SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep Exam Questions & Answers 2026 (11–20)

Q11A defendant in a £2.5 million commercial contract dispute made a Part 36 offer to settle for £1.8 million at the end of the relevant period specified in CPR 36.5. The claimant rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. At trial, the claimant was awarded £2.1 million in damages. The claimant now seeks an order for indemnity costs from the date of the Part 36 offer and interest on damages at an enhanced rate, arguing that the judgment sum exceeded the defendant's offer. The defendant argues that the claimant should not receive enhanced costs or interest because the judgment is less than the full claim amount and the Part 36 consequences should not apply. Which of the following best describes the likely costs and interest outcome?

• AThe claimant is not entitled to enhanced costs or interest because the judgment is less than the full claim amount of £2.5 million, and Part 36 consequences require the claimant to obtain judgment for at least the amount claimed.
• BThe claimant is entitled to enhanced interest and indemnity costs from the end of the relevant period because the judgment exceeded the offer.
• CThe defendant is entitled to standard costs from the date of the offer because the claimant failed to better the defendant's settlement proposal by a margin of at least 20%, which is required for enhanced consequences in commercial cases.
• DThe claimant may receive indemnity costs but not enhanced interest, as CPR 36.17 permits the court to award one or the other but not both forms of enhancement in the same case.

Q12A homeowner brings a claim against a builder for defective construction work following a loft conversion. The dispute involves alleged breaches of building regulations and negligent workmanship. Before issuing proceedings, the homeowner's solicitor sends a letter of claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes, providing details of the defects and the homeowner's loss (estimated at £45,000 for remedial works). The builder's solicitor responds within 14 days, denying all allegations but not providing a detailed response to each defect alleged or enclosing any supporting documents. The homeowner's solicitor immediately issues court proceedings without sending a further letter or allowing additional time for the builder to provide a fuller response. At the first case management conference, the judge considers whether to impose sanctions for non-compliance with the protocol. Which of the following best describes the likely approach of the court?

• AThe court may penalize both parties: the builder for inadequate response and the claimant for premature issue without allowing reasonable time for fuller response.
• BThe court is likely to dismiss the claim for abuse of process because the claimant failed to comply with the mandatory 28-day waiting period before issuing proceedings under the Construction and Engineering Protocol.
• CThe court will impose a costs sanction solely on the defendant for failing to provide a detailed response, as the claimant was entitled to issue proceedings immediately upon receiving an inadequate denial.
• DThe court will not impose any sanctions because the Construction and Engineering Protocol is directory rather than mandatory, and parties retain absolute discretion over when to issue proceedings regardless of protocol compliance.

Q13In a clinical negligence trial, both parties have instructed medical experts. The claimant's expert report concludes that the defendant surgeon breached the standard of care by failing to obtain informed consent before a surgical procedure. The expert's report is based on the factual assumption that the claimant was not provided with any written information about the risks of surgery and had only a brief verbal discussion. After exchange of witness statements, it emerges that the claimant did receive a standard hospital information leaflet about the procedure, but claims not to have read it. The defendant's expert report, which relies on the assumption that the claimant received and had the opportunity to review the leaflet, concludes that informed consent was obtained. At a pre-trial review, the defendant argues that the claimant's expert report should be excluded or given no weight because it is based on an incorrect factual assumption. Which of the following best describes the appropriate approach to the conflicting expert evidence?

• AThe court should give equal weight to both expert reports regardless of which factual assumptions are proven, as experts are entitled to base their opinions on the instructions and assumptions provided by the instructing party without verification of underlying facts.
• BThe claimant's expert report should be excluded entirely because it is based on a factual assumption that has been proven incorrect by the emergence of the hospital information leaflet, and expert evidence founded on incorrect facts is inadmissible.
• CThe court should order the experts to prepare a joint report addressing the informed consent issue on the basis of agreed facts, and exclude both original reports as they are based on conflicting and unproven factual assumptions.
• DThe court should allow both expert reports but may adjust the weight given to each based on which factual assumptions are proven at trial.

Q14A claimant in a data breach claim against a technology company is under a standard disclosure obligation. The claim concerns alleged unauthorized access to customer data between January and March 2022. The claimant's IT systems generate and store vast quantities of email, system logs, and backup files. The claimant's solicitor must advise on the reasonable extent of searches for disclosable documents. The company has: (1) approximately 2 million emails from the relevant period stored on its servers; (2) detailed system access logs for the period stored in a proprietary database format that would require specialist software (costing £15,000) to extract and review; (3) daily backup tapes stored offsite that contain deleted emails and files, with retrieval and restoration estimated at £50,000; and (4) paper records in archived boxes (estimated 200 boxes) that may contain some relevant documents. The value of the claim is approximately £100,000. Which of the following best describes the reasonable search obligation?

