🇬🇧 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 28 of 250

Free SQE Mock Test 2820 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 28

applaa-sqe-mock-28.pdf · 20 questions

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

Save PDF

Sample Questions — SQE Mock 28

8 of 20 shown

Correct answers highlighted in green. Full explanations included.

1
FLK1

A director of Apex Retail plc (a private company limited by shares) wants to allot new shares to a new investor (Victor) 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: Apex Retail plc is a *private* company limited by shares with *one* class of ordinary shares. 2. Apply Section 550: Directors of such a company have po

2
FLK1

A customer (Henry) is walking down a warehouse aisle when a heavy crate falls from a high shelf and injures them. The claimant has no evidence of what exactly caused the crate to fall. Can the claimant rely on the doctrine of 'Res Ipsa Loquitur'?

  • A.No, because the claimant must prove the exact negligent act to bring a claim.
  • B.Yes, if the thing causing the accident was under the sole control of the defendant, and the accident is one that does not occur in the ordinary course of things without negligence.
  • C.No, because Res Ipsa Loquitur only applies to breach of contract claims.
  • D.Yes, but the claimant's damages are automatically capped at £10,000.
  • E.No, unless the defendant has already been convicted in a criminal court.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Res Ipsa Loquitur ('The Thing Speaks for Itself') Res ipsa loquitur is an evidentiary doctrine that *shifts the evidential burden* to the defendant to provide an explanation for an accident. It assists claimants who cannot identify the exact cause of an accident but can show the circumstances make negligence the most probable explanation. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Three Requirements (Scott v London and St Katherine Docks [1865]): - The *thing* causing harm was under the defen

3
FLK1

A director of Epsilon Foods plc (a private company limited by shares) wants to allot new shares to a new investor (Ian) to raise capital of £350,000. 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: Epsilon Foods plc is a *private* company limited by shares with *one* class of ordinary shares. 2. Apply Section 550: Directors of such a company have

4
FLK1

A director of Meridian Group Ltd (a private company limited by shares) wants to allot new shares to a new investor (Charlotte) to raise capital of £25,000. 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: Meridian Group Ltd is a *private* company limited by shares with *one* class of ordinary shares. 2. Apply Section 550: Directors of such a company have

5
FLK1

A claimant was injured when a defendant (Harry), who was engaged in delivering expired pharmaceuticals, caused an accident. The defendant admits they owed the claimant a duty of care and breached it, but argues that the claimant's own negligence contributed to the injury. Under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, what is the legal effect of contributory negligence?

  • A.It acts as a complete defense, and the claimant receives no damages.
  • B.It reduces the claimant's damages to the extent that is just and equitable, reflecting the claimant's share of responsibility.
  • C.It has no effect on damages but requires the claimant to pay the defendant's legal costs.
  • D.It shifts the burden of proof to the claimant to show that they took all reasonable precautions.
  • E.It renders the claim null and void, requiring allocation to criminal arbitration.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Contributory Negligence (Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945) Contributory negligence is a partial defence - it does not defeat the claim entirely, but reduces the damages awarded to reflect the claimant's own responsibility for their injury. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Identify the Defence: Harry admits negligence but argues the claimant also contributed to their own injury (e.g., not wearing a seatbelt, failing to follow safety instructions). 2. Legal Effect (LRCNA 194

6
FLK1

A claimant (James) has applied for summary judgment against a defendant (Grace) 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

7
FLK1

An employee of Aura Goods Ltd negligently injures a customer (Katelyn) while driving a company delivery van to make a scheduled delivery. The customer sues Aura Goods Ltd. What is the legal doctrine that allows the employer to be held liable, and what is the test?

  • A.Res Ipsa Loquitur; requires showing the van was in a defective condition.
  • B.Vicarious liability; requires showing that the employee committed a tort in the course of their employment.
  • C.Strict liability; requires showing the employer acted with malicious intent.
  • D.Privity of liability; requires a signed agreement between the employer and the customer.
  • E.Contributory liability; requires allocating the claim to the Multi-Track.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Vicarious Liability Vicarious liability makes an employer strictly liable for torts committed by their employee, where the tort occurs in the 'course of employment'. It is a form of secondary liability - the employer is liable even without their own fault. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Identify the Employer-Employee Relationship: The delivery driver is an employee of Aura Goods Ltd (not an independent contractor). 2. Course of Employment Test: Was the tort committed while performing

8
FLK1

A claimant (Katelyn) has applied for summary judgment against a defendant (Georgia) 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

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
28 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