I was really happy with the paper! As for question seven, I didn't mention freedom of expression (although looking at what you've said, I now realise that I should have). I spoke about adverse pre-trial publicity and mentiond the test set down in D-v-DPP, then Z-v-DPP and Magee-v-O'Dea (I think that's the name? It's the one where the court held that the publicity had been so lurid and sensational that the "fade factor" would not help the jury have an impartial mind - it was either that, or that the coverage had been so lurid (...) that the jury would not be able to disregard the judge's direction to put it out of their minds).
Freedom of expression also came up (I think) in question one, re religion. I stayed well away from that one! And yeah, Nicolau was the case where the natural father was held to not have any constitutional right to the custody of his child because he was not married to the mother of the child, so what you said is dead right! I didn't answer that one in particular, I preferred the Re Art. 26 and the Health (Amendment) Bill 2004 (is that the year? I can't remember now!), re right to private property. I don't know where the examiner got "write a short casenote on Ryan-v-AG (1965). I answered that one, but it was too was friggin' long.. :-/ As for question 8, I stayed away from that one too! Don't worry about not feeling right after the exam. I know many people who have felt this way after sitting an FE1 when it turned out that they had passed, after all. You never know with these exams, seriously! Hope you do great on the rest of them, if you're sitting any more. Best of luck!! Rose On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Orla Fitzpatrick <[email protected]>wrote: > i do not know wer to begin..... > For Q7, laura the robber girl and her media thing, i said ....the media had > freedom of the press to write what they liked about her but it was subject > to her individual rights blah blah and them not contempting court blah > blah....and i walk outside the exam and i hear some girl say freedom of > expression wasnt on the exam and neither was the family......and i wrote > about the family in Q5 for the Nicoloau thing unmarried fathers marraige and > that?????did i do that wrong???? experts please!! > > ooo and also Q8: i said > the relying just on the constitution was abit restrictive for non nationals > only certain protected rights, burden of proof very high, Art 29 control of > the oireachats etc... so they wouldnt rely on it always???? > > this was my worst exam i just dont know how i did or if i even had the > right idea nad im not at all like this wen it comes to exams it just knocked > my confidence totally. > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Sarah Falvey <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi Everyone! >> >> How did you find the Constitutional law exam? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "FE-1 Study Group" group. >> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<fe-1-study-group%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/fe-1-study-group?hl=en-GB. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "FE-1 Study Group" group. > To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<fe-1-study-group%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/fe-1-study-group?hl=en-GB. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 Study Group" group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fe-1-study-group?hl=en-GB.