• ALimit searches to readily accessible emails only, and exclude system logs, backup tapes, and paper records entirely, as the claim value of £100,000 does not justify any searches requiring specialist software, offsite retrieval, or manual review of archived materials.
• BSearch all emails, system logs, backup tapes, and archived paper records regardless of cost, as the duty of standard disclosure requires a party to disclose all documents that support or adversely affect any party's case without regard to proportionality or expense.
• CSearch readily accessible emails and logs; archived backups and paper records may be excluded on proportionality grounds given cost and claim value.
• DSearch backup tapes and archived paper records first, as these are most likely to contain deleted or discarded evidence relevant to unauthorized data access, and then conduct keyword searches of emails and logs if time and budget permit after completing the archive review.

Q15A claimant in a substantial commercial dispute involving breach of a long-term supply contract seeks standard disclosure. The defendant is a large manufacturing company with extensive electronic and paper records stored across multiple sites in the UK and abroad. The defendant's solicitor estimates that a comprehensive search of all potentially relevant documents would cost approximately £150,000 and take four months, though the claim value is £200,000. The claimant alleges that crucial emails between the defendant's sales director and operations manager will prove the breach. These emails would be held on the defendant's main UK server and could be searched in two weeks at a cost of £8,000. Which of the following best describes the defendant's disclosure obligations?

• AThe defendant must disclose all potentially relevant documents regardless of cost, as the duty of standard disclosure is absolute and cannot be limited by proportionality where documents exist.
• BThe defendant must conduct a reasonable search, which may be limited by proportionality considerations including cost, and should prioritise the UK server where key emails are likely located.
• CThe defendant must conduct a reasonable search of all UK-based documents only, as the CPR does not require disclosure of documents held outside England and Wales jurisdiction.
• DThe defendant may limit disclosure to documents that support its own case, as documents that adversely affect its position are protected by litigation privilege and need not be disclosed.

Q16A defendant in a personal injury claim deliberately failed to disclose a crucial internal safety report that directly contradicts the defendant's pleaded case and strongly supports the claimant's allegations of negligence. The defendant's solicitor knew of the report's existence but decided not to include it in the list of documents. The report was discovered only when a former employee of the defendant provided a copy to the claimant three weeks before trial. The defendant's solicitor now seeks to argue that the late disclosure was due to an administrative oversight rather than deliberate concealment. Which of the following best describes the likely consequences for the defendant?

• AThe court may strike out the defence, impose substantial adverse costs orders, and draw adverse inferences; the defendant's solicitor faces potential disciplinary proceedings for a false disclosure statement.
• BThe court will likely permit late disclosure with a minor costs penalty payable to the claimant, as the document was ultimately provided before trial and no prejudice occurred that could not be remedied by an adjournment.
• CThe court cannot impose sanctions for non-disclosure absent clear proof of bad faith, and the defendant's explanation of administrative oversight creates sufficient doubt to avoid serious consequences beyond a costs warning.
• DThe primary consequence will be disciplinary proceedings against the defendant's solicitor personally, but the defendant company will face no sanctions as the client cannot be held responsible for solicitor errors in the disclosure process.

Q17A manufacturing company discovers that its former sales director has set up a competing business and is using confidential client lists and pricing strategies obtained during his employment. The company seeks an urgent interim injunction to restrain the former director from using this information and soliciting the company's clients. The former director argues that the information is not truly confidential as much of it could be reconstructed from public sources, and that an injunction would prevent him from earning a livelihood in the only industry he knows. The company can demonstrate that it has already lost three major clients to the former director in the past two weeks, representing £80,000 in annual revenue. Which of the following best describes the key factors the court will assess in deciding whether to grant the interim injunction?

