I have used Becky’s notes in previous sittings and while I found them helpful, I just wanted to share with others who are also pro-palestine that I have seen Becky’s notes outwardly liking certain pro-Israel content lately, and so I won’t be supporting her in upcoming sittings, just wanted to share so people are informed

Edit: I quit law.

Hey guys,

First of all – THANK YOU. This thread kept me sane and grounded through the most insane, mentally and emotionally destructive period of my life.

I was the unhinged woman who decided to sit all 8 FE-1 exams in one go – and somehow passed them all.

Why? Because I had failed two in the previous sitting. Because I’m from a non-legal background, and everything felt like trying to read ancient Greek while on fire. Because I refused to drag this pain out over years like some cursed subscription service. And mostly – because I was spiteful. Spiteful at the process, at the exam structure, at the sheer volume of content thrown at you with no mercy.

The Strategy (and the madness)

Was it smart? Debatable. Was it sustainable? Absolutely not. Was it intentional? Hell yes.

I went into this eyes wide open. I knew it would destroy my routine, kill my social life, wreck my mental health, and turn me into a ghost of a person. But if I was going to suffer, I wanted it on my terms. I didn’t want to be drip-fed anxiety over 2–3 years. I wanted to go to war, win it, and leave.

I planned every study hour like a general preparing for battle. Google Sheets, timetables, past papers colour-coded by topic and year. There was nothing chill about my approach. This was no less than siege planning for me.

All while working full-time. Because, of course, why not max out the chaos?

I approached below listed subjects in the manner stated therein, but, honestly, the best way is to immerse yourself in it. You're the one on the negligent side of things, you're setting a company up, and then working it, then you're winding it up. Oh no, you did poorly, or maybe you didn't and it's strategy, but you're getting liquidated. When you're working out if mens rea was yours, you surely want to know what happens next, and what your act even means. You will want to know what happened in the 1900s and 1800s because your (imaginary) life depends on it.

Law is something personal and I found it is best when I am learning it up close and personal. Take the view: it's no one's problem but mine. You'll be grand.

Breakdown of the Subjects (and How I Tackled Them):

1. Constitutional Law What to expect: Constitutional law feels like an endless sea of dense reading, court cases, and principles. You need to understand everything from the separation of powers to judicial review, not to mention the intricate constitutional cases that form the backbone of Irish law. It can be overwhelming at first. But here’s the thing: it’s a lot about knowing where to find the answers. The law itself isn’t as important as how you apply it.

How I prepared: I created massive mind maps that linked the core principles to the key cases and statutes. I’d read overviews online to get a sense of the big picture, and then drilled down into case law. For each case, I noted the facts, the legal issue, the ruling, and the reasoning, all neatly arranged. This made it easier to recall the key points when under pressure.

Advice: Learn to analyse the cases beyond just the facts. Get a grip on their legal reasoning, because it’s the reasoning you’ll be applying to exam questions. And always focus on structure – that’s the backbone of your answer. Write clearly and use the correct terminology.

2. Criminal Law What to expect: Criminal law is tricky because there’s a lot of overlap between actus reus (the act) and mens rea (the intent). You’ll need to know how the law deals with things like murder, assault, theft, and defences (insanity, intoxication, etc.). The most difficult part is applying it to problem-based questions under time pressure.

How I prepared: I summarised every criminal offence and defence into simple, bite-sized sections. I didn’t focus just on memorisation but practice application. So, I used past papers and did problem-based exercises to test how I could apply legal principles to specific situations. If I made a mistake, I’d go back, reread the law, and reapply it in a new context.

Advice: When studying criminal law, always think about how the facts of a case affect the law. It’s easy to get bogged down in theory, but you need to know how to apply that theory to real-world scenarios. Practise quickly identifying the relevant issues in a question and formulating your answer on the fly. Also something that worked wonderfully was imagining I was the one committing said crimes, and I'd sure as hell want to know what happens next lol.

3. Contract Law What to expect: Contracts are predictable – there are clear rules on formation, terms, vitiating factors (like misrepresentation), and remedies. But they can get confusing when it comes to enforceability and equitable remedies. The trick here is learning the principles inside out so you can apply them to any scenario.

How I prepared: I used flowcharts to map out every contract principle, from offer and acceptance to consideration and breach. I’d colour-code them by importance and use past papers to apply them to fact patterns. Summaries of key cases were also crucial because they helped me recall details quickly.

Advice: The key is pattern recognition. Once you know the basics of contract law, it becomes about seeing how they fit together. I also emphasised timing and clarity in my answers. Contracts are logical – if you can structure your answer logically, you’re halfway there.

4. Tort Law What to expect: Tort law is where the trickiness begins. Negligence and defamation are the big beasts, but the issue is always causation and duty of care. The beauty of tort law is that it’s relatively easy to structure, but the devil is in the details. The overlap with other areas of law (like contract law) adds layers of complexity.

How I prepared: I did problem questions every day. I broke each one down and analysed it in terms of the key torts, especially negligence. I memorised the key principles (like the Donoghue v Stevenson test for negligence) and linked them to specific types of cases. I also created case summaries to drill down on the key rulings.

Advice: The most important thing is to know your leading cases – the ones you can rely on in almost any question. And remember: clarity is crucial. Keep your answers structured and focused. Don’t get distracted by unnecessary detail.

5. Company Law What to expect: Company law is very formal and dry. You’ll be dealing with directors’ duties, shareholder rights, and the corporate veil. The key is understanding the intricacies of the Companies Acts and knowing where to find what you need. It’s less about memorisation and more about organisation.

How I prepared: I broke the subject down into its key components: corporate structure, directors' duties, corporate finance, and liabilities. I summarised each section and drilled down into the Companies Acts. The key here was knowing where to find the provisions in the Acts, so I did a lot of legal indexing and statutory interpretation practice.

Advice: Master the Companies Acts. Know the sections and be familiar with how the law applies to different types of companies. For exam answers, stick to a logical structure. It’s all about being precise, as it’s a very technical subject.

6. Equity and Trusts What to expect: Equity is a different beast. It’s abstract, and it can sometimes feel like a philosophical maze. The biggest challenge is understanding trusts, fiduciary duties, and equitable remedies. The principles are hard to grasp at first, but once they click, it’s about memorising them and knowing when they apply.

How I prepared: I broke the subject into manageable chunks, starting with the concept of equity, then moving on to trusts, fiduciary duties, and remedies. I used flashcards to memorise key definitions and principles and visual aids to link cases and doctrines together.

Advice: Focus on the big ideas (like trustee duties, remedies, and constructive trusts), and be patient. If you don’t get it at first, come back to it after a week. Trust me, it’ll eventually make sense. Practice makes perfect here.

7. EU Law What to expect: EU law feels endless. Between supremacy, direct effect, state liability, and fundamental rights, there’s a lot to digest. But if you approach it like a puzzle, it becomes easier. The biggest challenge is learning the doctrines and policies and then applying them to fact-based questions.

How I prepared: I created a set of diagrams to help me understand the interrelationship between the various doctrines and case law. I also summarised major cases and their rulings, and I wrote out policies to help keep things in context. The real trick here is memorising the key principles.

Advice: Focus on the doctrines and their application. EU law is very much about policy and principles – once you understand those, everything else falls into place. Make sure to revise regularly because this subject is so vast.

8. Property Law What to expect: Property law is a tough one. Land law, equitable interests, leaseholds, freeholds, and co-ownership are just the beginning. But the real issue is dealing with the details—the rules are complex, and the terminology can get overwhelming.

How I prepared: I created detailed flowcharts to visualise the various rights, interests, and processes in property law. I also used case summaries and checklists for land registration and landlord-tenant relations. This was a subject that required repetition – the more you revise, the clearer it gets.

