LW*** F4 June 2012 Exam was … Comments and Instant Poll ***

Was just wondering how the F4 English 2012 variant was, what topics were prominent, what kind of questions were they ?

Thanks!

Hi Guys I am routing for you all I hope you did well.comparing to last year how was it ? what topics were tested?

hey guys what came on the exam?

how important are treasury shares and bribery for F4 June 2012 ?

I thought the exam was fine, no major surprises and no really difficult areas.

The only areas I struggled on were:

Q1a: Importance of the hierarchy in court structure (7 marks)

Didn't quite get what he wanted. I talked about judicial precedent, which courts are bound/not bound, who can set precedents, stare decisis etc.

Q2b: In relation to formation of contract, explain the meaning of a tender.

I had no idea what "a tender" was. I have heard the word before but I cannot recall ever seeing this word in my course/revision notes. It was only worth 3 marks. I made a few points about consideration and moved on.

Q6c: Explain a written resolution (worth 5 marks).

This was in my notes but I hadn't revised it properly.

The last question, on director status and liability, I found difficult because I wasn't sure exactly what the examiner wanted. I wrote about fraudulent and wrongful trading.

Summary of areas covered:

Application:
Director status and liability
Liquidated/penalty clauses and non-financial losses
Defining employed/self-employed and dismissal rights

Knowledge:
Importance of court structure
Define Invitation to Treat and Tender
Ord/Pref shares and debentures
Ltd/PLC/LLP differences
Ord/Special and written resolutions
Compulsory Winding-Up

I'm missing one question out of that list that I can't recall.

No time pressures.

Not too bad.

Doctine of precedent
Invitation to treat
Shares
Employed vs self employed
Breach of contract
Resolutions
Liquidation

Think there was a negligence question too, but my memory is shot!! :}

Glad I wasn't the only one who had never come across tender in my law revision!! I know in the construction industry you tender for contracts, ie say you'll take on a contract for £x/month and then the "seller" usually receives multiple tenders and chooses from them so I just went along those lines.

Compulsory winding up was a sod, I now realise that I focussed a bit too much on voluntary, I could have nailed it if it was one word different haha!

The last Directors question got me a bit too, I think it was asking quite specificly about the Act which I couldn't remember a thing about so I ended up writing a little about the veil of incorporation and fraudulent trading and a bit about executive/non-exec/shadow directors

Yes there was! A question on defenses in case of tort of negligence ( contributory and volenti non fit injuria).

@oltagolloshi said:
Yes there was! A question on defenses in case of tort of negligence ( contributory and volenti non fit injuria).

Thats the one , thanks !

@miketye said:
Glad I wasn't the only one who had never come across tender in my law revision!! I know in the construction industry you tender for contracts, ie say you'll take on a contract for £x/month and then the "seller" usually receives multiple tenders and chooses from them so I just went along those lines.

Compulsory winding up was a sod, I now realise that I focussed a bit too much on voluntary, I could have nailed it if it was one word different haha!

The last Directors question got me a bit too, I think it was asking quite specificly about the Act which I couldn't remember a thing about so I ended up writing a little about the veil of incorporation and fraudulent trading and a bit about executive/non-exec/shadow directors

I had very similar problems to you with this paper, as well as private company written resolutions, I wrote mainly about the resolutions in terms on public companies.

Found the first half of the paper ok though !

Tenders are regarded as invitations to treat. Thats all I know.

F4 Russia was ok.

F4 Global - I skipped the resolutions during study and it was tested... everything else was not bad.

Hi there,

I guess the exam (F4 ENG) was OK, not really difficult, it was possible to include more difficult topics but there was not any such topic. Though I do agree with the above posts, the first question (part a) was not quite clear what answer was expected by the examiner, I tried to show the whole system of courts and also mentioned which cases could be binding according to the hierarchy of the courts.
The last question was also unclear regarding directors, I wrote something about directors, de facto directors and shadow directors, also spoke about the liability of a disqualified director, fraudulent and wrongful trading (though noted that a question didn't indicate whether the company went insolvent or not)
The resolutions were tested (all kinds :D), I did not like this part. I don't think I made an excellent answer but I think I passed this question.

