Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HopingHopper

Solicitor Exam - How was it?

Recommended Posts

Were you guys giving too much detail about the exam?  Might have been deleted since LSUC doesn't like details being released. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't deal with it myself but I took a look at it. It's the same deal as the LSAT issue we see every four months. People want to de-stress and deconstruct the questions and forget that they're not supposed to give specific details.

 

"It sucked and I had trouble with the real estate questions" is fine. It started out with that.

 

"Question five with guy who had two businesses and wanted you to incorporate one, what was the answer?" is not okay, and that's the kind of thing we were starting to see.

 

I will take another look and unlock it again after editing out the stuff / removing posts that cross the line, but if that kind of thing starts up again the thread will be gone for good. We have no interest in attracting LSUC's irate attention. 

 

 

EDIT: unlocked and here it is. Please avoid describing what the exam actually contained :)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly, there were a couple of ethics questions I am convinced were not in the materials and just relied on general moral/ethical principles. But maybe they were in the materials and I just drew a blank.

 

That and one PR question had two correct answers. I know this since I wasted 2 minutes looking up both answers, because I was sure both were correct according to the materials. I probably picked the "wrong one". Such bullshit.

 

Some answers didn't even make sense grammatically.

 

Very poorly written exam. 

Edited by blank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was alright.

 

Definitely more difficult than the barristers. The business section was particularly difficult - probably because of the variety of topics covered in that section. I was a little surprised about the number of tax questions but was still able to answer most of them with confidence.

 

Maybe I'm missing something but I thought Estates and Real Estate were pretty easy - probably because the subjects were singularly focused and I took both of those classes (as well as Trusts). I ended up finishing the second half 40 minutes early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was alright.

 

Definitely more difficult than the barristers. The business section was particularly difficult - probably because of the variety of topics covered in that section. I was a little surprised about the number of tax questions but was still able to answer most of them with confidence.

 

Maybe I'm missing something but I thought Estates and Real Estate were pretty easy - probably because the subjects were singularly focused and I took both of those classes (as well as Trusts). I ended up finishing the second half 40 minutes early.

 

I am finding that taking courses in law school that appear on the bar is actually a HUGE help. Areas I took in law school I found much easier. If nothing else, if you have to guess, but you took the course in law school, your 'gut feeling' is probably a lot more accurate as you have a grasp for how the general law in the area works. Not to mention that there are always a few questions you can answer immediately due to law school knowledge. 

 

From talking to others, they are saying the same thing.

 

EDIT - For anyone reading this, I would not suggest structure your course selection around these exams. You most definitely can pass both without having taking the relevant courses. Courses that interest you and that will be relevant to your practise area definitely should come before courses for the sake of the bar. The materials alone are all you will ever need to pass. BUT... if you need a few more credits and can't figure out for the life of you what course to take.... I'd suggest just going with something that will help with these exams.

Edited by happydude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am finding that taking courses in law school that appear on the bar is actually a HUGE help. 

 

Agreed. I took Estates last semester and that part of the exam was a breeze. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I took Estates last semester and that part of the exam was a breeze. 

 

That is what I am hearing from everyone who took estates. I did not take it. That part of the exam was definitely not bad for me, but I still had to look up most. From talking to others, if you took estates, many could be answered immediately with no need to consult the materials. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said, I'm still not 100% confident I passed. The grading for this thing is such an enigma. But for now, I'm just happy to relax and let the results trickle in whenever the gods of LSUC decide it to be so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also had friends who took Real Estate and thought that part of the exam was easier for them as well. 

 

My advice for test takers is to read PR thoroughly and know it as well as you possibly can (it's only 110 pages in the materials), so that you can answer those questions immediately and use that saved time for all the index flipping thats bound to happen when you get to the substantive questions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something but I thought Estates and Real Estate were pretty easy - probably because the subjects were singularly focused and I took both of those classes (as well as Trusts). I ended up finishing the second half 40 minutes early.

 

I took neither and found Estates difficult, while Real Estate was remarkably easy (and I also finished the second half with about 40 minutes to spare). However, the different versions of the exam seem to have some variation in questions beyond just the order, so it may be that I (or you and I) lucked out with our Real Estate questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took neither and found Estates difficult, while Real Estate was remarkably easy (and I also finished the second half with about 40 minutes to spare). However, the different versions of the exam seem to have some variation in questions beyond just the order, so it may be that I (or you and I) lucked out with our Real Estate questions.

 

From talking with others (I know, I know.... you're not allowed....), I too am convinced each version of the exam had some questions that were unique to it. For the most part, however, it seemed the questions were the same regardless of version. Just ordered differently.  I don't think it would be possible to "get lucky" with real estate (or any other section). 90%+ would be the same questions as any other test taker.

 

I found real estate the hardest part of the exam. Estates, to me, was more intuitive and possible the easiest section (despite not taking wills). Business was in the middle. Having taken a handful of relevant courses definitely helped. 

Edited by happydude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Going to help Ryn out when I can. I have the same experiences as them.  The review teams do not have the previous files, but we can request the information from admin if we needed it.  Practically speaking though, the scenario you're worrying about will not happen. It's quite rare for us to look at your previous application.  That being said I've always been of the opinion that you should tell the committee about your experiences. No reason to remove them IMHO 
    • There are a lot of recent topics on this website that you can review that discuss ways a new call can obtain employment. I was called in June 2019 and got my current job off of contacting a partner from a firm that was hiring in one practice area and providing him with an application package. I then did two interview with them, as per normal. Other people I know tended to do the same thing, rather than relying on Indeed, etc., just because it is so competitive and unless you are a superstar, it can be hard to distinguish yourself. 
    • If OP went to TRU in 1L then UBC in 2L, I'd assume they just didn't have strong cover letters/resumes. I'm in 3L at TRU and received 9 Vancouver OCIs with the following grades: A-, B+, B+, B, B, B, B. I had heard rumours that transferring to UBC from TRU/UVic looks bad to employers unless you had a compelling reason to transfer (family issues, you got married, etc.). I have no idea how true that is, so yeah.
    • Its mostly hyperbole for the pace of it part, I don't really see myself holding a tin can and a sign that reads "Will review contracts for Food".  There is nothing wrong of course with teaching fundamental skills. Just borrowing a page from say, physics. They teach fundamental theories and its very important to. But its laterally supplanted with learning how to use sophisticated machinery, and now supplanted with learning how to design and program simulation models. We spend like, an hour a week learning to use Westlaw and Quicklaw which are the tools of yesterday. We learn nothing about how these tools are going to operate. But yes, case summaries have not changed. It literally went unchanged for over a decade. Not for criminal law obviously, but the summaries I looked at were virtually identical to mine in teaching ratios and so-on with the same cases used. My point wasn't that it isn't useful; but the way of teaching it has not adapted yet and this is IMO problematic.  Sorry I seem very bitter and so-on, but I am just kind of frustrated with how archaic some of the curriculum for law schools generally seems to be entering my second year. 
    • Thanks for taking the time to answer my previous question. I may be applying this cycle and have a question with regards to the Sketch part of the application. When I previously applied to Law School I added every little volunteer/extracurricular from the time I entered University. For simplicity purposes, I wanted to retain only the last 3-4 years of relevant experience. Would this be a problem for an individual that had more sketch items in a previous application 1-2 years ago? For example some activities are not included at all whereas they were on a previous application?  And just for the sake of knowing I guess, would you have access to and look back at a previous application if you were assessing a candidate?  
×
×
  • Create New...