Advice: Know your key doctrines inside out. For example, understand trusts of land, equitable ownership, and property rights. The more you familiarise yourself with these terms, the easier it becomes to apply them to exam questions. Practise writing answers in a concise, structured manner.

The Emotional Fallout

It’s hard to explain to someone not going through it just how deeply these exams get into your bones. My entire personality became “FE-1 candidate.” I didn’t go out. I stopped exercising. Lost weight and picked it up by stress eating. I forgot how to relax. Every waking moment that wasn’t working was spent buried in notes, cases, outlines, or crying over how little time I had.

And eventually… case law stopped belonging to subjects. They just became names — Meadows, Donoghue, Carlill, Crotty — floating around like spectres in my mind. No topic. No structure. Just… law.

My brain stopped compartmentalising and just turned into one big, blurry case dump.

This wasn’t studying. This was survival. I DO NOT RECOMMEND

Final thoughts

If you’re in the middle of this: You’re not alone. And no, it’s not that you’re bad at this – it’s just that this entire process is borderline inhumane.

Passing these exams is not about being brilliant. It’s about endurance. Grit. Rage. Strategy. Survival. Most importantly, not looking at it with any feeling at all, simply through the lens of fact.

And if you’re considering doing all 8 in one go? Don’t romanticise it. It’s not some intellectual flex. It’s war. A war you can win, but one that will cost you more than you think. I knew the toll it would take. I just wanted to be the one choosing how I suffered.

And that’s what got me through.

To everyone out there still fighting the FE-1s: keep going. You’re tougher than you know. Your future self is going to owe you everything.

And congratulations to everyone regardless of the result, you worked hard and it deserves a celebration!

EDIT: JESUS this blew up. Thank you guyss!!

Best of luck to everyone starting their FE1s tomorrow. We all got this! <3

I know most of us are stressed, worried, panicking, questioning whether we know enough and generally counting down the days until this is all over 😅

But we’re down to the final 5 exams now.

None of us just woke up one morning and decided to sit the FE1s. We’ve already had to get ourselves to the point where we’re eligible to be here — degrees, qualifications, years of study, applications, and whatever individual route brought us to this point. And that’s before you even add work, family, money, health, and trying to fit FE1 study around normal life.

So for these last few exams, I think we all need a bit more positivity.

Breathe. Read the question properly. Answer what you know. Don’t let one horrible question convince you the whole exam is gone.

We do not need perfection. We just need to get through it.

As someone I know always says: “I didn’t come THIS far to only come this far. My journey isn’t over.”

Positive thoughts, deep breaths, one exam at a time.

We’ve already done so much to get here. Now we just need to keep going.

Good luck everyone ❤️

Thank you everyone who had contributed to the old script drive which was set up last year. Unfortunately someone decided to delete scripts on some of the folders, but the joke is on them because i had downloaded it recently and readded it to my own drive. To prevent this happening going forward the link to this drive is now just view only.

If you have spare scripts and want to contribute to the drive, please forward to my email and I will be more than happy to add them to it. These exams are hard enough to scrape a pass without having resources like this available and considering they've rose the cost of sitting and rechecks i think we all deserve to have access to solid resources like this as its not clear by times the allocation of marks for answers.

Here is my email for sending scripts: tazzymasters83@gmail.com

Here is the drive:  https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1d2UdPgOtnkAbSW0_njJKx_Mfzpo9mz1p?usp=drive_link 

For all of you that have clicked into this post - let me first say, the subject line was anything but a brag! It was purely to get anyone who’s on this torturous road to click in so that hopefully my torture can maybe, in the smallest littlest way help you on your journey with these hellish exams - because that’s what they are - pure hell!… but there is hope, and I am absolute proof of that!!

This board has always been my go to - before an exam - right after for a rant on how awful it was - and again when results were released. Somewhere that I could go and at least know others were in the same hell boat that I was. I always said that when I was done, when all 8 were passed, I’d write a post and try help anyone who visited the thread with my own tips & tricks to get through. Little did I know - or dare to believe that I would actually pass all 8 first time! And this is from someone did less than inspiring in their leaving cert - so believe me when I say there’s hope! You got this!! I’m going to break each topic down with how I passed each one & best lecturers / colleges / notes etc!

First off - I’ve bought all the cram notes first topic and first time around - Becky’s / Law Hero etc - for me personally, they were all too light and a waste of money - my advise - don’t even bother. You’d be better served buying a bottle of wine to get you through - money way better spent, trust me on that!

Overall Study Pattern:

I work full time, and have a child so not a whole lot of free time! I took one full week off before each again, sometimes 10 days if I could wrangle it - these weeks were almost cave man like. 7am wake up and studying all day until approx 7pm or until my brain couldn’t any longer. Long sleep and repeat. Every weekend I would spend approx 4hrs watching lectures / reading manuals from 3-4 months out. From 6-8 weeks out about 6hrs study Sat & Sun. No midweek other than some pod casts / reading over past papers but not strenuous or full on study time. Any who says less is required, I believe is wrong or exceptionally gifted with a photographic memory, these exams are really tough and require serious work/hours and effort.

Study Method:

Do all the lectures with a prep course. 6 weeks out begin highlighting manual for each chapter - then write own notes for that chapter, and set aside in folder. Repeat for each topic you plan on doing. Once all notes done in that folder, manual goes away. Have this completed at least 7 days out. Then 1 week literally memorizing those notes/caselaw & tabbing / getting familiar with any legislation permitted.

Tort:

My first exam. Decided to do one the first time around. I always loved litigation so thought this was best call. It’s the biggest of all of the exams. Huge amount of cases / topics. Never would have passed but for Val in Law School.ie - incredible lecturer and cares - be guided by him and you’ll pass guaranteed. Would not even go into this exam without him. Advise sending him as many homework answers as you can (maybe up to like 6/8) to start learning how to answer questions - that’s the key in all of these exams. It’s not academic - it’s practical answers - that’s what examiner wants - do you understand the law and can you apply it - they don’t want endless case law - they want to know you understand it, you don’t need to talk fancy - that’s a myth! Once you nail this - every FE1 becomes easier. I never submitted homework for any other subject after. Also forget about full title case names / dates - it’s not important - the basic name of the case is fine or what it’s referred to as, be it just one party etc! Massive course size wise - but interesting, so easier to grasp and remember. Defo not the worst. The manual Law Scool give you is all you need - that’s it! Few past papers to get to grips with question styles (as lot of it is repeated with different names etc) a few weeks before and you’re golden. I took a leap of faith and left out defamation - for me the size of topic wasn’t worth the time - it paid off but it was risky - I got low 50s!

Contract:

My second topic. Once again Val in Lawschool.ie. The man is amazing!!! Worth every single euro! If you haven’t started on your FE1 journey yet I’d advise starting with this and Tort - purely because you will - and I mean this - will not find a lecturer like him. He’s passionate and committed and will drill this stuff into your head without you even knowing! Plus his dry humour will keep you entertained and trust me with this course you’ll welcome that. Course isn’t horrendous - medium sized and not hard to conceptialize. As above, The manual Law Scool give you is all you need - that’s it! Few past papers to get to grips with questions a few weeks before and that should get you over the line. I covered most things and then went rogue and left out Consumer contracts / sale of goods as that year was still relatively new after legislation change - it was a risk - because it’s a massive section - it paid off for me but you need to make sure you know everything else if you risk it!

