TheoryFree SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep Practice Test
Take a free SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep practice test for 2026 with questions, answers, explanations, PDF download and timed mock exam links.
SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep Questions
Open each answer, read the explanation, then continue into the full practice flow.
Q1A property developer is seeking to prevent a neighbouring landowner from constructing a warehouse that would block natural light to the developer's recently completed residential building. The developer applies for an interim injunction. The proposed warehouse construction has not yet begun, but planning permission has been granted and materials have been delivered to the site. The developer's solicitor advises that the court will require security before granting relief.
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The court will commonly require an undertaking in damages because a mandatory injunction would disrupt the status quo by requiring the neighbour to refrain from starting planned construction.
The correct answer recognizes that although the injunction sought appears prohibitory in form (restraining construction), it may have mandatory effect by disrupting the status quo where the neighbour has obtained planning permission and prepared to build. Courts typically require an undertaking in damages to protect the defendant if the injunction is later found to have been wrongly granted. Distractor 1 incorrectly suggests no undertaking is needed for purely prohibitory relief. Distractor 2 wrongly states that undertakings are never required when planning permission exists. Distractor 3 misapplies the test by focusing on construction timing rather than status quo disruption. Distractor 4 incorrectly suggests mandatory injunctions cannot be granted at the interim stage.
Q2A claimant issues proceedings in the County Court against a defendant contractor for damages of £120,000 arising from alleged defective building work. The claim is allocated to the multi-track. The court gives case management directions requiring the parties to file and exchange costs budgets by a specified date, which is 21 days before the first case management conference. The defendant's solicitor is unfamiliar with costs budgeting requirements and asks whether the same obligations would apply if the claim had been allocated to a different track.
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: Costs budgets are required on the multi-track where directed by the court, but not on the small claims track where costs recovery is generally limited to fixed costs.
The correct answer identifies that costs budgeting under CPR Part 3 Section II applies to multi-track cases (and some fast track cases) where the court so directs, but the small claims track operates under different costs rules with very limited costs recovery, making detailed budgeting unnecessary and disproportionate. Distractor 1 wrongly suggests budgets are never required on fast track. Distractor 2 incorrectly states that all civil claims require budgets regardless of track. Distractor 3 misapplies the financial threshold for budgeting exemptions. Distractor 4 wrongly suggests budgets are optional rather than mandatory when directed.
Q3A potential claimant consults a solicitor about a personal injury claim arising from a road traffic accident that occurred 34 months ago. The claimant has one witness who supports the claimant's version of events, but the defendant has two witnesses who provide a different account. The claimant's witness is the claimant's brother-in-law, who was a passenger in the claimant's vehicle. The defendant's witnesses are independent motorists who were traveling in the opposite direction. The solicitor is assessing the merits of the claim before advising whether to commence proceedings. Medical evidence clearly establishes the extent of the claimant's injuries.
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The claim faces significant evidential challenges due to conflicting witness accounts, and limitation is about to expire, requiring urgent consideration of whether to issue protective proceedings despite witness reliability concerns.
The correct answer recognizes both the critical limitation issue (the three-year limitation period for personal injury claims is nearly expired at 34 months) and the witness reliability problem (the claimant's only witness is a family member passenger, while the defendant has two independent witnesses). A solicitor must not neglect limitation when advising on proceedings, as specified in the assessment criteria. The answer balances the need to preserve the claim by issuing protective proceedings with the evidential weakness on liability. Distractor 1 ignores the imminent limitation deadline. Distractor 2 wrongly dismisses the relevance of witness relationships to credibility. Distractor 3 incorrectly suggests that strong medical evidence on quantum overcomes weak liability evidence. Distractor 4 wrongly implies that limitation can be easily extended.
Q4A claimant in a clinical negligence action wishes to obtain expert evidence on three distinct issues: whether the defendant surgeon's operative technique fell below the acceptable standard; whether the hospital's post-operative monitoring protocols were adequate; and whether the claimant's subsequent psychological harm was a foreseeable consequence of the alleged negligence. The claimant's solicitor is instructing experts and drafting letters of instruction. The claimant's legal team includes a partner who previously worked as a nurse and has strong views on appropriate post-operative care standards.
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: Separate experts in surgery, hospital protocols, and psychiatry should be instructed, with questions limited to matters requiring specialist opinion in each field, excluding areas within the court's or solicitor's competence.
