🇬🇧 Limited Time — UK Only·🎓 Free Learning for 1 Month·🤖 Free AI Training Included·📚 4,000+ Lessons · 35,000+ Quizzes·🏆 GCSE Mocks · Olympiad Papers·⚡ Selected Students Only · Limited Places·🎁 Free Value Worth £2,000·🇬🇧 Limited Time — UK Only·🎓 Free Learning for 1 Month·🤖 Free AI Training Included·📚 4,000+ Lessons · 35,000+ Quizzes·🏆 GCSE Mocks · Olympiad Papers·⚡ Selected Students Only · Limited Places·🎁 Free Value Worth £2,000·🇬🇧 Limited Time — UK Only·🎓 Free Learning for 1 Month·🤖 Free AI Training Included·📚 4,000+ Lessons · 35,000+ Quizzes·🏆 GCSE Mocks · Olympiad Papers·⚡ Selected Students Only · Limited Places·🎁 Free Value Worth £2,000·
All SQE mocks
SQE · Free Mock Test 191 of 250

Free SQE Mock Test 19120 Questions + Full Answers

Solicitors Qualifying Examination · Trainee solicitors · SQE1 sits: Jan & Jul

Sections: FLK1 · Applaa proprietary paper — free to download and print

No sign-up required · 100% free · Applaa proprietary content

Applaa SQE Mock Test 191

applaa-sqe-mock-191.pdf · 20 questions

Applaa proprietary content · Free to download and print · No sign-up required

Save PDF

Sample Questions — SQE Mock 191

8 of 20 shown

Correct answers highlighted in green. Full explanations included.

1
FLK1

A claimant (Ian) has applied for summary judgment against a defendant (Arthur) under CPR Part 24. What is the test that the court must apply to determine whether summary judgment should be granted?

  • A.The claimant must prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt.
  • B.The defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim, and there is no other compelling reason why the case should be disposed of at trial.
  • C.The value of the claim must be less than £10,000.
  • D.The defendant has failed to acknowledge service of the claim form within 14 days.
  • E.The dispute involves questions of international law.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Summary Judgment under CPR Part 24 Summary judgment allows a party to obtain judgment *without a full trial* where the opposing party's case has no real prospect of success. It is a cost-effective tool that avoids unnecessary litigation. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Who Can Apply: Either the claimant or defendant can apply for summary judgment under CPR Part 24.2. 2. The Test: The court will grant summary judgment if: - The defendant has no real prospect of successfully defendin

2
FLK1

A builder (Nora) contractually agreed to construct a wall for a customer (Philip) for £5,000. Halfway through the job, the builder states they cannot finish unless the customer pays an extra £1,000. The customer agrees. After completion, the customer refuses to pay the extra £1,000. Under Williams v Roffey Bros, is the promise to pay the extra £1,000 binding?

  • A.No, because performing an existing contractual duty can never be good consideration.
  • B.Yes, if the customer obtained a practical benefit (such as avoiding a penalty clause to a third party) and there was no economic duress.
  • C.No, because a promise to pay more must be approved by the County Court under CPR regulations.
  • D.Yes, because oral contracts are automatically binding regardless of consideration.
  • E.No, because it violates Section 52 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Consideration and Practical Benefit (Williams v Roffey Bros) The traditional rule (Stilk v Myrick) held that performing an existing contractual duty cannot be good consideration. Williams v Roffey Bros [1990] modified this rule: performing an existing duty CAN be valid consideration if the promisee obtains a 'practical benefit'. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Traditional Rule: A builder promising to finish what they're already contractually bound to do provides nothing new - no consi

3
FLK1

A shopkeeper (Olivia) places a designer coat in the shop window with a price tag of £350,000. A customer (Emma) enters the shop, places the cash on the counter, and demands to buy the item. The shopkeeper refuses to sell it. Is there a binding contract?

