SQE1 FLK1 Dispute Resolution Sample Questions July 2024

The correct answer is E. The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) mandate the duty of fair disclosure. Lawyers are required to act with integrity and not mislead the court. Barrington Legal Services must inform their client of the consequences of withholding material evidence and recommend disclosure to comply with the rules and their ethical obligations.

Option A is incorrect because withholding material evidence contravenes the duty of disclosure under the CPR and can lead to serious consequences, including sanctions against the client and solicitor.

Option B is incorrect as while immediate disclosure aligns with the rules, the solicitor has a duty to advise the client about the implications and seek informed instructions.

Option C is incorrect because, while client instructions are important, solicitors cannot act in a manner that is contrary to legal obligations, including fair disclosure, even if it aligns with the client's wishes.

Option D is incorrect as destroying evidence is unethical, likely illegal, and would seriously breach the solicitor's duty to the court and their professional integrity.

The correct answer is C. Appointing a single joint expert is most suitable when the necessary expert testimony involves technical aspects but is based on established standards within the industry, which can effectively streamline proceedings and minimize costs.

Option A is incorrect because when technical standards are widely contested, it may be more appropriate for each party to have their own experts to fully present their case.

Option B is incorrect because the use of cutting-edge technology not widely understood might require highly specialized experts from each side to articulate the specifics of their case.

Option D is incorrect as the existing preliminary differing expert opinions highlight the need for each party potentially to provide detailed, individual expert testimonies to support their respective arguments effectively.

Option E is incorrect as the complexity and cost of organizing meetings do not inherently justify the appointment of a single joint expert; the key is the nature and disputability of the technical evidence required.

The correct answer is B. This option is correct because it aligns with the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s guidance on exploring negotiation and dialogue, in this case involving data protection concerns, before taking more adversarial steps. It allows for a better understanding of the planned measures and expresses the group's concerns directly to the company.

Option A is incorrect because it suggests skipping pre-action negotiations and alternative dispute resolution processes, which could potentially resolve the concerns without the need for litigation.

Option C is incorrect because it advocates for a reactive approach, which may not be in the best interest of the concerned group or allow for mitigation of their concerns in a timely manner.

Option D is incorrect because it suggests an escalation to regulatory intervention without first attempting to understand or resolve the issue directly with the company, missing an opportunity for dialogue.

Option E is incorrect because it suggests a confrontational initial approach without first seeking to engage constructively with the company over their concerns, which is contrary to the principles of pre-action conduct.

The correct answer is C. Commencing court proceedings without first notifying the supplier is least likely to be recommended as it goes against the principles of pre-action conduct which encourage parties to communicate and potentially resolve disputes without the need for litigation.

Option A is incorrect because sending a detailed letter of claim is a standard and often necessary step before initiating legal proceedings, as it provides the other party with an opportunity to understand the claim against them and possibly settle before going to court.

Option B is incorrect because requesting an early neutral evaluation is a recognized pre-action step that can help all parties understand the potential strengths and weaknesses of their case, potentially leading to an early resolution.

Option D is incorrect because arranging a without prejudice meeting is encouraged under the Practice Directions on pre-action conduct as a way to explore settlement options before resorting to litigation.

Option E is incorrect because calculating the limitation period is a crucial step to ensure that any claim is made within the time limits set by law, preventing the claim from being statute-barred.

The correct answer is B. Applying for a warrant of control allows bailiffs to seize assets owned by Gadgets & More Ltd, offering an effective means to recover the judgment debt directly through the sale of those assets.

Option A is incorrect because initiating insolvency proceedings is a drastic measure that might not directly lead to debt recovery and can result in the complete winding up of Gadgets & More Ltd.

Option C is incorrect as an attachment of earnings order is not typically applicable to directors or businesses; it is designed for individual debtors with a regular income.

Option D is incorrect because a third-party debt order targets accounts or debts owed to the judgment debtor by another party, which may not be relevant or guaranteed in this scenario.

Option E is incorrect as a charging order secures the debt against property, which may not result in immediate recovery of funds and is dependent on the liquidation or refinancing of that property.

The correct answer is C. Elara Innovations should consider securing a charging order against the debtor's property as it directly allows for the recovery of the financial sum awarded by creating a legal charge over the debtor's assets, such as real estate, which can then be enforced to satisfy the debt.

