Monday 14 July 2025
Your weekly SQE Prep Quiz has arrived
Dear Subscriber,
Good luck to everyone sitting SQE1 this week! Please see below for the question, the answer to the previous question and associated resources. This is the web version of this newsletter.
Exclusive Subscriber Discounts:
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 code “IOANNIS” to get 15% off any of the Pro Plans of AI tutor LawDrills at https://www.lawdrills.com/
This Week’s Question:
A solicitor at a law firm is advising a man on the sale of his business. The solicitor learns that another solicitor at the same firm is acting for the buyer in an unrelated matter. The firm keeps client files separate but has not yet informed either client of this connection. The solicitor is unsure whether the firm can keep acting for both clients without breaching ethical rules.
Under the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code of Conduct, what should the firm do in this situation?
A. Act for both clients if they keep files separate and do not disclose the connection to either client.
B. Automatically stop acting for both clients because conflicts are never allowed under SRA rules.
C. Check if there is a significant risk of conflict and only act for both clients with informed consent and safeguards in place.
D. Continue acting for both clients because the work for the buyer is on a different legal matter.
E. Act for the man only, as solicitors must choose to represent sellers over buyers in a business transaction.
Dig Deeper: For more info on solicitor ethics, watch this video.
NEW Podcast! Wish there was a decent podcast where people were talking about key FLK topics? Your wish has come true! I am launching “Functioning Law” the only podcast designed to help you navigate SQE FLK. Access all episodes here.
Last Week’s Question:
Eleanor, an elderly widow, relies heavily on her nephew, Tom, to help manage her finances and personal affairs. Tom suggests that Eleanor transfer her house into his name so he can “better look after her interests.” Eleanor hesitates but eventually signs the transfer documents after Tom repeatedly assures her it’s for her own good. After speaking to a solicitor months later, Eleanor regrets the decision and seeks to have the transfer set aside on the grounds of undue influence. Which of the following statements best reflects the legal position under the doctrine of undue influence in Eleanor’s case?
A. Eleanor cannot set aside the transfer because she signed the documents voluntarily, even if she relied on Tom’s advice.
B. Eleanor may be able to set aside the transfer because Tom’s relationship with her gives rise to a presumption of undue influence.
C. Eleanor has no claim because undue influence applies only where physical threats are used to force someone to sign a document.
D. Eleanor can only set aside the transfer if she proves Tom’s intention was to defraud her.
E. Eleanor cannot set aside the transaction unless Tom is her solicitor or financial adviser acting professionally.
✅ Correct Answer: B. Eleanor may be able to set aside the transfer because Tom’s relationship with her gives rise to a presumption of undue influence. The doctrine of undue influence protects individuals who enter into transactions due to improper pressure or influence, rather than free will.
There are two types of undue influence:
1. Actual undue influence – Proven evidence of coercion or improper pressure.
2. Presumed undue influence – Arises automatically where: A relationship of trust and confidence exists (e.g. family, solicitor-client, carer-dependent); and the transaction appears not readily explicable by ordinary motives (e.g. significant gifts or asset transfers).
In this case:
• Eleanor relied heavily on Tom for financial and personal matters, indicating a relationship of trust and confidence.
• The transfer of her house to Tom is a significant transaction that calls for explanation.
• Therefore, a presumption of undue influence arises, shifting the burden to Tom to prove the transaction was entered into freely and independently.
________________________________________
Why the Other Options Are Incorrect:
• A is incorrect: The fact Eleanor signed voluntarily does not defeat a claim if undue influence is presumed from the relationship.
• C is incorrect: Undue influence is broader than physical threats; it includes subtle pressure and reliance on relationships.
• D is incorrect: Fraudulent intention is not required for undue influence. The issue is the improper pressure, not fraud.
• E is incorrect: A presumption can arise in family relationships where trust and confidence exist—not just professional relationships.
Thank you for subscribing and let me know how you are getting on in your preparation through our Facebook Group or *NEW* 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 Glinavos
Leave a Reply