Did you sit the fifth AIBE today (25 August 2013)? How was it for you? Did the questions make sense? Was there enough time? Did anyone cheat?
Please share experiences, praise and criticism.
Bar examinee Mohit Singh wrote on the legal blog One Law Street that the paper was “moderately easy”:
“Following the pattern adopted in the AIBE IV, a huge chunk of questions could have been answered just by looking into the Section/Article number from the respective bare acts.
What was tough: [I hated this part] Around a dozen of questions were based on statements made by jurists. For instance, certain quotes on tort, evidence etc. were reproduced and it was asked to name the jurists. Options included authors like Salmond, Pollock, Winfield, Phipson etc. Other than these there were several quotes/principles based on English judgments which are not very very commonly talked/discussed (from an angle of a law student). However one carrying books might have been able to answer them. (Of course there would be people who did not require books to search for these answers).”
Most students had carried the earlier but obsolete preparatory materials into the exam, wrote Singh.
Last year’s bar exam was marred by 470 candidates’ grades being changed from pass to fail and hiccups in organisation and delays in the exam and grading, after the last-minute change to a new AIBE contractor by the BCI.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
For a fresher who has studied religiously for his/her LL.b. degree, the exam would have been a cakewalk for at least 70 questions, not involving the enactment year, case laws or the 'words quoted by' questions.. and for rest who graduated couple of years back (including me), it was a whole revision of bare acts and hence I am sure many would have struggled for time since you don't remember the exact section for amalgamation of companies for national interest by GOVT. (which actually was S.396) or the sub-section informing the power of police officer if obstructed from discharging duties (S. 41(c)).
Overall, I would thank BCI for giving allowing mindless exams to be conducted open book and I pray for the batches to come when the open book system would be withdrawn and the papers would be set by same bunch of people...
p.s. you don't ask about cheating in an open book exam.. ssshhhh :P
It was no cake walk. We did hv to sweat a bit!
That said I feel the process was better managed this time. Just speaking my my experience - There were no hitches with confirming details, downloading the hall ticket. Exam in Mumbai started 15 mins late but they gave us exact 3 hours.
The whole exam was a sham - the BCI is just getting rich at the expense of all our careers.
I was at Rizvi Bombay too. Examination was smooth. Though many asked for bare acts freely from others and the invigilator assisted in passing the bare acts. There was copying too wherein students did ask many others for answers. I was asked too, but ignored. :P
Paper was distributed 15 mins late, but we were allotted additional 15 mins for completion. College principle and invigilator in charge were friendly and the invigilator did try to stop students from copying as and when she could.
Being from one of the top National Law Schools, I did not expect few questions that I saw. I did slog for law entrances mugging who said what and which judge said what. I expected this to be an examination testing our application of law than knowing all case laws of what few judges said 200 years back. This part was shocking and alarming.
Further, I do not know whether such questions were present in the "earlier" AIBE study material, but if yes, they should have distributed it to us for free! There might be those who do not refer the old AIBE study material. If we carry bare acts for an examination, we would not have random case laws or millions of things past judges said in them.
Exam was both easy and difficult. I hope BCI understands that this is to test a lawyers aptitude/ application of law rather than quotations or definitions (which may run into millions). The rest, we had prepared for our Law entrance exams/ law courses in college. I think this was an exam which should have been an open mobile/ google examination for best results. Probably you still wouldn't find some answers (case laws). There are better ways of giving difficult questions.
Rest was a cake walk. You only needed your bare acts.[/qQuoting Rizvi mumbai:
Even I was allotted the same centre. The paper was given 15 mins late, I agree, but, they did allow 15 mins extra time to complete.
About AIBE-V Exam paper- Overall the paper looked moderately easy except the questions based on statements of the various jurists and the case laws (One could only shot a gun in the air without any clue). The rest of the part was all about BARE ACTS.
If you score anything less than 70 in this paper, I would say, you didn't do well.
Invigilators were strict and did not allow copying, shifting of seats and borrowing bare acts/material to refer to. Tho ppl did manage to borrow bare acts/books when the invigilators were not looking.
I was at Rizvi Bombay too. Examination was smooth. Though many asked for bare acts freely from others and the invigilator assisted in passing the bare acts. There was copying too wherein students did ask many others for answers. I was asked too, but ignored. :P
Paper was distributed 15 mins late, but we were allotted additional 15 mins for completion. College principle and invigilator in charge were friendly and the invigilator did try to stop students from copying as and when she could.
Being from one of the top National Law Schools, I did not expect few questions that I saw. I did slog for law entrances mugging who said what and which judge said what. I expected this to be an examination testing our application of law than knowing all case laws of what few judges said 200 years back. This part was shocking and alarming.
Further, I do not know whether such questions were present in the "earlier" AIBE study material, but if yes, they should have distributed it to us for free! There might be those who do not refer the old AIBE study material. If we carry bare acts for an examination, we would not have random case laws or millions of things past judges said in them.
Exam was both easy and difficult. I hope BCI understands that this is to test a lawyers aptitude/ application of law rather than quotations or definitions (which may run into millions). The rest, we had prepared for our Law entrance exams/ law courses in college. I think this was an exam which should have been an open mobile/ google examination for best results. Probably you still wouldn't find some answers (case laws). There are better ways of giving difficult questions.
Rest was a cake walk. You only needed your bare acts.
Questions were pedantic. Basically this bar exam is a judiciary style exam. That was the easy if annoying part, flipping thru bare acts to find trivial answers to obscure questions. Things like fine amounts or compoundable or bailable. The key to answering these questions is to really understand how to use a bare act. What info you can find where.
The second type of questions were about quotes and who write which book. Jurisprudence. Frankly, immaterial. I'd ask what relevance these sorts of questions have to do with the actual practise of law, but why to bother?
This bar exam tests ZERO logical or analytical reasoning skills. It is a classic Indian style exam which is to say it requires nonapplication of mind but rather rote memorization of microminutia or seeking answers to otherwise very straight forward questions which any nonlawyer can easily answer for herself with the mere help of a basic Google search.
At least two questions had typos. One or two others so poorly written so as to leave me scratching my head what the true question was.
lots of cheating going in. Unimpressed with the invigilators. Every five minutes, another disruptive announcement. Classic chaos. Bubble sheets can only be marked with a prn, which means one you select B, you cannot change your mind. We were told NOT to write on the exam question paper and then that turned into a ten minute diversion of which I protested, until they decided we could write in the booklets. Confusion as usual.
I found it to be very disappointing from a bar exam perspective, this being my fourth bar exam - NY Bar Exam, Multistate Bar Exam, Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam and the US Patent & Trademark Bar Exam. This AIBE does not qualify for more than a trivia contest from my perspective and has little to nothing to do with the actual practise of law or much of anything I learned in an Indian law school or any law school for that matter.
I suggest the BCI reconsider what exactly it is that they want to test to prove minimum competency to become an advocate vs. Whether we should be Trivial Pursuit experts.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first