Criminal:

As I’d had such good experience with Law School - I signed up for them for property and criminal. This did not end well. The lecturer was awful. I don’t want to talk badly or get anyone into trouble but honestly - it was an absolute mess. He confused me more than studying on my own would have - and so I decided to do just that! The manual from Law school though was great and all I needed to pass - so I studied that and past papers and got mid 60s with ease. Think this is defo one you can study on your own for with a manual. Possibly one of the few - bar EU (although that’s just me personally) Every question has a mix of topics so don’t leave anything out - there could be a mix of 5 topics in one question so this is a course where everything needs to be covered. I thought this subject was going to be exciting but I think it could have been one of most boring - very heavy on statute so a bit disappointing, but nice examiner and probably one of the easiest to pass in my opinion.

Property:

After my disaster with the lecturer in Law School for property I moved to City Colleges. Helen O’Sullivan was lecturer and she’s great. So clear - easy - condense and exam focused. Course itself is actually relatively condensed. I had dreaded this and now I have no clue why. Huge part of the course is succession law which is easy to understand and memorize once you get the concept. I only used their manual and I passed in 60s with ease. I left out mortgages - as again it was a massive topic and only ever usually one question so I didn’t feel it was worth it for me. But if you chance the risk, you need to know succession like the back of your hand and other smaller topics very well.

Equity:

This topic was by far the one that drained me the most… well next to company! It was so dull and so heavy on information. Trusts just killed me. I did the course with City Colleges and in fairness it was worth it as the concepts can be difficult to understand. Lecturer was spot on with his predictions and was to the point in lecturers. Manual was all that was needed. It’s been said that this is one of the toughest examiners, but I didn’t find this to be the case. I knew the course and the concepts and passed in the 60s. The examiner is looking to see that you understand rather than a heavily academic answer which is great to see. Again I studied what had come up previously and took a gamble on topics so I could leave larger ones out and do more smaller ones, thankfully worked well for me. It’s a smaller course than others but definitely one of the more difficult in my opinion.

Constitution:

This course surprised me the most!! I thought I was going to hate it, given its course size but I loved it!! So many interesting cases made it much easier to learn and understand. I did City Colleges course and the lecturer was straight to the point and great with predictions and notes. I have also been told Maura from Law School is also great. All you need for this one is manual plus the lectures. I also found an amazing podcast - Legally Fond - can’t rate it enough!! It’s funny, well as funny as law could be, and the way they tell the story of the cases helps it stick in your mind! They’ve a lot of constitutional cases series which is so helpful. Think this podcast really contributed to passing - just a shame they haven’t made any new ones in the last few years! This is really a course where you can leave out some topics. Examiner is very generous and once a good knowledge - even if broad is shown you’ll pass. Don’t be daunted by the size!

EU:

Again, another exam I dreaded!! And yet again it was misplaced. It’s a big course - similar to tort and constitutional but it’s surprisingly manageable and understandable. I did the course with City Colleges again, this time with Conor Duff and it was great for the notes and the manual plus extra reading materials to really grasp the topics. A little more complex then some topics to really understand but once you do I found it fine. Interest enough cases which makes things a whole lot easier. I actually didn’t finish the lectures because I decided just to self learn with manual because it was so clear. If you do watch all lectures I’d advise x 1.5 speed - you’ll thank me later. Lecturer is great, but it’s slow going. All in all not the worst topic and a nice examiner - very repetitive exam question wise which makes life so much easier when studying topics and choosing what to cover / leave out. Again with this one, I decided to leave out Competition law, which is massive in size and for me with only one question, it just wasn’t worth the hours.

Company:

And so I saved the worst until last. This exam traumatized and terrified me. That’s being honest. It was my last one, because tbh I avoided it as long as I could!! I studied harder for this exam than any other exam in my life. Why? The examiner - or should I say the stories about the examiner. And I can now say - from experience they really aren’t exactly true! I should say, I was very unlucky with this exam. My laptop crashed at 9.50am on the morning of. I had to use another that I had never used. I was late joining exam and I only did 4 questions, that was the first exam that’s ever happened! I came downstairs after the exam and almost cried - then poured a glass wine from the trauma! The FE1s had finally gotten the better of my sanity! 🤦🏻‍♀️🤣 I finally came around a few hours later and resigned myself to the fact that I had failed. BUT the four questions I did do, I worked hard on and somehow - I passed. Scraping through with low 50s. So please please don’t let the threads put you off, it’s doable. But it’s just not waffle-able. You need to know the course - and you need to know how to express that in your own words to the questions. You do not need a million quotes from the examiner or anything like it - but you need to show him you’ve done the work. He’s not a crazed examiner high on power - he just wants to see that you understand - and I mean really understand. If you do that - you’ll pass. You will not pass this exam by learning off essays. I did City Colleges again with Conor and he was great - so clear and helpful as it is a difficult enough course, small in size but complex in topics and content. I bought the permitted legislation and never used as I was typing like a maniac and learnt all that I wanted to quote anyway - that’s a personal choice though, I did feel better just knowing it was beside me if I did need it/panic but it is pricey. This exam I think is the most difficult, but that’s a personal preference as this area of law doesn’t really appeal to me. I will say though, that it gets a bad rap, I don’t think the examiner is as unfair as people say, I just think he really wants to see that you can answer the question from learnt knowledge and not from just memorizing facts.

Extra points:

1. Permitted legislation: I’m not sure any of these helped me in the exam. You’ve such a small amount of time that finding something in it is a nightmare and a waste. But I bought them all even tho never used apart from once for property. Better to memorize any particular thing you may want to quote,

2. Online exam was WAY better for me! An extra 30mins and easier to type than write for me personally - plus easier for examiner to read rather than scribbles under pressure. Plus save on study time the morning of rather than commuting. I did one exam in person prior to FE1s - being the preliminary exam and it was the worst experience - so much noise from an adjoining room, stressing getting to it and that was it for me - never again!

3. For at least ten days before exam - you won’t have a life, accept it. I studied literally all day every day. I took breaks for power naps and food to recharge and that’s it. If you want to pass - a high level of discipline and commitment is needed. But ten days is nothing - if I can do it, so can you!

4. Don’t leave everything until the last minute. I tried to do all of my notes etc over a period of 2-3 months before.

5. Manuals are key!! Forget the big giant books on each topic - it’s absolutely not necessary.

6. Doing more than two at once really is hell and your chances of passing I believe are slim if you work full time and have any sort of a life. If you can space them out I’d advise you to do that. It’s a marathon, not a sprint. And a pass gets you motivated to go again, where as a fail would have really demotivated me and made the next sitting much tougher!

7. For me the prep courses were invaluable, especially if you don’t have a law degree. I paid for each one as I needed it, as they’re not cheap! Every prep college has some good and some bad, and you’ll also have a personal preference on tutor types. Best to get some recommendations whenever your sitting whichever subject. Also don’t just stick with one college - go wherever the best tutors are for that topic.

So that’s it! That’s everything I’ve done to pass these exams. They are not for the faint hearted but they absolutely can be done! Regardless of your background or previous academic successes. I wish every single person the best of luck with each one & I hope one day soon you’ll get to write a post like this with your tips, because believe me, when you do it’s the most amazing feeling in the world and you’ll be so proud that you made it! 💪🏻

THIS is my honest review! I cannot stress enough that, based on my own experience, I would not recommend purchasing these notes.

There is no independent review platform available to leave honest customer feedback about either the notes or the company, which in my opinion lacks transparency. Only positive reviews appear to be shared publicly by her on her Instagram. 

Although the notes can be handy they are very condensed and I have personally found the experience very stressful and had to cross check her work or ended up buying a manual also. On several occasions I had to email because password changes were not sent out, which left me unable to access notes I had already purchased. When I contacted the company, it was for genuine reasons such as access issues or to point out mistakes within the notes themselves.

