🇬🇧 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 247 of 250

Free SQE Mock Test 24720 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 247

applaa-sqe-mock-247.pdf · 20 questions

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

Save PDF

Sample Questions — SQE Mock 247

8 of 20 shown

Correct answers highlighted in green. Full explanations included.

1
FLK1

A claimant (Olivia) makes a valid CPR Part 36 settlement offer to the defendant (William) of £18,500. The defendant rejects the offer. The case goes to trial, and the claimant wins, obtaining judgment of £21,275. What is the primary costs consequence under Part 36?

  • A.The claimant must pay the defendant's costs on the indemnity basis.
  • B.The defendant must pay the claimant's costs on the indemnity basis, plus interest on those costs, from the expiry of the relevant offer period.
  • C.The court will split the trial costs equally between both parties.
  • D.All costs recovery is capped at the Small Claims Track limit.
  • E.The defendant is immune to costs penalties because they defended the claim in good faith.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: CPR Part 36 Offers and Cost Consequences A Part 36 offer is a formal settlement mechanism under CPR. When a claimant's Part 36 offer is beaten at trial (i.e., judgment exceeds the offer), the defendant faces automatic cost penalties designed to encourage early settlement. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Olivia's Offer: £18,500 - a valid Part 36 offer. 2. William's Decision: Rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. 3. Trial Outcome: Olivia wins £21,275 - which *exceeds* the Part 36 o

2
FLK1

Yasmine offered to sell a printing press to Charlie for £95,000. Charlie replied: 'I accept your offer, but I will pay £85,500.' Yasmine did not respond. Two days later, Charlie wrote to Yasmine saying: 'I accept your original offer of £95,000.' Is there a binding contract between Yasmine and Charlie?

  • 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: Yasmine offers the printing press for £95,000. 2. Counter-Offer: Charlie replies with £85,500 - this is a counter-offer, NOT an acceptance. Under Hyde v Wrench (1840), this kills the or

3
FLK1

Jack offered to sell a residential apartment to Mia for £150,000. Mia replied: 'I accept your offer, but I will pay £135,000.' Jack did not respond. Two days later, Mia wrote to Jack saying: 'I accept your original offer of £150,000.' Is there a binding contract between Jack and Mia?

  • 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: Jack offers the residential apartment for £150,000. 2. Counter-Offer: Mia replies with £135,000 - this is a counter-offer, NOT an acceptance. Under Hyde v Wrench (1840), this kills the

4
FLK1

A builder (Georgia) contractually agreed to construct a wall for a customer (Helen) 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

5
FLK1

Prior to the formal incorporation of Vanguard Industries plc, a promoter (Amelia) 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 Amelia 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: Vanguard Industries plc had no legal existence when Amelia signed the contract. There was no legal entity to be bound. 2. Apply Section 51: The contract tak

6
FLK1

A builder (Charlie) contractually agreed to construct a wall for a customer (Beatrice) 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

7
FLK1

A claimant (Amelia) makes a valid CPR Part 36 settlement offer to the defendant (Zachary) of £500,000. The defendant rejects the offer. The case goes to trial, and the claimant wins, obtaining judgment of £575,000. What is the primary costs consequence under Part 36?

  • A.The claimant must pay the defendant's costs on the indemnity basis.
  • B.The defendant must pay the claimant's costs on the indemnity basis, plus interest on those costs, from the expiry of the relevant offer period.
  • C.The court will split the trial costs equally between both parties.
  • D.All costs recovery is capped at the Small Claims Track limit.
  • E.The defendant is immune to costs penalties because they defended the claim in good faith.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: CPR Part 36 Offers and Cost Consequences A Part 36 offer is a formal settlement mechanism under CPR. When a claimant's Part 36 offer is beaten at trial (i.e., judgment exceeds the offer), the defendant faces automatic cost penalties designed to encourage early settlement. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Amelia's Offer: £500,000 - a valid Part 36 offer. 2. Zachary's Decision: Rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. 3. Trial Outcome: Amelia wins £575,000 - which *exceeds* the Part 36

8
FLK1

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

  • 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: Julia offers the sports car for £5,000. 2. Counter-Offer: Nora replies with £4,500 - this is a counter-offer, NOT an acceptance. Under Hyde v Wrench (1840), this kills the original offe

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
247 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