Option A is incorrect because an injunction is a preventive measure aimed at stopping an action from occurring, not a method of enforcing financial judgments.

Option B is incorrect because a court order for specific performance pertains to the fulfillment of contractual obligations in the manner specified within the contract, not to the enforcement of financial awards.

Option D is incorrect because issuing a bankruptcy petition is a means to declare the debtor bankrupt and may not directly recover the financial sum awarded; it is more appropriate in cases where the debtor is unable to pay their debts.

Option E is incorrect because a writ of possession is used to regain possession of property, not to enforce a monetary judgment.

The correct answer is C. ABC Services Ltd. must show evidence of a credible defense to the breach of contract claim or identify a significant procedural flaw in how the judgment was reached to satisfy the conditions for setting aside a default judgment under Rule 13.

Option A is incorrect because merely agreeing to pay the legal costs of the competitor to date does not address the fundamental requirement under Rule 13 for setting aside a default judgment, which focuses on the presence of a substantial defense or procedural error.

Option B is incorrect because while non-receipt of court notices may form part of a procedural error argument, it alone does not suffice for setting aside a default judgment under Rule 13. A credible defense or a more substantial procedural flaw must be demonstrated.

Option D is incorrect because there is no arbitrary 14-day period specified under Rule 13 for the filing of an application to set aside a default judgment. The timing is subject to when the defendant becomes aware of the judgment and other considerations of fairness and justice.

Option E is incorrect because force majeure, relating to uncontrollable external events preventing a party from fulfilling a contract, is not directly relevant to the criteria under Rule 13 for setting aside a default judgment. The emphasis is on a credible defense and identification of serious procedural errors.

The correct answer is B. John should immediately issue a claim form to avoid any risk of missing the limitation period. This action ensures that the claim is filed within the legal timeframe, preserving the client's right to seek judicial resolution of the wrongful dismissal claim.

Option A is incorrect because negotiating directly with the former employer, while potentially useful in some disputes, does not ensure that the legal claim is preserved within the limitation period, risking the client's ability to seek redress through the courts.

Option C is incorrect because waiting until the last week of the limitation period is risky and does not allow for unforeseen delays or complications in filing the claim form, potentially resulting in missing the legal deadline.

Option D is incorrect because an immediate judgment in default is not relevant or possible at this stage, as the claim has not yet been issued or served on the former employer.

Option E is incorrect because while contacting the former employer to resolve disputes informally can be a valuable step, it should not delay the timely issuance of the claim form, especially when the limitation period is nearing its end.

The correct answer is D. The court has a responsibility to ensure that all settlements and agreements serve the interests of justice, including the protection of all parties involved, especially those not present during negotiations such as minor stakeholders. Therefore, if a settlement overlooks the rights of these stakeholders, the court is inclined to review and possibly mandate alterations to the agreement.

Option A is incorrect because simply endorsing the settlement without consideration for all stakeholders might not align with the principles of fair justice and the court's overriding objective to ensure that justice is done.

Option B is incorrect as requesting audits is not the standard approach for addressing concerns about the protection of stakeholders' rights within a settlement. The court's decision-making is more directly concerned with the terms of the agreement itself.

Option C is incorrect because while referral back to mediation is a potential course of action, it is more direct and efficient for the court to examine and, if necessary, mandate adjustments to the settlement to protect minor stakeholders.

Option E is incorrect because dismissing the agreement outright is an excessive measure when the court can instead require modifications to ensure the agreement is just and equitable.

The correct answer is D. Requesting the court for a writ of control is the first step the legal team should take to enforce the judgment through the seizure of the defendant's machinery and equipment. A writ of control authorizes High Court Enforcement Officers to seize and sell the debtor's goods to satisfy the judgment debt.

Option A is incorrect because a charging order is a method used to secure a judgment debt against the debtor’s property, rather than directly seizing assets to satisfy the debt.

Option B is incorrect because issuing a bankruptcy petition is a process initiated when a debtor is unable to pay their debts, not a direct method for seizing assets.

Option C is incorrect because a writ of possession is primarily used to recover possession of land or property, not for enforcing money judgments through the seizure of goods.

Option E is incorrect because a third party debt order targets debts owed to the judgment debtor by someone else, rather than allowing for the seizure of the debtor’s own assets.