  • A.Yes, because placing the item in the window was a unilateral offer that was accepted by the customer's cash payment.
  • B.No, because the display of goods in a shop window is an invitation to treat, not an offer. Refusing to sell does not breach any contract (Fisher v Bell).
  • C.Yes, because consumer protection laws force retailers to sell all displayed items automatically.
  • D.No, because contracts for sales in shops require a written signed document.
  • E.Yes, because the shopkeeper was silent when the customer entered, constituting acceptance.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Invitation to Treat vs. Offer A binding contract requires a valid *offer* and *acceptance*. The display of goods in a shop window or on a shelf is an invitation to treat - an invitation for customers to make offers. It is fundamentally different from a legal offer, which can be accepted to form a contract. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. What is an Invitation to Treat?: A display of goods with a price tag is not an offer - it is merely an expression of willingness to deal on those ter

4
FLK1

Philip offered to sell a agricultural tractor to Daniel for £5,000. Daniel replied: 'I accept your offer, but I will pay £4,500.' Philip did not respond. Two days later, Daniel wrote to Philip saying: 'I accept your original offer of £5,000.' Is there a binding contract between Philip and Daniel?

  • A.Yes, because the second letter constituted a valid acceptance of the original offer.
  • B.Yes, because the original offer remained open and had not been revoked by the offeror.
  • C.No, because the counter-offer of the lower price killed the original offer, meaning it could no longer be accepted.
  • D.No, because a contract for sale of goods must be made in writing signed by both parties.
  • E.Yes, because the offeror's silence on the counter-offer constituted acceptance of the lower price.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Counter-Offer and the Death of the Original Offer A counter-offer is a rejection of the original offer combined with a new offer on different terms. Once a counter-offer is made, the original offer is extinguished - it cannot be revived or accepted later. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Original Offer: Philip offers the agricultural tractor for £5,000. 2. Counter-Offer: Daniel replies with £4,500 - this is a counter-offer, NOT an acceptance. Under Hyde v Wrench (1840), this kills the

5
FLK1

Prior to the formal incorporation of Omega Holdings Ltd, a promoter (Rose) signed a contract 'on behalf of the company' to purchase machinery from a supplier. The company is now incorporated. Which of the following best describes the liability of Rose and the company on this pre-incorporation contract?

  • A.The company is automatically bound by the contract upon incorporation, and the promoter is released.
  • B.The contract is completely void and unenforceable by any party.
  • C.The promoter is personally liable and entitled under the contract, subject to any agreement to the contrary, under Section 51 of the Companies Act 2006.
  • D.The company and the promoter are jointly and severally liable automatically.
  • E.The company can unilaterally ratify the contract without the supplier's agreement.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Pre-Incorporation Contracts (Section 51 CA 2006) A company cannot be a party to a contract before it legally exists. When a promoter signs a contract 'on behalf of' an unformed company, Section 51 CA 2006 provides the default rule: the promoter is personally bound. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Legal Status Before Incorporation: Omega Holdings Ltd had no legal existence when Rose signed the contract. There was no legal entity to be bound. 2. Apply Section 51: The contract takes effe

6
FLK1

Prior to the formal incorporation of Epsilon Foods plc, a promoter (Sophia) signed a contract 'on behalf of the company' to purchase machinery from a supplier. The company is now incorporated. Which of the following best describes the liability of Sophia and the company on this pre-incorporation contract?

  • A.The company is automatically bound by the contract upon incorporation, and the promoter is released.
  • B.The contract is completely void and unenforceable by any party.
  • C.The promoter is personally liable and entitled under the contract, subject to any agreement to the contrary, under Section 51 of the Companies Act 2006.
  • D.The company and the promoter are jointly and severally liable automatically.
  • E.The company can unilaterally ratify the contract without the supplier's agreement.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Pre-Incorporation Contracts (Section 51 CA 2006) A company cannot be a party to a contract before it legally exists. When a promoter signs a contract 'on behalf of' an unformed company, Section 51 CA 2006 provides the default rule: the promoter is personally bound. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Legal Status Before Incorporation: Epsilon Foods plc had no legal existence when Sophia signed the contract. There was no legal entity to be bound. 2. Apply Section 51: The contract takes eff

7
FLK1

A director of Zenith Retail Ltd (a private company limited by shares) wants to allot new shares to a new investor (William) to raise capital of £180,000. The company has only one class of ordinary shares. Under the Companies Act 2006, which of the following is correct regarding the director's authority to allot these shares?