The correct answer applies the principle that expert evidence should be limited to matters requiring specialist opinion and that questions to experts should be confined to issues genuinely outside the expertise of legal representatives and the court. Each of the three issues requires different specialist knowledge: surgical practice, hospital administration protocols, and psychiatric causation. The partner's nursing background does not provide expert-level opinion on any of these specific areas and cannot substitute for properly qualified expert evidence. Distractor 1 wrongly suggests a single expert can cover all issues. Distractor 2 incorrectly implies the partner's nursing experience can replace expert evidence. Distractor 3 wrongly suggests expert evidence on foreseeability is unnecessary. Distractor 4 incorrectly limits the number of experts arbitrarily.
Q5A solicitor is preparing a witness statement for trial in a breach of contract claim. The witness is a former employee of the claimant who left the company two years ago. The statement includes: (1) the witness's recollection of events during their employment; (2) the witness's opinion that the defendant 'clearly intended to breach the agreement'; (3) a paragraph stating 'I was told by my manager that the defendant had said they would not perform'; and (4) the witness's signature and a statement of truth. The statement runs to 15 pages and includes extensive commentary on the defendant's business practices unrelated to the contract dispute. Which of the following best describes the primary deficiency in this witness statement?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The statement contains inadmissible hearsay and argumentative opinion that should be excluded.
The statement is deficient because it includes hearsay (what the manager was told) and argumentative opinion ('clearly intended to breach'). Witness statements must be confined to matters of fact within the witness's own knowledge and should avoid argument. The statement is also prolix with irrelevant commentary. While the signature and statement of truth are present, the content deficiencies are more fundamental. The other options incorrectly focus on the witness's status, the statement's length alone, or formatting issues that are secondary to the substantive inadmissibility of hearsay and opinion evidence.
Q6A claimant's solicitor is preparing the trial bundle for a High Court commercial dispute scheduled to commence in five days. The court's case management order specified that the bundle must be lodged seven days before trial and contain: pleadings, disclosure documents, witness statements, expert reports, and a chronology. The solicitor discovers that: (1) the bundle contains all pleadings and witness statements but omits three key disclosed emails that support the claimant's case; (2) the bundle includes the claimant's expert report but not the defendant's, which was exchanged on time; (3) the bundle is indexed but pages are not numbered consecutively; and (4) no chronology has been prepared. The defendant's solicitor has not yet filed their bundle. Which of the following represents the most serious procedural failing that could result in sanctions?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: Failure to lodge the bundle within the seven-day deadline as specified in the court order.
The most serious failing is missing the court-ordered deadline for lodging the bundle seven days before trial. Non-compliance with court directions can result in sanctions including costs orders, adverse inferences, or adjournment with costs consequences. While the other deficiencies (missing documents, lack of pagination, no chronology, and omission of the defendant's expert report) are serious and must be remedied, breach of a court order deadline is the most fundamental procedural failing. The court can impose sanctions under CPR 3.9 for failure to comply with rules, practice directions, or court orders.
Q7A claimant in a High Court commercial dispute seeks to rely on an email chain as evidence of the defendant's instructions to a third-party supplier. The email chain consists of: (1) an email from the defendant's purchasing director to the supplier requesting specific goods; (2) the supplier's reply confirming receipt and providing a delivery estimate; and (3) a subsequent email from the supplier's warehouse manager to the purchasing director stating 'our sales representative told me you needed urgent delivery'. The defendant objects to the admissibility of the third email on hearsay grounds. The claimant argues that the entire chain is admissible as business records under the Civil Evidence Act 1995. No hearsay notice was served, and the trial is in three weeks. Which of the following best describes the admissibility of the evidence?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The third email contains inadmissible multiple hearsay; the claimant must serve a hearsay notice to rely on it.
The third email contains multiple hearsay (what the sales representative told the warehouse manager) and is not automatically admissible as a business record. While emails (1) and (2) may qualify as direct communications or business records, the third email reports a statement made by another person not party to the email. The claimant must serve a hearsay notice under CPR 33.2 to rely on hearsay evidence, though the court has discretion to admit evidence despite late or non-service. The business records exception under section 1 Civil Evidence Act 1995 does not automatically render all documents in a chain admissible when they contain statements made outside the business record itself. The other options incorrectly assume blanket admissibility of business records or overstate the automatic application of exceptions.