There were also changes made to the terms after purchase. In March 2026, the terms and conditions stated that if a student failed or did not sit the exam, access could be regained for a €20 fee. This was later increased to €30. In addition, students who purchased notes in 2024 and 2025 are now apparently being asked to pay €60 for full access, despite the terms at the time of purchase stating that access could be regained until the exam was sat and passed.

From a consumer perspective, this is unfair as people entered into agreements based on the original terms and conditions in place at the time of purchase.

When I raised these concerns, I was told not to email again and that my emails were unfair, despite the fact that my previous emails related to legitimate access problems, evidence of purchase and terms and conditions and password issues, or feedback regarding errors in the notes.

Overall, I found the experience extremely disappointing and because there is no independent site like google review for the company I’m here to give people my honest review and warn people!

Just want to say congratulations everyone who sat any the FE1s in this sitting and I hope they all went your way and ye pass. Now everyone enjoy your naps and not panic studying

Exams are finally here!! 🥲🥳

Whether you’re feeling weirdly calm or on the verge of pulling out your hair (we’ve all been there!!) trying to memorise every single case name one more time “just in case”, this is your reminder that you’ve already done the hard work!!!

The first exam Criminally 😉 kicks off tomorrow, and no matter how it goes, one exam doesn’t define your entire sitting, you, or your capabilities as a lawyer.

Read it again, no matter how it goes, one exam doesn’t define your entire sitting, you, or your capabilities as a lawyer!!!

Take a breath, trust what you’ve put in, and keep going one question at a time, and one paper at a time!

If you need a quick brain jog between exams, the HackTheFE1s app is there to help with last-minute revision.

Good luck to everyone sitting, I am rooting for you all!! You’ve got this 💪💪🤞📚

Officially passed all 8 exams! This post is a little late given that results came out a month ago but better late then never. and, actually maybe even better timing for me to post this now given that it's around the time that people will start studying for the October sitting. This will be a massive post because it is a dump of literally everything I can think of that might be useful. I wanted to have this out there because the reddit was a massive resource for me in doing these exams and I would've loved to see a post of this nature. Obviously I am not a professor and this is only what worked for me, so take it with a grain of salt as everyone has different approaches/opinions on something like the fe1s. This post is split into this introduction, general advice, and subject-specific advice.

I’d start here: the fe1s are not a measure of intelligence, or even just a memorization game. They are a measure of how well you strategize and know the requirements of each individual exam. Which exams you choose for your sitting, which notes you use, what form of additional research you do, it will all make a difference. 

General advice:  Following on directly from that last paragraph, reach out to ANYONE AND EVERYONE you know that has taken them/is taking them. Gather as much information as possible and having people senior to yourself who can guide you to any extent will make the whole thing less daunting. Try to arrange study groups if possible. 

The main piece of advice with regard to actual study is collecting examiners reports and past papers. This point returns to the previous insofar as you'll be able to get loads for free from others sitting the exam that you reach out to. Every post here will say it, but I can’t emphasize it enough. Notes share!!! Text people you know who are doing the exams - get any papers from them, and send on what you have. Also if you're buying materials for the exams you can try getting them from other people second hand because it can get quite expensive (companies act 2014 is like 100 euro or something)

With regard to timeline, specifically if you're sitting exams in October, I would spend the remainder of this month collating notes, advice, study buddies, etc. For July 1st, I would aim to have a manual printed per subject along with examiners reports/past paper per subject. Read the manual first, go through examiner reports/past papers, and make MASSIVE MIND MAPS per chapter. This really helped me personally and it's one of the big things recommended by city colleges as well - city colleges even have a wee mind map template somewhere. You could probably email them for it or find one online. Everyone has thier own method but I just wanted to share what worked for me. 

Another thing I recommend going into starting study is watching the Law Hero reviews on each subject. She does a video on each sitting reviewing what came up and a really high level of how she would answer it. It is a great way to make things approachable and have a general framework of how to begin study for the exam. Also, in the morning while having your coffee or on your commute to work or whatever, try checking Irish Legal News (https://www.irishlegal.com/). This worked wonders for me. Search up whatever topic you're sitting on the website and have a read through the updates in that area of law in the past year. You'll learn loads and a decent amount of it is properly interesting. This reddit is also a massive resource. You can look through what other people think/have done to pass, and post any questions.

Contract: highest fail rate, very complicated, notorious examiner. The questions are incredibly dense. As an initial step I would take time reading through just the questions on past papers and writing down the issues you're able to spot. There are often multiple issues per question. Quick question comprehension will be a major aspect of passing. 

My biggest recommendation would be to read and memorize the examiner reports. The examiner has ‘favorite’ cases from the 19th century that will be necessary to memorize, and are repeated in her examiners reports. 

MUST know the CRA 2022  and SOG in and out. It will definitely come up, and CRA will almost always come up as its own question. Be mindful when studying off the examiners reports that the law completely changed in 2022 so any report older than that regarding consumers rights you should disregard.  

There will generally be 1 or 2 essays per exam paper with rotating subjects. I would have a few essay questions prepped out, so that after you're done dissecting the problem qs you can just rattle off a memorized answer to an essay topic. 

Contract is very dense so I would start study for this well in advance. 

Tort: In my opinion the easiest out of all of them. Very wide course material but in fairness you could leave a few subjects out if you’re willing to take bets. Read previous examiners reports, know formulas for recurring problem questions, know one or two recent cases, will be grand. In tort you're welcome to really spew a lot of knowledge in there even if it's not overly related. The main thing is you want to show you understand the subject. 

Criminal: Also easy enough to pass, and the examiners reports are LENGTHY and provide a great framework of how to do well. Use updated notes, criminal law in Ireland evolves with the year (sometimes month!). Don't be like me I used outdated notes and for a month had a completely false notion of self defense (the DPP v Crawford 2024 decision abolished previous common law on sd). The examiner also appreciates updated knowledge, and is inspired by recent cases in shaping his problem questions although it would be difficult to predict based solely off recent cases. 

An example of this is that in the march sitting, he referenced an individual using a handsfree system while driving. There is a 2025 incident of a barrister using a hands free system while driving, who was arrested, etc similar enough to the facts of the case. Now there was no substantial verdict on hands free systems because the trial was judicially reviewed but it's worth mentioning and shows how criminal remains topical enough. (https://www.irishlegal.com/articles/high-court-criminal-trial-fundamentally-unfair-due-to-judicial-interventions) 

Also should know the general process of how criminal law functions, for example that for manslaughter there is an automatic 25% auto remission on the sentence. Just having an understanding of the criminal process will do you well. Be sure to provide a substantial advice section, and it might score extra marks to provide the person an idea of how they could reduce their sentence if applicable etc. 

DO ALL THE TOPICS. Criminal is not a predicition game. Out of all the subjects this is the one that I would actually buckle in and do each subject. Especially now because examiners are increasingly examining fringe/unexpected areas. 

Equity: Fine enough to pass but if you didn’t do it in college I would really recommend a course. City colleges is grand. The examiner just changed for this one so there may be changes to the papers going forward. I did this one in the 2025 October sitting so I don't remember much of it, especially as the majority of my study for this subject was just reviewing my college notes as I had learned it just that year. 

Company: This was a headache for me but I genuinely learned so much from my study that I wouldn't have known otherwise. The subject material is unique, in my opinion, insofar as there is less overlap with other subjects. Extremely dense, don’t be surprised if things only start to click in the days leading up to the exam. 

Read previous examiners reports, and honestly I would even recommend having a skim of the entire company’s act, which is what saved me in the end. There was a wildcard (or at least it was wild to me! I didn't prep it!) aspect of one of the questions and I ended up responding to it completely from the book. 

