🇬🇧 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 4 of 250

Free SQE Mock Test 420 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 4

applaa-sqe-mock-4.pdf · 20 questions

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

Save PDF

Sample Questions — SQE Mock 4

8 of 20 shown

Correct answers highlighted in green. Full explanations included.

1
FLK1

A driver (Nathan) crashes into a pedestrian (Diana) who is crossing the street, causing physical injuries. To establish negligence, the claimant must show that the defendant owed them a duty of care. How does the court establish if a duty of care exists for physical damage caused by positive actions?

  • A.By applying the three-stage Caparo test including fair, just, and reasonable criteria in every case.
  • B.By finding that the case falls within an established duty category (such as road users to other road users) where a duty is automatically owed (Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire).
  • C.By checking if the defendant signed a voluntary duty registration form.
  • D.By proving the defendant intended to cause physical harm.
  • E.By allocating the claim to the Fast Track under CPR guidelines.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: Duty of Care - Established Categories (Robinson v Chief Constable) Not every case requires a full Caparo analysis. The Supreme Court in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018] confirmed that where a case falls into an *established duty category*, the duty is owed as a matter of precedent. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Is this an Established Category?: A driver ('Nathan') causing physical injury to a pedestrian (Diana) through a positive act clearly falls within an

2
FLK1

Julia offered to sell a vintage watch to Lucas for £1,500. Lucas replied: 'I accept your offer, but I will pay £1,350.' Julia did not respond. Two days later, Lucas wrote to Julia saying: 'I accept your original offer of £1,500.' Is there a binding contract between Julia and Lucas?

  • 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 vintage watch for £1,500. 2. Counter-Offer: Lucas replies with £1,350 - this is a counter-offer, NOT an acceptance. Under Hyde v Wrench (1840), this kills the original

3
FLK1

A claimant was injured when a defendant (Zachary), who was engaged in speeding in a residential zone, 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: Zachary 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 1

4
FLK1

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

5
FLK1

A shopkeeper (Victor) places a vintage watch in the shop window with a price tag of £5,000. A customer (Nathan) 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

6
FLK1

A claimant (George) makes a valid CPR Part 36 settlement offer to the defendant (Isabella) of £150,000. The defendant rejects the offer. The case goes to trial, and the claimant wins, obtaining judgment of £172,500. 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. George's Offer: £150,000 - a valid Part 36 offer. 2. Isabella's Decision: Rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. 3. Trial Outcome: George wins £172,500 - which *exceeds* the Part 3

7
FLK1

A business wants to apply for an interim injunction to prevent a competitor (Nora) from using its trade secrets. According to the guidelines in American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd, what is the first question the court must consider?

  • A.Whether the applicant is willing to pay the court fees.
  • B.Whether there is a serious question to be tried.
  • C.Whether the defendant has a criminal record.
  • D.Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for either party.
  • E.Whether the trial can be completed within 6 months.

✓ Worked Explanation

Core Concept: American Cyanamid Test for Interim Injunctions An interim injunction is a temporary court order preventing a party from doing (or requiring them to do) something, pending a full trial. The American Cyanamid test provides a structured three-stage analysis. Step-by-Step Resolution: 1. Stage 1 - Is there a Serious Question to be Tried?: First, establish that the claim is not frivolous or vexatious. There must be a *genuine dispute with arguable merit*. If yes, proceed to stage 2. 2.

8
FLK1

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

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
4 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