Monday 28 October 2024
Your weekly SQE Prep Quiz has arrived
Dear Subscriber,
I hope you had a great weekend. Please see below for the question, the answer to the previous question and associated resources. This is the web version of this newsletter.
Question: Michael owns a small coffee shop and recently decided to install a new decorative fountain in the seating area. During a busy morning, the fountain leaks water onto the floor, creating a slippery surface. A warning sign about the wet floor is placed near the fountain, but it is partially obstructed by a table and not clearly visible to customers entering the seating area. Lucy, a customer, slips on the wet floor, injuring her ankle. She decides to sue Michael for negligence, arguing that he breached his duty of care by not ensuring the floor was safe for customers.
Which of the following factors will the court most likely consider when determining whether Michael breached his duty of care to Lucy?
1. Whether Michael warned Lucy personally about the wet floor before she entered the seating area.
2. Whether Michael’s actions were reasonable in light of the risk of harm from the wet floor and the visibility of the warning sign.
3. Whether Lucy was wearing appropriate footwear, which might have prevented her fall.
4. Whether Michael had insurance coverage to pay for Lucy’s medical expenses.
5. Whether Lucy’s injury was severe enough to justify a claim for damages.
Study Material: Preparing for the SQE alone? Watch this video on what to do to ensure success.
Free Study Planner: You can download our NEW SQE1 Study Planner for the July 2025 exam by clicking here.
Discount Codes: 1) Use code “REVSQE10” for 10% off all ReviseSQE products (including bundles) and free p&p for printed resources when purchasing directly at https://revise4law.co.uk/revisesqe-shop/ . 2) Use “IOANNIS” to get 15% off any of the Pro Plans of AI tutor Law Drills at https://www.lawdrills.com/
Join the community: Become a member of ‘iGlinavos Scholars’ on YouTube (£2.99/month, click here for info), get priority access to new videos, and participate in members-only livestreams, where we work through SQE1 MCQs together, analysing questions and answers. Also, you get access to a members’-only FB group for support directly from me and other candidates. Receive priority notification of discounts and deals on products and services that can help you succeed, and much more!
Answer and feedback to last week’s question: James is a solicitor representing a client, Rachel, in a contentious divorce case. During a meeting, Rachel discloses to James that she has been hiding a substantial amount of assets from her spouse to avoid them being considered in the divorce settlement. Rachel instructs James not to disclose these assets during negotiations and court proceedings, but James is aware that failing to disclose this information could mislead the court and contravene legal obligations. James is now facing a dilemma regarding his professional and ethical responsibilities.
Which of the following best describes James’ ethical obligation under the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code of Conduct?
1. James must follow Rachel’s instructions and keep the assets confidential due to his duty of confidentiality.
2. James must disclose the hidden assets to the court to comply with his duty to act with integrity and to uphold the rule of law.
3. James should withdraw from representing Rachel to avoid breaching his duty of confidentiality while also avoiding misleading the court.
4. James should continue representing Rachel but make no mention of the hidden assets unless asked directly by the court.
5. James can report Rachel’s behaviour to the opposing party as a means of resolving the ethical conflict.
Correct Answer: 3. James should withdraw from representing Rachel to avoid breaching his duty of confidentiality while also avoiding misleading the court. Feedback: Under the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code of Conduct, solicitors are required to act with integrity and uphold the rule of law, while also maintaining client confidentiality. However, solicitors must not knowingly mislead the court. In this situation, James faces a conflict between his duty to maintain confidentiality and his duty not to mislead the court. The appropriate course of action is for James to withdraw from representing Rachel, as continuing to represent her would put him in a position where he might be forced to either breach confidentiality or mislead the court.
Option 1 is incorrect because James cannot simply follow Rachel’s instructions if they lead to misleading the court. Option 2 is incorrect because, although James must not mislead the court, he cannot disclose the assets without Rachel’s consent due to his duty of confidentiality. Option 4 is incorrect because simply staying silent unless directly asked by the court is not an ethical way to avoid misleading the court, and it does not resolve the conflict. Option 5 is incorrect because solicitors are not permitted to disclose confidential information to third parties, including the opposing party, without the client’s consent or a legal requirement to do so. Therefore, the correct ethical approach is for James to withdraw from the case to avoid breaching either his duty of confidentiality or his duty to the court.
Thank you for subscribing and let me know how you are getting on in your preparation through our Facebook Group. 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 Glinavos
Leave a Reply