• AWhether the injunction would cause disproportionate hardship to the former director by preventing him from working in his field of expertise, as the court must give primary consideration to the defendant's right to earn a livelihood when balanced against purely commercial interests.
• BWhether the company can prove on the balance of probabilities that the information is confidential and has been misused, as the court must be satisfied of the likely success of the claim before granting interim relief that restricts the defendant's business activities.
• CWhether the former director's actions constitute a clear and flagrant breach of his contractual obligations, as interim injunctions are only granted in cases of deliberate and egregious misconduct rather than technical breaches or disputes over the scope of confidentiality.
• DWhether there is a serious issue to be tried on the confidentiality claim, whether damages would adequately compensate the company for ongoing client losses, and whether the balance of convenience favours granting relief given the risk of further harm.

Q18A UK technology company obtained a £2.5 million judgment against a foreign software distributor for breach of licensing agreements. The company has now discovered that the distributor is systematically transferring assets to newly created offshore entities in multiple jurisdictions. Bank statements obtained through disclosure show large transfers to accounts in Singapore and the British Virgin Islands over the past three weeks. The distributor's UK assets have declined from approximately £1.8 million to £400,000 in the same period. The company applies for a freezing order without notice to the distributor. During the hearing, the company's solicitor mentions the asset transfers and the judgment but does not disclose that the company itself owes £600,000 to the distributor under a separate supply contract, nor that the distributor has made written requests for payment of this sum. Which of the following best describes the likely outcome of the freezing order application?

• AThe freezing order should be granted because the cross-debt is not material to the dissipation risk and relates to a separate contract, though the court may vary the amount frozen to account for any legitimate set-off claims the distributor may have.
• BThe freezing order should be granted as the evidence of asset dissipation is compelling and the risk of judgment being frustrated is clear, though the court may order the company to disclose the cross-debt within seven days of the order being served.
• CThe application should be refused due to the material non-disclosure of the cross-debt, and the company may face adverse costs consequences for breach of its duty of full and frank disclosure.
• DThe application should proceed but be adjourned for a hearing on notice, as the duty of full disclosure does not extend to facts that the respondent could raise in their own defence if they were present at the hearing.

Q19A claimant brings a claim for £85,000 for goods sold and delivered under a written contract. The defendant acknowledges receiving the goods but argues that the goods were defective and caused consequential losses of £120,000, which the defendant now counterclaims. The claimant applies for summary judgment under CPR Part 24, arguing that the defence has no real prospect of success because the contract contains a clause stating "all goods are accepted as satisfactory upon delivery and no claims for defects will be entertained after delivery." The defendant has produced some evidence of the defects including photographs and an independent engineer's report, but has not yet obtained witness statements from employees who inspected the goods on delivery. Which of the following best describes the approach the court should take?

• ASummary judgment should be granted because the contractual exclusion clause is clear and unambiguous, and the defendant accepted its terms by taking delivery, making the defence bound to fail regardless of the evidence of defects.
• BSummary judgment should be refused as the defendant has raised a real prospect of success by challenging the enforceability of the exclusion clause, and there is a compelling reason for trial where factual disputes exist.
• CSummary judgment should be granted unless the defendant can demonstrate on the balance of probabilities that the exclusion clause is unenforceable, as the burden is on the defendant to prove an exception to the clear contractual terms.
• DSummary judgment should be refused because the court cannot grant summary judgment in cases involving contractual disputes where both parties have produced some documentary evidence, even if one party's case appears significantly weaker than the other's.

Q20A claimant brings a claim for £180,000 for professional negligence against a firm of accountants. Six months before trial, the defendant makes a Part 36 offer to settle the claim for £140,000. The claimant rejects the offer, believing the claim is worth the full amount. At trial, the judge finds in favour of the claimant but awards damages of only £135,000, finding that the claimant failed to prove the full extent of losses claimed. The trial lasted four days and incurred significant costs. In addition to the damages award, the claimant seeks an order that the defendant pay all of the claimant's costs of the action. Which of the following best describes the likely costs consequences?

• AThe claimant will recover costs up to the end of the relevant period, but must pay the defendant's costs from that date, as the judgment is not more advantageous than the Part 36 offer.
• BThe claimant will recover all of their costs from the defendant because the claimant has been successful in the claim and obtained a substantial judgment, and the costs consequences of Part 36 only apply where a claimant recovers nothing or minimal damages.
• CThe court should make no order as to costs because the judgment amount of £135,000 is sufficiently close to the offer of £140,000 that the offers should be treated as equivalent for costs purposes, applying the principle of proportionality under the CPR.
• DThe claimant will recover all costs unless the court finds the claimant acted unreasonably in rejecting the offer, and the court should consider whether the claimant had legitimate grounds for believing the claim was worth £180,000 at the time the offer was made.