🇬🇧 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 33 of 250

Free SQE Mock Test 3320 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 33

applaa-sqe-mock-33.pdf · 20 questions

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

Save PDF

Sample Questions — SQE Mock 33

8 of 20 shown

Correct answers highlighted in green. Full explanations included.

1
FLK1

A customer (Noah) 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

2
FLK1

A builder (Alice) contractually agreed to construct a wall for a customer (Emma) 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 director of Crown Estates Ltd is considering entering into a contract on behalf of the company where they have a personal interest. Under Section 177 of the Companies Act 2006, what is the director's primary duty regarding this conflict?

  • A.They must resign immediately from the board of directors.
  • B.They must declare the nature and extent of their interest to the other directors before the transaction is entered into.
  • C.They must obtain a court order approving the transaction.
  • D.They must transfer their shares in the company to a blind trust.
  • E.They must obtain unanimous shareholder consent at a general meeting.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Director's Duty to Declare Interest (Section 177 CA 2006) Directors must manage conflicts of interest transparently. Section 177 imposes a *duty to declare* any direct or indirect personal interest in a proposed transaction before the company enters into it - protecting the company from undisclosed self-dealing. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Identify the Conflict: The director has a personal interest in the transaction being considered by the board of Crown Estates Ltd. 2. Apply Sec

4
FLK1

A claimant was injured when a defendant (Xavier), who was engaged in operating a crane without safety barriers, 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: Xavier 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 19

5
FLK1

A claimant (Victoria) makes a valid CPR Part 36 settlement offer to the defendant (Liam) 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. Victoria's Offer: £500,000 - a valid Part 36 offer. 2. Liam's Decision: Rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. 3. Trial Outcome: Victoria wins £575,000 - which *exceeds* the Part 3

6
FLK1

Prior to the formal incorporation of Apex Retail plc, a promoter (Caleb) 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 Caleb 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: Apex Retail plc had no legal existence when Caleb signed the contract. There was no legal entity to be bound. 2. Apply Section 51: The contract takes effect

7
FLK1

Prior to the formal incorporation of Zephyr Services LLP, a promoter (Philip) 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 Philip 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: Zephyr Services LLP had no legal existence when Philip signed the contract. There was no legal entity to be bound. 2. Apply Section 51: The contract takes e

8
FLK1

A claimant (Samuel) makes a valid CPR Part 36 settlement offer to the defendant (Ryan) 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. Samuel's Offer: £500,000 - a valid Part 36 offer. 2. Ryan's Decision: Rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. 3. Trial Outcome: Samuel wins £575,000 - which *exceeds* the Part 36 of

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
33 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