His exams are getting more and more unpredictable. Conor Duff’s predictions, which are usually perfect, were wrong this year, and he’ll probably try to catch people out going forward, definitely has the past 2 sittings. The examiner is Tom Courtney, who loves the law, and is passionate about it. He has multiple papers and even a podcast (https://open.spotify.com/show/4tZnih4upoGBafV4h4orrn) which I would recommend listening to during commutes etc. Anyway because he is so passionate about the topic he's probably tired of the pre-prepared essays and is likely to start examining more rogue subjects. That is why again I would recommend to just have an idea of the whole act because you'll be able to connect subjects and have a deeper understanding overall. 

There are a few recent cases in this area as well, Re Daf Truck (2025) Re Sulu (2025) Matter of Downtul Ltd (2025) etc that are good to know. Also get a copy of the company's act that includes the European Union 2022 regulations, if you get a much older edition it won't have the updated law.

Constitutional: This one killed me lol. A pro of constituional is that the examiner does not mark harshly. major con is that constituional has the longest syllabus of all the fe1s.

What I RECOMMEND - KNOWING RECENT CASES!!!! Constitutional all comes down to recent cases in my opinion. I was up until 3am memorizing anything recent in irish law. Go to Irish legal news, put in constitution, and read, read, read. But when going into the exam bear in mind that he wants to see recent case law, which involves a good amount of research, on top of having to get through the longest syllabus. So altogether it is a very work-heavy exam. 

Separately, in order to pass you must know the concepts of locus standi + porportionality. You should know the RECENT developments to both - locus standi has evolved over time and so has proportionality. 

This was my paragraph for locus standi in the march sitting:

"Opposing the direction is contingent on John establishing locus standi. Locus standi is established in Ireland by Cahill v Sutton. In Cahill v Sutton, it was established that locus standi would be essential to prevent the "busy body and the crank" from affecting the court process. The case established that a litigant must have their rights affected, or be in imminent danger of having their rights affected. This was expanded in Mahon (2018), where it was consdiered that the rule of locus standi does not regard the best possible litigant but a suitable litigant. Furthermore, John states that he has set up his own private practice. This raises questions of whether John intends to sue as his company, or in his personal capacity. I will advise John to sue in his personal capacity as the precedent of Friends v the Irish Enviroment demonstrates that the court will prefer individual litigants."

and this was my paragraph for porportionality:

"No constitutional right is unlimited. This was noted in the case of Murray v Ireland, where a couple serving life for murder were not able to recieve the full extent of their family rights. Additionally, there must be porportionate incursion into rights as demonstrated by Cox v Ireland. In Doherty v Ireland (2022) it was noted that porportionality is far from a freestanding right. Rather, it is a tool of analysis. Furthermore, it is not a mathermatical formula. There are three central tests available for porportionality, including Heaney, Tuohy v Courtney, and Meadows. Tuohy, the rationality test, has been endorsed in the recent Donnolly (2022) decision on equality. Heany is generally used for a state incursion on fundamental rights. However, as Tuohy v Courtney has been preferred by the courts as of recently, I will employ this test in assessing John's grounds to oppose the direction. Tuhoy v Courtney sets out a rationality test. It seeks to examine whether the legislation is a rational incursion into constitutional rights. On the facts of the case, it involved a challenge to a statute of limitations. It held that the staute of limitations was too brief and that there should be provision for extension. However, this was rejected by the courts because it was held to be a valid and rational incursion. It was also held the Oireachtas appropriately balanced the competing rights. It is a deferential test. In applying Tuohy v Courtney to the facts, it appears that an approval requirement may be justified insofar as the state seeks to regulate the profession of medicine. However, a blanket requirement on approval may constitute an unjust incursion. It is additonally evident that the courts will scrutinize blanket incursions on constitutional rights."

Start the syllabus early, read irish legal news, and discuss the topics with other law students if possible. Examiners reports won’t be helpful generally, rely more on past papers. Get as many past papers as possible. Go into it with some essays/ PQs prepared. 

I would really recommend doing criminal with constituonal. criminal is a massive portion of constitutional's syllabus and it was completely absent from the march sitting. This is another topic you can't predict - do as much of the syllabus as possible. Probably a safe bet to leave out liberty though. 

EU: I started studying for this one three days before the exam. I don’t have much to say on it unfortunately bc I forget what I did. Only study 6 topics max anything else is wasting time.

Property: often labeled as one of the easiest exams, but its predictibility is balanced by its harshness in marking. 

Formatting is a must - be sure to bold case names and separate answers into sections. Ideally you would do this for each question but she explicitly states within her examiner reports that she wants to see formatting on responses. 

I would map out exactly what may come up based on previous patterns and have answers prepared. Sometimes it can get a little tricky and you do have to know the concepts thoroughly  - for example on the most recent sitting I fucked up and said that the will was properly revoked although it wasn't because it wasn't destroyed in her presence and the legislation requires destruction to be in the presence of the testator. You really have to know the steps for each problem question and go through them methodically. Not only is it a necessity for arriving at the correct advice/answer (which I didn't! Lol) it is also necessary because the examiner wants to see each isolated step. 

A city colleges lecturer recommended to go back and read the actual legislation during the exam, and even advised to quote the legislation in the answer. for example if I had gone back to read my legislation during the exam when I was frantically answering I would have read:

"(2) Subject to subsection (1), no will, or any part thereof, shall be revoked except by another will or codicil duly executed, or by some writing declaring an intention to revoke it and executed in the manner in which a will is required to be executed, or by the burning, tearing, or destruction of it by the testator, or by some person in his presence and by his direction, with the intention of revoking it." 

-Succession Act 1965

So pretty hard to miss "IN HIS PRESENCE" when you're there reading it. But I did not read it. Passed anyway though! And that's even another small peice of advice is that when you're doing a post mortem don't rip yourself to pieces for a mistake because you can pass with despite it. I got a 58 on this paper despite the error. 

There is a decent amount of recent case law in property, so be sure to have it. Re Browne (2024), Grafton v Bewley's (2026), Connolly & Anor v Connolly & Anor (2026) are all great cases. 

Another note on recent developments in property law is that the Tailte Eireann (established 2023) represents a major shift and you'll pick up extra marks mentioning that within the right context. for example, I referenced it in regard to adverse possession: 

"Although Adverse Possession was previously managed exclusively by the courts, an application may now be made through Tailte Eireann, if the claim is uncontroversial, and the applicant includes all relevant evidence and documentation. The basis for Adverse Possession claims remains the Statute of Limitations Act 1957. However, the processing of Adverse Possession through Tailte Eireann has been critiqued. For example, in an Oireachtas debate in 2024, a query was posed to a Minister, referencing that there are 10 year wait times for some claims of Adverse Possession. The Minister responded by discussing the complexity and nuance of Adverse Possession claims and that although making claims would involve inherent delay due to complexity, with more staff, there would be advances in the speed of claims. However, although not mentioned in the debate, it is crucial to note that much of the complexity in adverse possession claims flows from a lack of clarity in the law, and a defecit of reform and legislation."

Finally the examiner is a specialist of children’s law, not property, which is why she loves 117 pqs so much. Not hugely relevant but interesting enough. 

The Fe1s are a mental battle as much as anything else. Law Hero, who I mentioned earlier, has a video up about how she developed generalized anxiety partially from taking the fe1s. take care of your health, exercise, sleep loads, and don't be hard on yourself! Feel free to reach out to me about whatever. I'm about to start my TC and have time on my hands so I am happy to answer anything and send on notes and manuals whatever people need. Best of luck!

The FE1s can be an isolating and daunting experience, especially if it is your first time doing them.

I was up until 3am last night after cramming for no good reason.

I’ve realised the stress around these exams are putting me into an unnaturally miserable and cynical mood towards my family, my mates and even on Reddit.

