- This topic has 77 replies, 45 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
- Posts
the paper was quite okay, question 9 about the company secretary possessing ostensible authority to make contracts on the company name binding.
this is quite straight forward and easy, though it is ultra vires, the company will still be liable but they can later sue chu to recover the amounts- Topics: 2
- Replies: 14
- ☆
Really?. Checked in some text – cant get the name now and it says that Whiteley v Chappell was a literal rule case.
Anyway would you loose all the marks for that kind of error?
that question was for 4 marks , 2 marks for the literal difinition and 2 for the golden rule.
its unnesesarry to quote a case here cuz the 2 marks available are for the definitions only, this is just common sense, if it was worth 4 marks for each then u could have quote.
the secret behind passing acca exam is technique
the only place necesarry to quote in this exam is the definition of the duty of care, there u quote donough vs stevenson or caparo vs dickmanhat question was for 4 marks , 2 marks for the literal difinition and 2 for the golden rule.
its unnesesarry to quote a case here cuz the 2 marks available are for the definitions only, this is just common sense, if it was worth 4 marks for each then u could have quote.
the secret behind passing acca exam is technique
the only place necesarry to quote in this exam is the definition of the duty of care, there u quote donough vs stevenson or caparo vs dickman- Topics: 0
- Replies: 31
- ☆
Maybe mike little would be able to tell us if getting definition correct but quoting wrong case would loose you all the marks!? I’m sure they would like too see more cases quoted in just tort. It actually says in some of the questions 8-10 to score the top marks they like too see cases quoted. This in in the examiners comments.
Also thank you for Consideration cases Mike! Cury v Misa definition, Tweedle v Atkinson, Nestle case… I don’t know if I had to go into so much details for 3 point consideration question but I even put Stilk v Myrick, Hartley v Ponsoby Ward v Byham!
All I could hear was Mike’s voice in my ear !!!!!! ha ha ha
Thanks 😀
- Topics: 2
- Replies: 14
- ☆
I have quoted where it wasn’t necessary according to you. Do you think I would be penalised or it would be ignored since the principle is correct.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 31
- ☆
In the bpp revision text it says whitely v chappell is the literal rule.
The literal rule will be applied ….. unless it leads to an absurdity in which case the golden rule will be applied. And the Whiteley v Chappell case was such an absurdity! Dead men can’t vote!
Morag, don’t worry about it. Clearly it would be better to quote the correct case but, if you quote it wrong, it’s not a major problem. Remember, this is a law exam for accountants – you’re not expected to be at the level where you have to stand up in court and defend a client!
Hi Ruby,
I took the Singapore Variant. It’s a fair paper covering almost all the syllabus. But Q6 about Judicial Management, I didn’t know what to write and totally skipped that question.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
- ☆
For alteration of Articles i wrote that ordinary resolution is required and majority (50%) instead of Special Resolution. But poll vote and show off hands are same for both the resolutions. How the examiner will look at this
I think the question on disqualification for 10 marks was difficult. There was not enough to write on this it would be better if it also included removal, resignation and retirement of directors to score good marks.
Thanx Miss Debbie from London School of Business and Finance and opentution. as well.@hussainladhani.. I think changing company articles is an important matter so would require special resolution of 75%..
GLO LAW paper was OK. Apart from question 7 on credit transfers. Fairly easy paper.
I was feeling like utter junk the whole weekend before and was spewing up on the Sunday! Still not feeling better now and its Tuesday!!!! The first question stumped me as did question 5 and 10.
Feel that the majority of the others went well. I didn’t state any cases either but used illustration of the cases. Don’t feel i performed well enough for a pass. Perhaps a good fail (high 40%) but who knows. Only time will tell chaps hey!
Also, what is the best way people have learnt to study? This was my first exam and i read the whole of the BPP book. Roughly, four chapters a week. Then used part of open tuitions webinars. Would people say that worked for them also?
Hi Jerry, I was looking for somebody who took Singapore variant. I heard Singapore variant is more difficult than tha UK or Global one. Actually this term I didn’t take F4, I plan to take it next sitting but I still can’t make up my mind on which variant I should take for F4 and F6 🙁
@ cool chick
you wont be penalised, the question required the difinition and if u give that u get ur 2 marks flat.
i once read an examiners comment that stated that one has to apply coomon sense by looking at the marks available for a scenario and pointing out ur answer. cuz u dont wanna define, explain and quote a case for a question worth 2 marks u do that for a question worth 5 marksI took the Scots variant, and thought the questions weren’t too bad.
But I couldn’t remember ANY case names, my mind just went blank – I hope I can at least pick up a few points by referencing the details even if I could quote the names
And I couldn’t remember gross misconduct for the cdda, even thought its the obvious one and I looked at that in my notes just before I went in!to get the marks in the statutory interpretation question you need a definition and a case
I used a case in every single question apart from question 10 and possibly one other
The case I used for question 8 was Hollier v Rambler Motors. Not sure if was mentioned in the open tuition lectures but I don’t think many people would have used it so hopefully that scores me some extra marks with the marker
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.