> come up
> > > > as separate questions, but to have to outline them both in the
> one
> > > > question (along with legitimate expectations) was asking a lot.
>
> > > > I could easily find fault with every question on the paper so I
> > > > suppose I had just better say that it was horrible and Im glad
> that
> > > > you all think the same.
>
> > > > Lets hope his marking scheme is a little fairer!!
>
> > > > On Apr 3, 4:02 pm, lukin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > it was definitely one of the toughest eu papers, let alone
> blackhalls
> > > > > I have ever sat - and i've sat all of them besides
> tort.
>
> > > > > Noel travers deserves an absolute kicking right in the
> behind for the
> > > > > type of questions he puts up. I would be absolutely
> positively shocked
> > > > > if more that one handful of people could satisfactorily
> answer the
> > > > > case note question - having learnt 10 "seminal
>
> cases" from all across> > > > the course, you would think one be covered - 
> not could I do
> one.
>
> > > > > The direct effect question was all over the place.
>
> > > > > Part A of the competition law question was one of the most
> confusing
> > > > > questions I have ever read. The fact that Mr. Travers
> thought it
> > > > > prudent to give "nicknames" to almost every
>
> relevant party ("stayers",
>
>
>
> > > > > "goers", etc etc etc).
>
> > > > > I have no problem with a testing paper - having covered all
> the
> > > > > course, I truly can say I was not happy with one question I
> attempted
> > > > > today.
>
> > > > > It's funny these exams are set by people who have never
> have been
> > > > > within an asses' roar of having to study/sit a
> blackhall.
>
> > > > > On Apr 3, 3:01 pm, tiger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hey all
>
> > > > > > I thought it was fairly bad as well. plus, the
>
> commission question - I> > > > > wrote an awful lot from the treaty. Don't 
> know
>
> whether I can get any> > > > > marks for that.
>
> > > > > > The article 82 question was tough too - the dual role?
> Anyone know
> > > > > > what that was about?
>
> > > > > > On Apr 3, 2:58 pm, molly
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > God,that was crap. Only got to do 4 quetions and
>
> The question on free> > > > > > movement of goods was completely bizarre, 
> Could
> not figure out its
> > > > > > > relevance to that area at all. I mean fixing
> tinted stickers or
> > > > > > > whatever to car windows? How does that restrict
>
> the free movement of> > > > > > goods? Kept looking at it thinking I must be
> missing something.
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 3, 1:39 pm, Richard Power
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > good bit off work not whole course but a
>
> alot of study and prob for nothing!!!
>
> > > > > > > > last one aswell and was hoping bhall but may
> have to wait.....
>
> > > > > > > > the paper was all on the difficult aspects
>
> of ec law, the one on direct effect took about an hr to understand!!!
>
> > > > > > > > > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 05:26:45 -0700
> > > > > > > > > Subject: EU Post Mortem
> > > > > > > > > From: [email protected]
> > > > > > > > > To: [email protected]
>
> > > > > > > > > I found that paper really tough - it
>
> was my last exam and I think I've> > > > > > > > completely screwed my 
> chances of going
>
> to B'hall this year -
>
> > > > > > > > > Can someone explain what question five
>
> was all about please? I had no> > > > > > > > idea how the second and third 
> parts
> related to FMG?!!
>
> _________________________________________________________________> > > > > > 
> > Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live
>
> Messengerhttp://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/-Hidequotedtext-
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- 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