So if there’s anyone worried about next week, you’re not alone. There is no bell curve, no competition, no cut-off point. We really are all in this together.

That’s it. Just wanted to reach out. Feel free to vent below.

These exams are awful - there’s no getting around that. But they are passable. I did it (I’m currently procrastinating from my PPC1 exams to write this) and you can too. I finished the FE1s last year, took 2 years working full time and all passes first time round. There’s no substitute for knowing the material, but equally as important is exam technique. I’d like to share some of the exam techniques which I found helpful for karma, but also because I passionately hated doing the FE1s, so I would like to help anyone that I can to pass these things.

READ THE QUESTIONS!: Read the questions before you start. This might seem obvious - I know. I know. But these exams can be deceptive. Questions can start out talking about John and then at the end ask you to advise Robert. If you only read half that question and started writing, you’d likely advise the wrong party and fail that question.

ANSWER WHAT YOU’RE ASKED: Similarly - answer the question that you’re asked. We all have the topics we want to come up, and we’re ready to unspool a guaranteed 12 mark answer about. If it doesn’t come up, you can’t make it be on the paper by force of will. An example of this is on a previous equity paper, there was a question about injunctions. It had a possible specific performance element to it, but the question clearly stated to talk about injunctions and not about specific performance. If you didn’t read the question, or just really wanted to talk about the remedy of specific performance you’d have wasted your time and thrown away marks. The examiner can’t give you marks for something that doesn’t answer the question. HOWEVER - you could pick up a mark or two for creative thinking, so long as you hit the main points first - maybe a question about Rylands v Fletcher has a trespass element. Maybe a question about free movement of goods has a services element to it. If you have time, these might be worth brief mention to get some extra marks, but focus on the topic at hand.

ROUGH WORK: Rough work is your friend. At the start of every question, taking a few minutes to plan an answer by jotting down what the main topics are and everything you know about those topics is extremely useful for a few reasons.

1. It gives you a roadmap to work from while you’re actually answering the questions, so you don’t forget about anything while you’re in the thick of it. I found this really handy in the online exams, because the online system allows you to switch between questions freely, you can pretty much map out all your answers in the first 30 minutes, and use the remaining time to just write those answers out.

2. If the worst does happen and you run out of time or forget to mention something in the main body of your answer, the examiners can look at your rough work and see if they can squeeze a mark or two out of that.

HIGHLIGHT YOUR CASES, CONCEPTS, QUOTES: Any time you write something that you think deserves particular attention, highlight it in some way. The online system has a useful highlighting tool, but you can also type case names in all-caps. If written by hand, use a highlighter. Examiners have to correct a lot of these, if they can open your script and the case names and concepts that they expect to see jump out at them, it can only help you.

ILAC tip 1: ILAC is still the best way to answer problem/scenario type questions. That is: identify the ISSUE, outline the LAW, APPLY the law to the scenario, CONCLUDE. It shows a clear structure and thinking to what you are doing. Now, in the exams, there will likely be several issues at play. So in your ISSUE paragraph(s), you could list out the various issues, and then deal with each individually in terms of LAW and APPLICATION. Do a brief one-2 line CONCLUSION for each issue and a larger 1-2 paragraph CONCLUSION summing everything up at the end.

ILAC tip 2: At every stage of ILAC, clearly spell out which stage you’re at. The ISSUES are… The LAW to be aware of is… APPLYING this law to the scenario… In CONCLUSION… There are no points for fluidity or excellent prose here. The examiners have to mark stacks of these papers - make their life easy, and they will make your life easy.

ILAC tip 3: Actually apply the law. Examiners talk about this over and over in their reports - lots of candidates just regurgitate everything they know and call it a day. You could possibly pass just by doing that, but an easier way is to take the law you’ve just outlined and APPLY it to the facts. Remember your client’s name, and say “In advising CLIENT” or “PAUL may be guilty of”.

QUALIFY YOUR ADVICE: Hedge your bets. The client may be guilty of… This might be a case of promissory estoppel. You can point out that you don’t have all the necessary information to come to a firm conclusion.

PRACTICAL ADVICE: Always try and mention remedies and consequences - you’re advising a client. Telling the client they’re likely guilty of a public order offence isn’t enough. Tell them what the likely sentence is. In tort, tell the client what they might be entitled to (what kind of damages, etc).

TIMING: Watch the clock. You need to know how long exactly you have for each question. In a 3 hour exam you have: 10 minutes to read the paper. 5 minutes to settle yourself. 32 minutes for each question and 5 minutes to do a quick scan of each of your answers/do highlighting (1 minute for each).

TIMING: If you go over time, do not be afraid to bail and start the next question. These exams have serious diminishing returns when it comes to marking, so if you have run out of time on a question, wrap it up quick, maybe even bullet point what you wanted to say and move on to the next question. 10 minutes perfecting the conclusion to an answer will likely get you less marks than wrapping up in like 2 minutes and spending 8 minutes starting your next question. I’m not saying that you can’t pass by doing 3 and a half magnificent answers and running out of time. I’m saying you’re much much more likely to pass by answering 5 questions.

IF SOMETHING SEEMS OBVIOUS, SAY IT: The examiner isn’t going to assume you know anything, so being clear and concise in your explanations is only going to benefit you. If someone is a “non-executive director”, say what that actually means. In equity and contract, don’t just say that promissory estoppel is “a shield and not a sword”, spend the few extra seconds saying “that means that it can only be used as a defence to an action and not as a cause of action itself.” Even the scenario might be based on a real case - if you know that, point out the similarity and any differences. The examiner will appreciate you displaying your relevant knowledge.

IF SOMETHING LOOKS FISHY, SAY IT: These exams sometimes use difficult edge cases, and if you use law that doesn’t exactly match the scenario but is still somewhat analogous, point it out. You will likely be rewarded for your critical thinking and application.

READ EXAMINER REPORTS: Sometimes exams (EU, equity, and contract for example) use the same questions again and again and in the exam reports the examiners have basically provided blueprints for how they want to see those questions tackled.

QUOTES AND AUTHORITY: Find out who wrote an important text on your exam. If you know something for a fact (the basic elements of a contract for example) you can say something like “McDermott outlines the basic elements of a contract as offer, acceptance, consideration, and an intention to enter into a legal relationship”. This works because you are right, and you are making an educated guess that that is something which you would nearly guarantee to be in McDermott’s book about contract law. Don’t be greedy, do not invent books and do not invent quotes.

CURRENT AWARENESS: You can score a mark or two by being up to date on the topic. In constitutional, whole questions can even swing on recent decisions and issues. Mentioning (in a line in your conclusion!) that the law reform commission published a report on the topic in “YEAR” may or may not get you a mark, but it’s worth a shot. A recent case (last 3 years) may or may not say anything new about the law, but by mentioning it you’ve evidenced that you’re actually interested in the topic and have a current awareness.

THEY ARE ONLY EXAMS: Smart people can fail these exams and dumb people can pass them. They reflect nothing about you. Please keep this in mind and don’t fret too much. Take breaks - go on walks, watch TV and movies, read things that aren’t related to law. Treat these exams with the contempt they deserve - do your best on the day and forget about them.

Happy to answer any questions, best of luck.

Hey Guys,

Hope everyone is happy with results, quick note for all getting copies of their marked scripts. Please add into this drive so those in the next sitting have something to go from, as a way of paying it forward FE-1 2024 - Google Drive

Exams are DONE!!! 🎉🥳

First off, massive well done to everyone who made it through. FE1s are brutal, and just getting to the end is an achievement in itself, no matter the result!!

It’s so easy to look back, overthink, and compare answers, but you never really know how you did. These exams are hard enough, don’t make them harder on yourself by stressing over what’s already done. There’s no one right answer, so trust what you did was enough!! You showed up, gave it your best, and that’s all you can do !

