*** F4 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

Quite an easy exam in my opinion. But I suppose if you know the answer it will be. Mike Little’s lectures were invaluable though; i doubt I could have passed without them.*

*Hope I’m not being overly optimistic about passing.

Don’t know what to make of F4 today. I was finished 40min before time, so either I have really done well or have royally messed up. I was doing three exams so havent had the time for much f4 pass papers and dont really know the standard required to get marks. Felt I knew the answer to everything except the share premium stuff and didnt see how there were 10 marks to be had on redredundancy, seriously wtf! 4-5 marks at most for that. Just curious what everyone was writing for the extra time, frantically scribbling uo to the end, making me nervous big time.

How many lines do you need to write for a mark? I was was writing extremely to the point, it probably didnt read amazing but had plenty of points and revevant cases quoted. Like probablly writing a page at most for 10marks, have I under estimated the requirements here?

Not sure about Q10. They over drafted the amount agreed with the bank without consent so, at least for this point, looks fraudulent for me.

I said directors could be disqualified for upto 15 yrs or the courts would look to them to personally contribute to pay the liabilities, hopefully thats right

Wrongful rebecca, as there was no evidence that there was intent to defraud

Kevin i went for specific performance too as an equitable remedy and mentioned that they could also sue for lost 50k advertising as a common law remedy to put them in the same position as they were before contracting

Kevin and Revoelad: I did not put specific performance as this is not an available remedy for personal services. The award would most likely be damages in my opinion – I said advertising expenses too!

Oh i had no idea Specific performance not available for personal services. The question asked something like what remedies would be available, which immediately made me think equitable remedies

I put Fraudulent on Q10 as they carried on trading when they were already heavily in debt. Q7 I screwed up big time just hope I got enough points. Though coming on here after makes me worried.

Guys if you see on that breach one, It was clear picture that the way damages can be measure in this scenario was out of pocket basis (Refer to angela television vs reed) you don’t how much books you gonna sell depends on the content n popularity of it. Its hard to measure this like how much they gonna make profit from it. So as out of pocket basis you can be awarded only the preliminary expenses which was incurred as marketing cost ! There was no other thng thy can measure here..
Thr was a case of remotness of loss as well as they got the contract of 100 k but this related to second climb of rule of a loss is not too remote relating to special circumstnces but if defendant knew or ought to knew it will be counted.so applying this thr was no clear thng stated like he knew or not so not a part of concern.
Stated :- it was out of pocket basis (ANGELA VS REED)
HOPE IT HELPS

I think question 8 was to do anticipatory breach in that Apt ltd has the right of acceptance and rejection. since apt ltd did not possess the script the couldnt continue with the contract but in case bel knew of the contract apt lmt could recover profit. hedley and baxendale remoteness of damages

I’m reviewing Q10 of GLO (I think is the same for ENG variant) and I’m confused about this sentence: “[they] carried on trading although this meant unilaterally ignoring the limit on their agreed overdraft with Just Bank plc, and delaying the payments on their other outstanding contracts.”

I say that it was wrongful trading but Just Bank mabe can ask the court for fraudulent trading as they ignore unilaterally their agreement.

What do you think?