  • A.The director has automatic statutory authority to allot the shares without shareholder approval under Section 550, unless restricted by the articles.
  • B.The director must always obtain authorization by ordinary resolution of the shareholders under Section 551.
  • C.The director must obtain authorization by special resolution of the shareholders to allot any shares.
  • D.The director requires the approval of the Board of Trade before alloting any class of shares.
  • E.Authority is only required if the allotment would cause the company to exceed its authorised share capital as stated in the memorandum.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Director's Authority to Allot Shares (Section 550 CA 2006) The Companies Act 2006 grants directors of private companies with a single class of shares a specific statutory power to allot shares of that class without requiring shareholder approval - unless the articles restrict this. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Identify Company Type: Zenith Retail Ltd is a *private* company limited by shares with *one* class of ordinary shares. 2. Apply Section 550: Directors of such a company have

8
FLK1

A seller (Ian) negligently makes a false statement of fact regarding the turnover of a business to a buyer (Bob), inducing them to buy it. The buyer subsequently discovers the fraud. Which of the following describes the remedies available under the Misrepresentation Act 1967?

  • A.The contract is automatically void, and the seller must be prosecuted criminally.
  • B.Rescission of the contract and/or damages under Section 2(1) of the Act.
  • C.The buyer can only recover damages and has no right to rescind the contract under any circumstances.
  • D.The contract is binding, and no remedy is available since the buyer should have checked the accounts (caveat emptor).
  • E.The seller is required to perform specific performance of the turnover projection.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Misrepresentation Act 1967 - Remedies The Misrepresentation Act 1967 classifies misrepresentation into three types (fraudulent, negligent, innocent) and provides different remedies for each. A negligent misrepresentation under Section 2(1) is the most commonly tested in SQE. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Identify the Type: A *negligent* false statement of fact made by Ian to induce Bob to buy. 2. Remedy Under Section 2(1): The innocent party (Bob) may: - Rescind the contract (ret

Download the PDF for all 20 questions + full mark scheme

Download PDF

Frequently Asked Questions

Is this SQE mock exam free?+

Yes. All 250 Applaa SQE mock exams are completely free — no registration, no paywall. Download PDF or view in browser.

What is FLK1 in the SQE exam?+

FLK1 (Functioning Legal Knowledge 1) is the first part of the SQE1 assessment, testing substantive and procedural law across multiple legal practice areas with multiple-choice questions. Each Applaa SQE mock covers FLK1-style questions with full explanations.

How many SQE practice questions are in each mock?+

Each Applaa SQE mock test contains 20 functioning legal knowledge questions with worked explanations, mirroring the question style of the real SQE1 assessment.

Are these SQE mock papers relevant for 2025?+

Yes. Applaa's SQE mock papers are updated for the current SQE1 syllabus and are suitable for candidates sitting SQE1 in 2025 and 2026.

Download This Mock

Free PDF — 20 questions with worked answers. Print it or attempt offline.

Download PDF Free

No sign-up · No paywall · Applaa proprietary

Paper Info

Exam
SQE
Mock number
191 of 250
Questions
20
Format
Multiple Choice (MCQ)
Sections
1
Audience
Trainee solicitors
Timing
SQE1 sits: Jan & Jul
Copyright
Applaa Proprietary

Sections Covered

  • FLK1

AI step-by-step guidance

Appy Buddy in the Applaa desktop app guides you through every question with Socratic AI tutoring — explains why each answer is right or wrong.

Download Applaa Free