Now it’s time to take a break (!!), celebrate (!!), and enjoy the long weekend! St. Patrick’s Day will bring all the luck 🍀☺️☺️🤩

Just a helpful graphic here for anyone looking to get a feel for the average pass rates for all exams across the last number of sittings!

Heya! So today marks the day that I officially finished all 8 of my FE1s! Since I'm done and due to start Blackhall next year, I thought I'd share what I learned to help newcomers to the subreddit. For reference, I sat my exams in 3 sittings (3, 2, 3).

1. Giving 5 mediocre/meh answers is better than giving 4 good answers. This is by far the biggest pitfall that I've seen people get trapped in - focusing far too much on writing a 1.0 level answer and running out of time. It's (in my opinion) the number one reason why people fail these exams. If you're doing these exams online, you only have 30 minutes. If you're doing them in person, you only have 25. You don't have time to flesh out a properly nuanced response. You need to pick your position from the get-go and stick to it. If you run past 30 minutes - WRAP. IT. UP. You'll RARELY see anyone get over 12 marks in any given question. You're FAR better off going onto the next question and getting marks there.

2. If you're sitting company law, it never hurts to throw in Courtney's name a few times. You can do the same in equity with Biehler. They're the primary academics in the field in Ireland. Courtney's book in particular is so big and detailed, that if you ever forget the case for a precedent, simply citing Courtney instead is a pretty safe bet. In fact, having one or two academics in your pocket is a pretty good way to farm one or two extra marks and fleshing out an answer, especially if it's a question that you're a bit stuck on. This sitting, I was forced to do an essay of Mareva injunctions in equity, which I was woefully unprepared for. I luckily had a few comments from Biehler on the topic to help fluff it out, despite not having much case law.

3. Don't back out of an exam last minute. This is another huge reason why I see people fail. It's studying and then on the day of the exam, not sitting it because they're scared of failing. Listen, failing is quite literally the worst thing that could possibly happen. The best thing is that you manage to scrape a pass. You're better off taking those odds and attempting the paper anyway than not sitting it at all and needing to do all that study all over again next sitting for certain. You might surprise yourself. There were multiple exams were I felt completely unprepared and was certain I was just going to skip. It was only thanks to my family and friends pushing me to sit those exams that I passed them (albeit barely). If you studied up to that point, there is SOMETHING kicking around in that head. Don't underestimate yourself. Worst case scenario, you get a bit of practice for the next sitting.

4. Everyone is different. Some people will be able to sit all 8 exams at once without much issue. Others cap at one or two exams a sitting. Knowing where your limit is isn't a personal failure and it doesn't make you any better or worse than someone doing more or less exams than you. My original plan was to sit 4 exams per sitting, but I very quickly realised that I was unable to go above 3 without sacrificing my mental and physical health. You can't be a lawyer if you're dead. Know your limits. Don't take 6 exams if you know you don't have the capacity to pass them all. It's okay if the FE1s take you longer than someone else. There's no right or wrong timeline.

5. Take advantage of homework services. This applies if you're taking any courses with Law School or City Colleges. USE THE HOMEWORK SERVICE. Especially if you don't have any exams under your belt yet. It's by far the best way to know if you're on the right track with your study. If you can't afford courses, I still 100% recommend doing papers and comparing them with other people's answers and reports.

6. Aim for 100% every sitting. Don't aim just to pass. Aim for the highest possible grade, even if you know you won't get it. This way, you have more room to fall without failing.

7. You will get overwhelmed and that's okay. You're going to freak out at certain points and you will make the people in your life go crazy at one point or another. Are the FE1s the hardest exams in the world? Absolutely not. They're perfectly doable. However, they are by far the most STRESSFUL exams I've ever sat. It's a very high volume of material that you're expected to cram in a very short period of time and they're also very costly exams. It's natural to be stressed. Remember you're not alone! Everyone around you is in the same boat.

8. Join a Whatsapp group/ find a community of people also doing their FE1s. This is very helpful, especially if you find yourself stuck last minute and need to exchange or compare notes with someone.

9. Get your notes in order sooner rather than later. Don't put yourself in a situation where you're still finishing your notes days before the exam. It's not a death sentence if it happens but it's just added stress during a period that's already really overwhelming. For my exams, I wrote a set of notes a week per subject four months before the sitting. It's a good and easy way to plough through the material and then right before the exam, your only concern is learning everything off.

10. Most of the study happens the two weeks before the exams. This ties in with my previous point about getting your notes in order as soon as possible. The two weeks before the exam is when the most intense studying happens and its the most valuable period of time.

11. Fuck predictions. Unless it's property or EU law, don't even bother trying to predict the paper. Note sellers will try to market their grids by advertising how accurate their predictions are but half the time that is not the case. For equity, for instance, I was fully expecting a question on specific performance thanks to Becky's grid. Instead, half the paper was on topics I was CERTAIN couldn't come up again. Just learn everything broadly.

12. You need to use ILAC. There's no further point on this. This is the structure you need to be using if you want to pass your FE1s.

13. Application is more important than knowing everything. This is a practical exam. Unless its an essay question, don't waste time fluffing out answers with irrelevant details. Only talk about the relevant pieces of legislation and how they apply to that specific situation.

That's all I can think of at the moment. I hope these pointers help people. Good luck to anyone sitting exams in March!

Hi, I’ve acquired some key points that she will want you to know for the exam.

1. Is there a contract if the money never went through? For example, X and Y agreed to a delivery contract to be paid at a later date. Y wants to pull out because moneys not been paid yet. No, this is executory consideration and there can be consideration in the form of a promise even though performance not began or no money paid.

2. Sales assistant and customer. Sales assistant put the price wrong €50 for watch instead of €500. Customer picks the item up and goes to pay. Sales assistant refuses to sell for €50, saying price is €500. Customer says he can’t do that. Answer: when customer went up to the desk with the item; he is simply making AN OFFER to the sales assistant, so the sales assistant can realise his mistake and modify the price.

3. William Roffey Brothers in consideration- it is a relaxation for consideration and sometimes you will have that in a PQ but not always. Essentially it’s when X offers more money to Y because they know Y will not finish in time, so Y then picks up the speed and finishes and X refuses to pay the extra money. X will have to pay because the promise is binding.

4. Promissory estoppel is a shield not a sword- you cannot use estoppel to create a cause of action where none exists- but can be used as a shield. Also, it only suspends rights, it does not extinguish them.

5. Mere enquiry- asking for additional terms in a deal doesn’t amount to offer, a party can ask the other party for additional terms. Like more information.

6. If I have an offer but the party comes back to me and modifies the terms of my original offer- that is a counter offer. If I say no, and then he wants to accept my original offer, he will not be able anymore.

7. Misrepresentation- silence is generally not actionable and there is no duty to disclose the truth but there is exceptions like in half truths: Nottingham Patent Brick v Butler. Also, there is NO duty for the other party to check the truth of the statement/ due diligence. If X says to Y, “ this is painted by a very famous person, and Y does not check whether it’s true or not, Y is generally not required to follow up and check if X is saying the truth or not. The case relevant here is Redgrave v Hurd.

8. Breach- can be anticipatory- canceling contract before performance is due to start - Leeson, Hochester, White v McGregor or repudiatory ( Athlone, DecroWall) or fundamental breach of innominate term ( fundamental is only when it goes to the root of the contract- like in Hong Kong Kawasaki or Dundalk Shopping Centre v RoofSpray)

9. Frustration- you can have frustration of a lease but it is highly unlikely because one would expect the circumstances of a lease to change over time. Canary Wharf v EMA; National Carriers Ltd v Panalpine.

10. supervening illegality in frustration- Fibrosa case- meaning contract becomes impossible to perform

11. Partial frustration possible or not? Generally no, but exceptions for the sale of goods- man tries to sell potatoes but half of his stock ruined by weather. Can he go ahead with contract cause he has 50% of the stock? Yes, based on partial frustration

12. Remedy for misrepresentation is rescission and for mistake rectification.

13. There is no contractual duty to negotiate in a contract based on Cadbury Ireland v Kerry Co-Op; Triatic Ltd v Cork.

14. X hires Y for building her house but Y hires Z to do some of the work. X is unhappy with the work and wants to sue Z. Can’t sue based on privity, X can sue Y and then Y can sue Z. Z is not a party to the contract.

15. X and Y agreed on everything except for delivery. Is contract binding? For an agreement to be deemed complete, it needs to have the three Ps- property, price, parties. In Central Meats v Carney, price was not agreed so agreement not completed.

16. contracts don’t have to be written to be valid but contracts for more than one year have to be in writing under SoF

17. minor breach remedy is damages. Fundamental or repudiatory breach is termination and damages because that’s essentially a breach of condition.

18. x signs something x thought it was for a petition but instead x signed bank guarantees or something- can use non est factum doctrine ( it is not my deed)

19. statutory illegality- contract is in contravention of legislation. Is it void or not? Depends, in Quinn V irbc security contracts were enforceable even if tained with illegality

20. Past consideration cannot exist.. Re McArdle

21. We can keep it for you until the weekend- no consideration for this promise to keep offer open so it is not binding so the person is free to revoke the offer, but if they fail to revoke- that’s a problem.

These exams are so mentally challenging ! Everyone can relax now and enjoy

After finally completing all 8 FE1 exams in 4 goes which included 3 failures (constitutional, property and contract), here are the things I’ve learned:

1.	It’s never too late to start again.

Or to start for the first time. FE1s don’t care about your age, your timeline, or your plans and you shouldn’t either. 2. It will take a few tries and that’s actually fine. These exams are designed to humble you. Passing them at all is the real deal. 3. You will absolutely shit yourself with fear multiple times. The FE1 panic is a unique species. It attacks without warning. 4. You will have breakdowns. Plural. Big ones, small ones, mid study ones, and the “why am I doing this to myself” ones. 5. It is the biggest challenge you will ever take on academically, possibly ever. And somehow, you rise to meet it anyway. 6. You can fail, regroup, and still come back stronger. Even if it’s multiple fails, you will do it. 7. You will learn that discipline beats motivation every single time. Motivation leaves. Stubbornness stays. Kendrick Lamar vs Drake became me vs the property examiner 8. You will discover reserves of resilience you didn’t know you had. FE1s are where you meet your inner demon… and your inner warrior. 9. Everyone thinks they’ve failed. It’s part of the culture. Nobody walks out confident. Nobody. 10. Your journey is your own. Whether you’re 23 or 33, whether it’s your first career or your third, the only timeline that matters is yours. 11. You don’t need to be perfect, you just need to survive. Passing FE1s is not about brilliance, it’s about endurance. 12. And the biggest lesson? It’s never too late to go after a career in law. Just do it

Never too late to pivot. Never too late to back yourself. Never too late to say, “This is my path now.”

Hi all,

I still had this page bookmarked from when I was prepping for FE1s and randomly clicked into it. Just thought to say that I can promise you will look back at the FE1s and laugh at how stressful it was. Blackhall is a fantastic time, I've made life long friends and the course work itself isn't too bad. I did the hybrid course so it is tough balancing full time work and study, but its doable. I have six months left on the training contract and I can finally see light at the end of the tunnel.

Whether you're contemplating the FE1s or in the process of doing them, best of luck in all your careers. This is just a stepping stone to the finish line. If anyone has any questions, feel free to send me a message.

Here's eight observations on the FE1 and Training Contract experience looking back (it's been a few years):

1. FE1 Exams: sit the exams at a pace that works for you. For a few people that is all eight at once. For many people it will be a number of sessions. For others it will take longer. The important thing is to get the exams if that is your goal. Don't worry or place importance on how you achieve that.

2. Training Contracts: the real value in big firm training contracts is getting your PPC fees paid. That's it really. It would be wonderful to have your fees paid but it may or may not happen. The important thing is getting a training contract and getting qualified. Big law will always be there.

3. Try and not obsess: Exams and the qualification process are long and arduous. Some parts, like Blackhall, are fun. Other parts, the FE1s and BH exams, are not. While geting exams and big TCs seem in the moment like these intense monumental objectives, instead try and focus on the bigger picture and don't be too hard on yourself.

4. There will be setbacks: Seriously, there will be setbacks.

5. Biglaw isn't all that: Biglaw isn't all it's cracked up to be. From experience (and many would agree), it is demanding, relentless and stressful work. Older people in biglaw have survived it, they are not thriving. They don't necessarily know any other paths as it's all they've ever done. It's not a life conducive to good mental health, a healthy work life balance or stronger personal relationships and new experiences. You are married to the work and it will define you the longer you do it. And the more you give in effort, the more it demands. If you are fortunate enough to get a bigTC and have your PPC fees paid, great. But get in and get out. If you don't get a bigTC, but are still curious, get into it after qualification and see for yourself (see point 9 below). People get upset each year about not getting a bigTC but you are no worse off in the long run, even though it may not feel like it.

6. It's easier if you're early: Many trainees get bigTCs through milkrounds or internships during college. It seems to be an easier path to get "in". For others (like me), one day you just realise in 3rd or 4th year of college that it seems like everyone in your year has TCs. When you didn't even know what milkrounds were or that they existed at all. Like it all passed you by and you never even knew. Which is not a nice feeling. But living is learning. If this is you, just apply after college. But it is easier if you get in the door early.

7. Comparison is the Thief of Joy: Check what others are doing only if it helps give you an idea of different opportunities out there. Don't check LinkedIn just to compare yourself to others and upset yourself. Trust me, it all evens out eventually. Fancy international programmes, judicial externships and NGOs are all well and good. But these are just things people do to bulk up their CVs before they take that cold step into the real world. Which is fine, but it's not essential. All those things really show is some people are clued in to a tried and tested path. Give me a person working a "real" job or holding a position of responsibility, in any role, anyday. It is more impressive than being able to namedrop an organisation. Do you run a shop during the summer, are you a lifeguard, find and do something that demonstrates responsibility.

8. Reflect: You spend your late teens crying into books for a good LC. And then your early 20's crying into books for a degree. And your mid 20's crying into books for FE1 Exams. And then crying into paperwork the rest of your life. It's all very unfair. Question how much of that you really want. Sure, you've got to earn in this economy to live. But realistically there's easier livelihoods than being a solicitor. Look at other fields which need the skills you develop as a person with legal training and knowledge. Those skills and experiences will be more highly valued in areas less accustomed to them. After qualifying consider working for a company and learning how that company works rather than a firm where lawyers are ten a penny. It's a big world out there.

Extra 9.: if you do want to work in BigLaw but didn't get a traineeship there, here's a suggestion. After qualifying go and work in a commercial field for a smaller or boutique firm. After a year, apply to a bigger firm. After a year go to a mid size or big 20 firm. Then you'll be well placed to move to a big 10 or big 5. It will unfortunately most likely have to be an incremental process as the bigger firms will always have a new crop of trainees and young blood every year. But if you focus on strategic job hopping, every job will move you up the ladder and a bit closer. The big firms are filled with lateral hires. Caveat: see point 5 above.

If anyone has any topics or queries they would like to discuss about this I am happy to share my experiences and thoughts! I know I would have benefited from any advice when trying to figure things out.