Q8In a professional negligence claim against an architect, the claimant instructs a structural engineer as an expert witness to opine on whether the architect's design met applicable building standards. The expert's report concludes that the design was deficient. During disclosure, the claimant discovers that: (1) the expert previously worked for the same firm as the claimant's solicitor five years ago; (2) the expert has been instructed by the claimant's solicitor in three other unrelated cases over the past two years; and (3) the expert's report primarily addresses the question 'Did the architect breach his duty?' rather than focusing on technical building standards. The defendant challenges the expert's independence and the scope of the report. Which of the following represents the most significant ground for challenging the expert evidence?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The expert addresses the ultimate legal issue rather than confining opinion to technical matters within their expertise.
The most significant flaw is that the expert addresses the ultimate legal issue of breach of duty, which is for the court to decide. Experts must confine their opinions to matters within their expertise and avoid usurping the court's role in determining legal questions. While the expert's prior relationship with the solicitor and repeated instructions could raise independence concerns, they do not automatically disqualify the expert if proper duties to the court are acknowledged. The report's focus on legal conclusions rather than technical building standards is the fundamental deficiency. CPR 35 and the practice direction require experts to provide opinion on technical matters, not legal conclusions. An expert who opines on breach of duty rather than technical standards fails to fulfill their proper role.
Q9A claimant company is engaged in High Court litigation against a competitor. During standard disclosure, the claimant's solicitor identifies a memorandum prepared by the claimant's in-house legal counsel advising the board on litigation strategy. The memorandum is located in the files of the claimant's parent company, which is not a party to the proceedings but shares some directors with the claimant. The memorandum is clearly marked 'Privileged and Confidential – Legal Advice'. The defendant requests inspection of all documents listed in the claimant's disclosure list, including the memorandum. The claimant's solicitor lists the memorandum in Part 2 of the disclosure list (documents for which inspection will not be permitted) and claims legal advice privilege. The defendant argues that: (1) the document is in the parent company's control, not the claimant's; and (2) privilege cannot be claimed because the parent company is not a party. Which of the following best describes whether the privilege claim is likely to succeed?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: The claim is likely to succeed if the claimant can demonstrate control over the parent company's documents through shared management or authority.
A party's disclosure obligations extend to documents within its control, which includes documents in the physical possession of another entity if the party has a right to inspect or take copies. Shared directorships and close corporate relationships can establish control. If the claimant can show it has a right to obtain the memorandum from its parent company, the document is disclosable but can be withheld on privilege grounds if it contains legal advice to the client (the claimant or its group). Legal advice privilege protects confidential communications between lawyer and client made for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice, and can extend to in-house counsel advice. The fact that the document is physically held by a non-party does not defeat privilege if the claimant has control and the privilege conditions are met. The other options incorrectly assume privilege is automatically lost due to the parent company's possession or that privilege cannot be claimed for documents not in direct physical possession.
Q10A claimant seeks an urgent interim injunction to prevent the defendant from disposing of assets pending trial in a High Court fraud claim. The claimant's solicitor believes there is evidence that the defendant has been transferring funds to offshore accounts. The trial is scheduled in six months. The claimant's solicitor prepares an application and supporting witness statement but is uncertain whether to apply without notice (ex parte) or on notice to the defendant. The defendant's solicitor has been cooperative in correspondence to date and has not indicated any intention to dissipate assets. However, the claimant fears that giving notice will prompt the defendant to accelerate asset transfers. Which of the following best describes the correct approach to determining whether to apply without notice?
Show answer
✓ Correct answer: Apply without notice only if there is real risk that giving notice would defeat the injunction's purpose, supported by evidence.
Applications without notice should only be made in exceptional circumstances where giving notice would enable the defendant to take steps to defeat the purpose of the injunction, such as dissipating assets. The applicant must provide evidence of this risk, not mere speculation or fear. The duty of full and fair disclosure is heightened in without-notice applications. The court will scrutinize the decision not to give notice. Simply fearing that the defendant might act is insufficient; there must be a real and immediate risk supported by evidence (e.g., evidence of ongoing transfers, previous asset dissipation, or specific threats). The defendant's prior cooperation in correspondence does not automatically preclude a without-notice application, but it is a relevant factor. The other options either set the threshold too low (mere fear or suspicion) or too high (requiring proof of actual ongoing dissipation or automatic notice in all cases of cooperation).
Full SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep bank + unlimited mocks
Try 30 questions free. Unlock the complete SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep question bank, every explanation, and unlimited timed mock exams. Practice on any device.
Unlock SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep →