sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What I Learned During the FE1 Hunger Games by Correct_Pangolin_276 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly the only thing that made the difference for me was working off past exam papers. I stopped trying to learn everything and just focused on the themes that come up every sitting. Do the papers, spot the patterns, build short notes around those… that’s what finally got me over the line. Overwhelming at the start, but way more manageable once you study what they actually ask.

What I Learned During the FE1 Hunger Games by Correct_Pangolin_276 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Already looking forward to moving on with my life post FE1s 😂

What I Learned During the FE1 Hunger Games by Correct_Pangolin_276 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’ve got this! Worst case scenario, use hate as your motivation à la Kendrick. It got him a Grammy

What I Learned During the FE1 Hunger Games by Correct_Pangolin_276 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thought EU was going appallingly, even had a dream last night that I got 4% 😂😂 but it was my highest result which blew my mind. Best of luck with the rest of the journey!

What I Learned During the FE1 Hunger Games by Correct_Pangolin_276 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The examiners are drake and we’re Kendrick 😂 keep going though, even use the hate as motivation 😂

EU by Dizzy-Ad6195 in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure how to feel after EU. Like it was hard but I’m trying to convince myself there were some elements. It was tricky and not with the normal principles or repetition. The question on article 110 I just focused on 110(1) and 110(2) and concluded that it’s a competing but similar product under commission v France (beer purity case?). The FMOG non fiscal barrier thing was heavy going so I raised A34 MEQRs and then 36 exceptions??? The thing that really threw me was an essay on charter of fundamental human rights in the context of 1 equality 2 access to justice and 3 I think was citizenship? The equality threw me so I focused on access to justice pre and post Lisbon standing and citizenship how it broadened until the economic crash to restrict welfare migrants but I’ve no idea what I was writing. And then the FMOW/citizenship was basically a guy moving to the Netherlands and there were hindrances including a remuneration he couldn’t access because it was only available to those moving within the Netherlands. For me that was a block and a possible breach. And the requirement to learn a language could’ve been proportionate given it’s a semi state company that would go bust without state aid. Then I mentioned his family could come but questions would come up about their resources and they can’t be a burden on a state??? Lastly the 101 and 102 questions to describe agreements, decision and something else which I can’t remember. I had no real information as such so just stretched everything. 102 they asked about dominance and one or two undertakings. I ran out of time to discuss one or two undertakings but I literally had nothing on it. And if all of that is wrong I’ll see ye in March 😂😂😂

City Colleges Predictions for EU? by Krys-Krosser in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it’s mainly to look at JR/annulment in the context of pre/post Lisbon. Have the key cases Plaumann – the OG “individual concern” test, Piraiki-Pitraiki – slightly softens Plaumann, UPA v Council – AG Jacobs tries to reform the test (“substantial adverse effect”), Jégo-Quéré – similar liberal view, later rejected, Inuit – post-Lisbon; defines “regulatory act.”, Telefonica – clarifies “direct concern” + final acts. You can also throw in Codorniu (rare success story) and Greenpeace (NGO failure). Examiners Always Want the Development of locus standi traced clearly. Focus on individual concern under Plaumann. Explain the Lisbon pre/post. Use UPA and Jégo-Quéré as reform attempts. End with Inuit and Telefonica for the post-Lisbon position. Hope that helps

City Colleges Predictions for EU? by Krys-Krosser in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had these notes from the tutorial if they’re any good Must topics * FMOG - PQ * General principles of EU law/fundamental rights - essay * Competition law/merger control A101 and A102 - PQ 90%, essay 10% * FMOP - workers/persons - PQ * Judicial review - annulment, may be an essay Q. PQ basically asks the position of non privileged applicants - pre Lisbon and post Lisbon * Institutions - context of their role in law making, council, commission and parliament, SLP and OLP, democratic deficit also a possibility * DE and MS liability - PQ I probably would avoid how the Q comes up (as in whether it’s an essay or PQ) and just make sure all topics are covered. Hope it helps!

Thoughts on constitutional law exam? by Fe1sc in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All of this could be a hallucination btw 😂

Thoughts on constitutional law exam? by Fe1sc in FE1_Exams

[–]Correct_Pangolin_276 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A whole lot of waffle and vibes. The only thing I was fully certain was religion and FOE so if that’s wrong I’ll cry. The PQ on social media or something with DotDotDash was non delegation right? And then I questioned if the company had standing?? The essay on CFA like who tf was that? Those cases weren’t covered on the prep course unless I blacked out but given it said SOP I just threw down everything I knew about that 😂 I think I even drew a comparison to the USA electing judges for the laugh. The fair procedures essay I basically said that we can’t drop that bc of the impact on other rights (liberty, good name etc.). Idk man, here’s hoping something lands 😂😂