Monday 19 January 2026
Your weekly SQE Prep Quiz has arrived
Dear Subscriber,
Hope you had a great weekend, and if you are sitting SQE1 FLK2 this week, good luck! Please see below for the question, the answer to the previous question and associated resources. This is the web version of this newsletter.
It would mean a lot to me if you could tell your candidate friends about this newsletter. The way the world is going, if we face disruption in our usual online services, email will be the best way to support each other. So please tell people about this mailing!
NEW! You can now find text guides, concept summaries, FLK breakdowns and flashcards on Substack in a series of posts. Subscribe here, if you were looking forward to this type of resource, or gain access through the new ‘preppers’ membership level on YouTube.
Livestreams: Join me for a special live for channel members (scholars and preppers) on https://www.youtube.com/live/XzjJm4j6v0o to go through the SRA’s SQE1 FLK2 sample Qs Wednesday at 1pm!
This Week’s Question: A woman owns a small farm. Over many years, she repeatedly tells her nephew that “one day this will all be yours.” Relying on these assurances, the nephew works on the farm full-time for low pay, turns down other employment, and spends his own money improving the farmhouse. The woman later falls out with the nephew and leaves the farm to a charity in her will. After her death, the nephew brings a claim. Which statement best reflects how the court is most likely to resolve the claim?
A. The nephew will succeed only if he proves a binding contract supported by consideration.
B. The nephew will succeed automatically and receive the farm because reliance always fixes the remedy.
C. The nephew may succeed if assurance, reliance, and detriment are established, with the remedy tailored to avoid unconscionability.
D. The nephew cannot succeed because informal assurances relating to land are void without writing.
E. The nephew can succeed only if the woman intended to create a trust over the land.
Dig Deeper: Learn more about FLK2 Property Law, on https://youtu.be/aiOWJPsiSBw
Exclusive Subscriber Freebies & Discounts:
1) Try my FREE MCQ Test Bank! This newsletter’s questions in a test bank you can attempt! Currently with 30 questions, and more added all the time. Try on https://glintiss.co.uk/yannis-mcqs/
2) Use code “REVSQE10” for 10% off all ReviseSQE products (including bundles) and free p&p for printed resources when purchasing directly at their shop.
3) Use code “IOANNIS” to get 15% off any of the Pro Plans of AI tutor LawDrills at https://www.lawdrills.com/
4) Preparing for the July sitting of SQE1? Try my free Study Planner on https://glintiss.co.uk/study-planner/
Last Week’s Question: A company advertises specialist computer servers for sale on its website. A fraudster emails the company, falsely claiming to be a well-known university procurement officer and using a similar email address to the genuine one. Relying on this representation, the company agrees by email to sell the servers on credit and delivers them. The fraudster immediately sells the servers on to an innocent third party. When the fraud is discovered, the company seeks to recover the servers from the third party. Which statement best reflects the legal position?
A. The contract is void for mistake, so title never passed and the company can recover the servers.
B. The contract is voidable for misrepresentation, but title passed before avoidance.
C. The contract is void because the identity of the buyer was fundamental to the agreement.
D. The contract is valid because mistakes as to identity are never recognised in online contracts.
E. The contract is void unless the company can show that the third party acted dishonestly.
✅ Correct Answer: B The contract is voidable for misrepresentation, but title passed before avoidance. Feedback: In contracts concluded at a distance (including email and online transactions), the general rule is that the seller is presumed to intend to contract with the person communicating with them, not with the person they claim to be. Following Phillips v Brooks Ltd [1919] and confirmed in Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62, a mistake as to identity usually makes the contract voidable for misrepresentation, not void. As a result, title passes to the fraudster and can pass again to a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, unless the original contract is avoided before that happens.
- Option A and C are wrong: the contract is not void unless identity is of fundamental importance and the transaction is effectively “face-to-face.”
- Option D is wrong: mistake may still be relevant, but the presumption operates against voidness.
- Option E is wrong: the third party’s honesty is not relevant if they are a bona fide purchaser, plus unilateral mistake renders a contact voidable, as opposed to void ab initio.
This question tests FLK1: Contract Law, specifically mistake, misrepresentation, and the transfer of title, an area where candidates often confuse void vs voidable contracts and misapply face-to-face principles to modern transactions.
Thank you for subscribing and let me know how you are getting on in your preparation through our Facebook Group or on Reddit! Feel free to forward this email to anyone you think will benefit.
If you wish to unsubscribe: You can stop receiving the newsletter at any time by emailing us at newsletter@glintiss.co.uk with ‘unsubscribe’ as the subject. We will promptly remove your email address from our mailing list. Thank you for being with us.
You will hear from me again soon.
All the best
Dr Ioannis (Yannis) Glinavos
Leave a Reply