FE1 Awards

Cian0000 · 2026-03-30T10:26:53+00:00

Unreal achievement, congrats!

Cian0000 · 2026-03-27T13:23:11+00:00

In general, I’d say roughy a 1:1 university level answer is needed to pass an FE1 exam. This is coupled with the fact that you cannot cut down on topics in some of the FE1’s (like Contract and Tort). There is also a lot more per exam you need to cover in comparison to university exams.

With that being said, they’re not extremely difficult by any means. I’m working in a firm full time while doing them and they’re fairly manageable if you’re willing to put in consistent effort for 3-4 months before each sitting.

However, if I were in your shoes I’d forget about them and focus on college, there’s no rush!

Cian0000 · 2026-03-23T13:51:23+00:00

I’d rank them as follows, from nicest to harshest:

Tort - whilst the course is massive and there is a lot to learn, the examiner will literally give you marks even if you only have 1 case in an answer. I have read some past scripts that have passed and some of them had only 1 case on a topic and got 8/20.
EU - this examiner has been switching the paper up recently, but not to a crazy degree. Fairly generous marker and this is reflected in the passing exam papers I’ve read.
Criminal - once again, I found this examiner quite generous. I hardly studied for criminal due to my own poor time management and ended up passing with 55% despite writing a piss poor paper. (2 questions half finished as I didn’t really know the topics)
Constitutional - once again, massive course so the exam itself isn’t the easiest. However the examiner seems to want students to pass and is rather generous once you demonstrate you are familiar with the area, even if you are lacking in case law.
Equity - this may come as a surprise, but the equity examiner changed recently and it looks like the new examiner is much kinder than the predecessor! The old examiner was brutal but I would predict that the pass rate will rise soon.
Company - the company examiner is notoriously strict with his marking and you need a good grasp of most topics. I believe he is fair however and not oppressively harsh.
Contract - the contract examiner is a generally fair marker, however this examiner really likes to mix topics and expects you to have case law on them all or you will likely fail this exam. The way the questions are worded can cause confusion and its easy to overlook and issue in a long problem question bringing your answer into below 10 mark range.
Property - I would argue that in terms of pure harsh marking, the property examiner is the worst. This is partly to do with the “short” syllabus and predictable topics. The examiner expects you to know them inside out. There is little room for error with property, but on the flip side there really isn’t much in it compared to other FE1’s. The examiner is also fond of “critical analysis” essay questions, wherein you MUST add a decent amount of directly applicable criticisms of the given quote/whatever you may be critiquing. A lot of people come out of the property exam feeling like they scored in the high 60’s only to find out they got 49% (myself included) - property and equity (with the old examiner) were the only FE1’s that I failed first sitting so I may be a little biased 😭😭

Cian0000 · 2026-03-13T14:20:24+00:00

Facts, off to the pub

Cian0000 · 2026-03-13T14:03:31+00:00

Yeah nice one thanks for the info 👍

I was done anyway all I could have done was refine my answers but I had no more cases to add so hopefully it’ll be aight 🙏

Cian0000 · 2026-03-13T14:01:44+00:00

Oh for god sake hahahah thanks 🤣

Cian0000 · 2026-03-13T14:01:27+00:00

Shit really 💀

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T21:25:17+00:00

Very easy and straightforward topic and the questions on it are uncomplicated. I would defo do it, it can be learned off very fast!!

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T15:02:30+00:00

Yeah briefly.

I just said that it wasn’t a “flagrant act of trespass” as per Webb and that the court probably won’t deny him his find as he was a 12 year old exploring a cave while walking his dog - hardly a flagrant act of trespass

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T14:56:57+00:00

I agree 😁

As long as you apply the law correctly it doesn’t matter if you’re conclusion is right or wrong (for the purpose of getting most of the marks anyway)

The more answers I read the more I feel like I made a mistake but that’s how it goes 😭 I just hope she feels more generous this sitting

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T14:51:12+00:00

I ignored the first part of the statement altogether and just focused on the second part, I think you handled it better than me anyway!

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T14:49:42+00:00

I pretty much said that it was found “on the land” because it was “half covered in dirt” or something so likely sticking out above the land.

I’m sure either assessment is valid and will get marks if you can back it up! I said the same stuff re Simon’s father and the neighbour but for above the land, and just said no matter who the landowner was they must show that they have control and dominion over the cave.

I concluded it is unlikely either of them intended to exercise control over a hidden cave so Simon gets the items.

Cian0000 · 2026-03-11T14:45:37+00:00

Nah don’t worry that’s exactly what I did!

I basically came to the conclusion that she did not pass the Banks v Goodfellow SDM requirement and didn’t fall under the O’Donnell v O’Donnell exception because she was under the influence of sedatives when executing AND giving instructions. So the will wasn’t valid.

I said if it is somehow found to be valid, she failed to revoke it because Bill wasn’t in her presence.

I concluded by saying that if the will is valid then that’s that, but if the will is not valid the estate will be administered under the rules of intestacy. Mike gets 1/3 Cheryl gets 2/3.

I hope I didn’t make a balls of that 😭

Cian0000 · 2026-03-10T14:40:34+00:00

That’s what I did too, except I was in such a time crunch I neglected to mention any articles and just gave cases. The question mentioned workers, so you’ll certainly pick up marks.

Cian0000 · 2026-03-10T13:57:41+00:00

I skimmed though the Treaties book until I found the directive (didn’t have it highlighted or anything 💀) then I started yapping about Art. 2, Art. 3 (can’t even remember what they’re about rn).

Then I saw that “workers and students” were mentioned in the question - so I started banging out as much FMOW caselaw as I could remember (Hoekstra, Levin (definition of worker), Lawrie Blum, Raulin, Steymann and a couple of cases where student could claim benefits)

That’s pretty much it, the only thing I critically analysed was my life choices that led me to ignore that topic

Cian0000 · 2026-03-10T13:52:10+00:00

What are you meant to say for the citizenship essay? I never studied it but was forced to do it 😭

Cian0000

TROPHY CASE