There was no treasury shares and bribery examined and don't remember also anything regarding auditors (I was expecting questions on these areas :D)

So hoping for the best wish you all "pass" and good luck :)

Regards,
Tammi

I was a bit thrown by the first question, wasn't sure what they wanted and also the tenders threw me. 1st scenario question was a bit scarry and I think I got bogged down with veil of incorportation on the last question!!! Think I have missed out on loads of potential marks re the meetings and resolutions, wasn't sure if they were talking about public or private companies and freaked a bit!!

Employment question was nice - hard to find 5 points to say about Volenti and contributory negligence each!!!

F4 RUS, surprisingly the exam seemed to be easier than all past papers.
However, it's better to judge based on marks gained.

Thanks guys (OP). I always visited the site whenever I got stuck. There are a few cases where focussing on Mike teaching made me recall in exams

Advise on finding a way of remembering cases helped a lot.
Managed to get cases and articles in.
F4 Global doesnot have a lot of cases and therefore forcussed on Articles.

The paper was manageable.

Lets see what happens.

Yeah, I was also expecting that Bribery Act would be tested but...... anyway, I hope August 8th would turn out to be a happy day for all of us.
Good luck to all !

Hi all,

For saying I was absolutely terrified about this exam yesterday I didnt find it too bad.. the 'tender' question threw me a bit which seems to be the case for a lot of people. I didnt want to waffle on so for three marks I just skipped it and moved on to save time. I thought it went ok overall but you never know. I thought I passed F8 with flying colours and I only got 53!! Fingers crossed!

The examier always says not to try and guess questions on this paper and that you can't predict what is going to come up- so I wasnt really expecting bribery or treasury shares as it would have been way too obvious! :) Having said that I bet its on the next paper!

How did you find q8? Not sure if I got the right point in section a, I wrote about anticipatory breach mainly...?

i think there was not enough time, at least for me as not mother tongue English speaker, the Q quite easy comparing to previous exam but i believe not only me struggled to find the right terms in a relatively short time to express my knowledge in writing.I hope we all did better than good.

Good luck!

@livnwin said:
F4 RUS, surprisingly the exam seemed to be easier than all past papers.
However, it's better to judge based on marks gained.

Tried rus today! Did u pass?))

Hi everyone,
what about Q 8 on Az. Co & B. Co?
part a) was asking whether damages can be claimed (B. breached the contract but Az could sell the ship to another Co for the same 25 m
If I remember correctly - I stated that no damages are likely to be sued - as NO damages are actually incurred
part b) 20% penalty - stated as likely to be ruled as excessive (case with the paintings)

Hi all,

Tender is like a Bid, but it is done for example: from local authorties to other private companies. Is an invitation to make an offer regarding a project, and in the end of the process only one of the offers is accepted ( ussually the most cost effective) all the remaining offers are simply rejected.

Hope I did OK. For me question 7 re the complusory winding up - was a bit hard becouse didnt revised it well. however wrote smth but not sure.May be I'll get 2-3 points...
The hierarchy of the Courts, i did the same as one of you.. talked a bit of each, and which binds which, the overrruling power ect.
glad there was no bribery question.

Good luck to everyone!

On the (ENG) Paper Questions, 8, 9 and 10...does anyone know the conclusions??

Question 8 - I think it was about anticipatory breach, damages and liquitable damage clause. For the first part I said that Az cannot claim damages becuase he sold the ship for the same value. For the second part I mentioned penalty clause and said that the clause was invalid as it was too excessive!

Question 9- was this about redundency and unfair dismissal? were they both liable for this? Did anyone mention the self employed/employed test??

Question 10- Directors/fraudulent trading? I messed up on this one.

revised like all financial crime except m.laundering and CDDA and bammmmm!!!!!
CDDA....
didnt revise insolvency......and bammmmmmmm

Q8 I also think it was about anticipatory breach, damages and liquidated damages...

Q9 I talked about employee/self employed test comparing 2 workers. I think Eve was employed and she could claim redundancy payment (2 weeks per each worked year)
And the orher guy was self employed and he couldnt claim anything.

Q10 I messed it up, I talked about disquaified director that he should be liable...

The exam seemed pretty fair..i was definitely expecting the bribery act to come up but funny enough it didnt..i ran out of time though which doesnt seem to great..doesanyone know if the markers check answers in bullet points..or do they just give u big 0 for those lol

Are self empolyed entited to notice of termination tho? or redundency?

I hated question 10!

This exam was doable while at the same time challenging. It was an excellent balance not too easy and not too hard. I really appreciate that the scenarios were to the point and didn't waste your exam time reading it.