Solicitors Qualifying Examination

SQE Sample Test | SQE papers practice questions | SQE1 Practise 2021

1-A man and a woman who had never met each other were at a swimming pool. The man had a lesson from a qualified instructor but due to the negligence of the instructor the man struggled in the deep end of the pool and drowned. The woman saw the entire incident and developed traumatic neurosis as a result.

Can the woman recover damages against the instructor for the traumatic neurosis?

No, because the instructor did not owe the woman a duty of care.

Yes, because the woman is suffering from a medically recognised condition.

Yes, because the instructor breached the duty of care he owed to the man and his negligence caused the woman loss.

Yes, because the instructor breached the duty of care which he owed to the woman and his negligence caused her loss.

No, because the woman’s loss is too remote.


2-A woman in the UK asserts that her rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have been infringed by a public authority. Although she wishes to protest, she is unwilling to bring court proceedings under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) against the public authority, because of the publicity she might receive, and because of the possible cost. The woman’s wealthy cousin is not affected by the alleged infringement, but says she would be willing to bring proceedings on behalf of the woman.

Can the cousin bring legal proceedings as the woman’s representative under the HRA?

No, because only a victim of the infringement can bring an action and the cousin is not a victim.

Yes, because the HRA provides that proceedings may be brought by a representative where anonymity is a serious concern for the victim.

No, because a representative can only bring an action under the HRA where it replaces numerous individuals making identical claims.

Yes, because the court will be satisfied that the cousin as a representative is able to meet the expenses of the proceedings.

Yes, because family representatives are specifically granted standing under the HRA.


3-A company created a floating charge over all its assets in favour of a trade supplier, as security for sums due from time to time.

Five years later, the same company entered into a debenture with a bank, creating a floating charge over all the assets of the company, as security for a loan from the bank.

The trade supplier’s charge was not registered at Companies House. However, before the debenture was signed, the company notified the bank that the trade supplier already held a valid floating charge over the company’s assets. The debenture was duly executed, and was immediately registered at Companies House. The company went into administration ten months after entering into the debenture, with outstanding sums due and unpaid both to the trade supplier and to the bank.

Which creditor of the company has a prior claim to the company’s assets?

The bank, because the trade supplier’s failure to register its charge makes the charge void against the company.

The trade supplier, because the bank had actual notice of the existence of the trade supplier’s charge.

The trade supplier, because the bank’s charge was created less than 12 months before the company went into administration.

The trade supplier, because the priority of floating charges is determined solely according to their dates of creation.

The bank, because the trade supplier’s failure to register its charge makes the charge void against the administrator and the bank.



Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: