SQE Flashcards
A man has instructed a solicitor to act for him on the purchase of a house. The man intends to finance his purchase with a mortgage. The solicitor has just received the mortgage offer, which contains the following condition:
‘The solicitor must ensure that existing credit card debt of £3,500 is paid off prior to drawdown of the loan.’
The solicitor has reported fully to the client on the terms of the offer. After completion, the mortgage lender discovers that the man still owes £3,500 on the credit card debt referred to in the mortgage offer.
Did the solicitor breach any duties with respect to the man’s existing £3,500 credit card debt?
A No, because the solicitor has reported to the clients on the terms of the offer, which is the extent of the solicitor’s obligation to the lender.No, because the solicitor has reported to the clients on the terms of the offer, which is the extent of the solicitor’s obligation to the lender.
B No, because the mortgage offer is between the borrower and the lender, and it is not the solicitor’s concern if the borrower fails to comply with a condition in the offer.No, because the mortgage offer is between the borrower and the lender, and it is not the solicitor’s concern if the borrower fails to comply with a condition in the offer.
C Yes, because the UK Finance Mortgage Lender’s Handbook requires solicitors to ensure their client’s existing debts are fully paid before submitting the certificate of title to the lender.Yes, because the UK Finance Mortgage Lender’s Handbook requires solicitors to ensure their client’s existing debts are fully paid before submitting the certificate of title to the lender.
D Yes, because the condition contained in the mortgage offer has not been complied with.Yes, because the condition contained in the mortgage offer has not been complied with.
E Yes, because if the borrower defaults on the loan, the solicitor can be pursued for any shortfall incurred by the lender.
Yes, because the condition contained in the mortgage offer has not been complied with.
The solicitor breached the condition in the mortgage offer. The condition in the offer required the instructing solicitor to ensure that the existing credit card debt was paid off; thus, the failure to do so is a breach of the solicitor’s duty to the lender.
After a competitor pushed an opponent while playing hockey, the opponent became angry and hit the competitor with his stick, drawing a penalty. The opponent was not ejected because the penalty was not far outside the bounds of normal play. The competitor had to be taken to the hospital for stitches. Wanting to make an example of an athlete who plays sports too aggressively, local authorities charged the opponent with inflicting grievous bodily harm under Offences Against the Person Act 1861 section 20.
Which of the following is the opponent’s best defence?
A Self-defence.
B Diminished responsibility.
C Loss of control.
D Lack of intent.Lack of intent.
E Consent.
(E) The competitor’s best defence is consent.
Consent can be used as a defence against a charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm. In contact sports such as rugby and hockey, consent will be implied so long as the actions are not greatly outside the rules of the game. Since the competitor here was not ejected, we can assume his actions were within the bounds of consent.
A woman died last month, having never made a will. The woman is survived by her 20-year-old daughter and her 19-year-old son, who the woman adopted when he was a baby. The woman’s parents and brother are also alive. All members of the family are keen to administer the woman’s estate.
Who has the best right to apply for a grant of representation to the woman’s estate?
A The woman’s daughter only.
B The woman’s parents.
C The woman’s two children.
D The woman’s son.
E The woman’s brother only.
(C) The woman’s children have the best right to apply for a grant of representation. This is an intestacy situation, and the woman’s estate will be administered under a grant of letters of administration.
The order of entitlement to a grant of letters of administration is set out in rule 22 of the Non-Contentious Probate Rules (‘NCPR’), under which the women’s children have the best right to act as administrators. No distinction is made between natural and adopted children in this respect.
A woman died on 17 May 2023. At the date of her death, she owned the following assets:
- A house worth £390,000
- Chattels and cash with a value of £70,000
- Shares held in an individual savings account (ISA) worth £60,000
At the date of her death, the woman owed income tax of £25,000 in respect of the tax year 2022/23.
The woman left £100,000 of her estate to a registered charity and left the remainder of her estate to her daughter.
What is the woman’s chargeable estate for inheritance tax purposes?
A £335,000
B £395,000
C £420,000
D £520,000
E £265,000
(B) £395,000
To calculate the chargeable estate, we add up all the assets the woman owned at death that are not exempt and subtract out her liabilities and gifts made to charities. None of the woman’s assets are exempt, so her gross estate is £520,000 (£390,000 house + £70,000 chattels and cash + £60,000 ISA). From that, we subtract the income tax owed (£520,000 - £25,000 = £495,000) and the gift to the charity (£495,000 - £100,000 = £395,000)
A woman, who is illiterate, makes a will. On the day the will is to be executed at a solicitor’s office, the woman tells her friend that she is unable to travel to the office that day but that the friend should execute the will without her. The friend signs the will for the woman at the solicitor’s office, which had been planned all along due to the fact that the woman cannot read or write. In addition, the friend acts as one of two witnesses to the execution of the will.
Which of the following best describes the legal position regarding the validity of the will?
A The will is invalid as it was not signed by the woman herself.
B The will is invalid as the friend who signed it also acted as a witness.
C The will is invalid as the woman was not present when the will was signed.
D The will is invalid as it was not appropriately witnessed.
E The will is valid.
The will is invalid as the woman was not present when the will was signed.
The will is invalid as the woman was not present when the will was signed. To be valid, a will must be in writing and signed by or on behalf of the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses present at the same time who each sign the will in the presence of the testator. It is possible for another person to sign on behalf of the testator if they are blind or illiterate. However, the testator must be present, and the will should be read to them before the will is signed on their behalf. Here, the woman was not present when the will was signed, so the will is invalid.
A man and his friend are arguing. As the argument intensifies, the man and the friend each start pushing each other. The friend falls over and hits his head, cracking his skull. The man did not intend for his friend to fall over or crack his skull. The friend is taken to hospital. In the ambulance, the friend dies of a heart attack completely unrelated to the fall.
Which of the following is the most appropriate charge that the prosecution could bring against the man?
A Murder.
B Voluntary manslaughter.
C Involuntary manslaughter.
D Grievous bodily harm with intent under section 18.
E Grievous bodily harm under section 20.
(E) Section 20 grievous bodily harm is the most appropriate charge. It applies when the defendant causes a wound or serious bodily harm, intending to cause or being reckless about causing some harm. Here, the pushing was unlawful as it caused the friend to crack his skull.
In her will, a woman left the residue of her estate to trustees on trust to invest and use the income to pay grants to the children of employees and former employees of her family company to enable them to attend university.
Which of the following statements best describes the reason why this is not a valid charitable trust?
A It is not for the public benefit.
B The purpose is not of a charitable nature.
C The terms of the trust contravene the rule against inalienability.
D The objects are not sufficiently certain.
E The objects are not exclusively charitable.
(A) The trust is not a valid charitable trust because it is not for the public benefit. A charitable trust must be for a charitable purpose as defined in the Charities Act 2011, it must be for the public benefit, and its objects must be exclusively charitable. Here, the people who can benefit from the trust are defined by reference to a private relationship – the employment of their parents by the family company. This means they do not form an adequate cross-section of the public, and so the trust fails the public benefit test.
A husband discovers his wife is having an affair. He is so furious he cannot contain himself and decides to kill her. The husband gets the shotgun and ammunition he keeps in the shed. He drinks a bottle of whiskey to get up the courage to go ahead with it. He lies in wait for his wife at their marital home. After two hours, the wife returns home. The husband shoots her once in the back. The wife sustains serious injury but eventually recovers. The husband is charged with attempted murder. The husband is subsequently diagnosed with severe depression.
What defence, if any, is available to the husband?
A Loss of control.
B Diminished responsibility.
C Self-defence.
D Intoxication.
E None of the above.
(E) None of these defences is available to the husband.
Loss of control and diminished responsibility are both partial defences to murder, reducing the conviction to voluntary manslaughter. They are not available to attempted murder, and so (A) and (B) are incorrect. (C) is incorrect because self-defence is available when reasonable force is used to defend oneself, another, or property, which clearly does not apply here. Intoxication can offer a defence to a specific intent offence like attempted murder if the defendant is so intoxicated that they cannot form the necessary mens rea. Here, we are told that the husband intended to kill his wife, so this defence does not apply
In breach of trust, a trustee removed £10,000 from the trust’s bank account and deposited it into his personal bank current account. He then received £10,000 as a lottery win and paid that into his account. The trustee then removed £10,000 from his account and used it to pay his credit card debt.
Can the trust beneficiaries recover the £10,000 remaining in the trustee’s account?
A No, because the trustee mixed the trust funds with his own money.
B No, because of the rule that the first money into the account is the first money out of the account.
C No, because where two funds are mixed in the same account, they are shared proportionately.
D Yes, because the trustee is deemed to have spent his own funds first.
E Yes, because the trustee did not earn the lottery winnings but won them through luck.
D. Yes, because the trustee is deemed to have spent his own funds first.
(D) The beneficiaries can recover the £10,000 remaining in the trustee’s personal account because the trustee is deemed to have spent his own funds first. When a trustee places trust funds into an account with the trustee’s own money, the beneficiaries may claim a charge over the account for the amount of trust funds in it. If the trustee has drawn money out of the account, the general rule is that the trustee is treated as withdrawing their own money first. Therefore, the trustee is deemed to have spent his own £10,000 on paying his credit card debt, and the beneficiaries can claim the remaining £10,000 in the account. (A) is, therefore, incorrect. (B) is incorrect because the first-in, first-out rule applies when a trustee has mixed the funds of two trusts in a personal current account. (C) is incorrect because the proportionate solution applies when the court displaces the first-in, first-out rule for mixed trust funds. (E) is incorrect because the fact that the trustee won the lottery money does not affect the beneficiaries’ ability to claim it
A solicitor is representing a defendant at court for first appearance. The defendant is charged with theft. The evidence against the defendant is overwhelmingly strong, and the solicitor believes the defendant should plead guilty.
Should the solicitor tell the defendant to plead guilty?
A No, because the decision on plea is for the defendant only and a solicitor must never tell their client how to plead.
B No, because the solicitor should tell the defendant to plead not guilty and elect Crown Court trial, as acquittal rates are higher in the Crown Court.
C Yes, because the sentence will be lower than if he is convicted after trial.
D Yes, because the evidence against the defendant is overwhelmingly strong.
E Yes, because it is the solicitor’s professional opinion.
No, because the decision on plea is for the defendant only and a solicitor must never tell their client how to plead.
(A) The solicitor should not tell the defendant to plead guilty. The decision on plea is for the defendant only, and a solicitor must never tell their client how to plead. A defence solicitor should advise on the strength of the evidence, which includes warning the defendant when the evidence is strong. A solicitor should also advise on the credit defendants are entitled to for an early guilty plea compared to conviction following trial. However, the decision on plea remains the defendant’s alone. (B) and (E) are incorrect as a solicitor should never tell their client how to plead. (B) is incorrect because the solicitor should not tell the defendant to plead guilty or not guilty. (C), (D), and (E) are incorrect, because, although all three statements are true, the solicitor should not tell the defendant how to plead.
A woman makes a will in which she gives the residue of her estate to a named friend “to be distributed as I have instructed him”. Before the will was signed, the woman sent a letter to her friend in which she listed her intended beneficiaries. The woman dies. The friend has not responded to the letter.
Which of the following best describes the position of the friend following the woman’s death?
A The friend holds the money on resulting trust for the estate.
B The gift to the friend fails, and the estate passes on the woman’s intestacy.
C The friend may keep the money because he did not accept the trust.
D The friend holds the money on trust to distribute as directed in the letter.
E The friend may keep the money because the beneficiaries were not named in the will.
The friend holds the money on trust to distribute as directed in the letter.
(D) The friend holds the money on trust to distribute as directed in the letter. The usual rule is that where a trust is to take effect on death, all its terms must be included in a valid will. However, where the will declares a trust but does not identify the beneficiaries, a valid half-secret trust arises provided that the terms of the trust were communicated to the trustee before the will was made and the communication is consistent with the wording of the will. The secret trustee must accept the trust either expressly or impliedly by silence. Here, the will refers to a communication which was made before the date of the will and is consistent with the letter already sent. Therefore the half-secret trust is valid, and the friend must distribute the money as directed in the letter. (A) and (B) are incorrect because the half-secret trust is valid. (C) and (E) are incorrect because it is clear on the face of the will that the friend is a trustee, and so he may in no circumstances keep the money for himself.
A woman made a will leaving a gift of “£50,000 to the children of my sister who reach the age of 18”. The woman died three months ago and was survived by her sister who has two children, aged 20 and 14. The sister now discovers that she is pregnant with a third child, conceived after the woman’s death.
Which of the following best describes how this gift will be distributed?
A The gift of £50,000 will pass only to the 20-year-old.
B The gift of £50,000 may pass to both the 20-year-old and the 14-year-old.
C The gift of £50,000 may pass to the 20-year-old, the 14-year-old, and the baby.
D The gift of £50,000 will initially pass to the 20-year-old and the 14-year-old but will be redistributed on each occasion that the sister has another child.The gift of £50,000 will initially pass to the 20-year-old and the 14-year-old but will be redistributed on each occasion that the sister has another child. - no response given
E The gift will fail for uncertainty.
The gift of £50,000 may pass to both the 20-year-old and the 14-year-old.
(B) The gift of £50,000 may pass to both the 20-year-old and the 14-year-old. A class gift is a gift of property to be divided among beneficiaries who fulfil a general description. Here, the class gift is to be divided among the children of the sister who reach the age of 18. Class closing rules apply to determine how and when a class gift should be distributed. Generally, a class closes – to the exclusion of any potential beneficiary not then living-when at least one beneficiary has a vested interest. When there is a contingent gift, with a condition that needs to be satisfied, the class closes at the date of the testator’s death if there is any living beneficiary who has met the condition. The class then includes any other living beneficiary who later meets the condition. Here, the class closes at the date of the woman’s death because the sister already has one child who has reached the age of 18 and has therefore fulfilled the condition. Any future children of the sister who are ‘living’ at this time may also claim a share of the £50,000 when they reach the age of 18. This includes the 14-year-old only. The baby has no future entitlement as it had not been conceived before the class closed on the woman’s death. (A) is incorrect. Whilst the 20-year-old has fulfilled the contingency and so can claim a share of the £50,000 now, the 14-year-old can also claim a share when they reach the age of 18. (C) is incorrect. The baby was not conceived when the class closed on the woman’s death and so is not entitled to a share. (D) is incorrect. The class closed on the woman’s death, and any future children of the sister will have no entitlement to share in the £50,000. (E) is incorrect. A class gift such as this is valid.
A man has owned 7,500 shares in an unlisted trading company since January 2001. On 1 July 2023, he gave 3,000 shares to his son. The company has an issued share capital of 10,000 shares.
The values of different shareholdings in the shares on 1 July 2023 are as follows:
Up to 25%: £5
26% to 50%: £8
51% to 74%: £13
75% or more: £20
What is the transfer of value for inheritance tax purposes on the gift of the shares to his son?
A £0 under the related property rule
B £24,000
C £60,000
D £58,500
E £114,000
£114,000.
£114,000. The transfer of value is always the loss to the donor. With unquoted shares the value by which the estate has diminished is used. The value of the man’s shares before the gift was £150,000 (since he owned 75% of the shares, we calculate value at £20 per share). After the gift, the man held 45% of the shares (4,500) which were worth £8 per share (£36,000). £150,000 - £36,000 = £114,000
A father paid £50,000 towards his daughter’s purchase of an apartment costing £100,000. The apartment was conveyed into the daughter’s name alone, and there was no declaration or evidence as to the father’s intentions. The father and daughter are now estranged, and the daughter has sold the flat for £150,000. The father wishes to claim as much as possible from the sale proceeds.
Which of the following best describes the father’s claim?
A He may reclaim £50,000 under a presumed resulting trust.
B He has no claim because a gift is presumed.
C He may claim £75,000 if he can prove that no gift was intended.
D He may claim £75,000 under a presumed resulting trust.
E He may reclaim £50,000 if he can prove that no gift was intended.
He may claim £75,000 if he can prove that no gift was intended.
(C) The father may claim £75,000 if he can prove that no gift was intended. Where an individual contributes to the purchase of property in the name of another and there is no evidence that a gift was intended, the usual presumption is that the legal owner holds on resulting trust for herself and the other party in proportion to their respective contributions. This presumption does not apply where the contributor was the father or husband of the legal owner, or was acting in loco parentis to the legal owner. In these cases the presumption of advancement applies and it is presumed that the contributor intended to make a gift unless he can prove that he did not. Here, the presumption of resulting trust does not apply because the contributor was the legal owner’s father. It is therefore presumed that he intended a gift unless he can prove that he did not. (A) and (D) are incorrect because the presumption of resulting trust does not apply here as the contributor was the father of the legal owner. (B) is incorrect because, although the presumption is that a gift was intended, the presumption can be rebutted by evidence that this was not the case. (E) is incorrect because, if it can be shown that the daughter holds on resulting trust, she holds in proportion to their contributions, so the father would be entitled to claim half of the sale proceeds.
A man made a valid will 10 years ago. It included the following provisions:
(1) I give my LMN plc shares to my cousin’s two daughters jointly.
(2) I give the remainder of my estate to my sister.
There are no other relevant clauses. The man has just died. The cousin’s older daughter died last year, but the other daughter survives. The man’s sister is also still alive.
Which of the following best describes entitlement to the man’s estate?
A The sister will inherit the entire estate.
B The cousin’s surviving daughter will inherit the LMN plc shares and the sister will inherit the remainder of the estate.
C The cousin’s surviving daughter will receive half of the shares, and the other half of the shares will pass to the man’s sister. The man’s sister will also inherit the rest of his estate.
D The cousin’s surviving daughter will receive half of the shares, and the other half will pass via the intestacy rules. The man’s sister will inherit the remainder of the estate.
E The shares will pass via the intestacy rules, and the man’s sister will inherit the remainder of the estate.
The cousin’s surviving daughter will inherit the LMN plc shares and the sister will inherit the remainder of the estate.
(B) The cousin’s surviving daughter will inherit the LMN plc shares and the sister will inherit the remainder of the estate. If a beneficiary has predeceased the testator, the gift to them will lapse – that is, fail. A gift to two or more people as joint tenants will not lapse unless all the recipients die before the testator. If one joint tenant dies, the surviving joint tenants are entitled to the entire gift. Here, the man left his shares to his cousin’s two daughters jointly. Because the man gave the gift to the daughters as joint tenants, the surviving daughter is entitled to all of the shares. (A), (C), (D), and (E) are, therefore, incorrect. The surviving daughter will inherit all of the shares, and the intestacy rules will not apply.
A buyer of a piece of land recently completed his purchase. A deed of easement over the piece of land was included in the epitome of title. The buyer claims that he did not know about the right of way contained in the deed and that he is not bound by the right of way.
Which of the following best describes the buyer’s position?
A The buyer is not bound by the right of way because he did not know about it at completion.
B The buyer is bound by the right of way if the easement was registered as a D(iii) land charge.
C The buyer is bound by the right of way because he had imputed notice of it.
D The buyer is bound by the right of way because it is a legal interest and he is bound irrespective of notice.
E The buyer is not bound by the right of way because he is a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration without notice of it.
The buyer is bound by the right of way because it is a legal interest and he is bound irrespective of notice.
(D) The buyer is bound by the right of way because it is a legal interest and he is bound irrespective of notice. A buyer of a legal estate will purchase subject to any legal interests which subsist whether or not they were aware of them. Legal interests bind a buyer irrespective of notice. A legal easement is one that is created, as here, by deed. Thus, the buyer is bound by this legal interest irrespective of notice. (A) is incorrect because, as explained above, the buyer is bound by the legal easement irrespective of notice. (B) is incorrect because a D(iii) land charge protects an equitable easement, and this is a legal easement. (C) and (D) are incorrect because imputed notice (notice given to an agent acting on behalf of the buyer) and the buyer’s position as a bona fide purchaser are relevant to the doctrine of notice, which is used to determine the enforceability of certain equitable interests. The easement here is a legal interest
A man is buying a house which is 20 years old. The survey he commissioned includes the following information:
‘Internal works have been recently carried out to the property. A wall was erected in the large dining space to create an office room in the rear of the original room. From my inspection, the internal works were minor in nature and did not involve alteration to any load bearing walls.’
The seller did not obtain permission from the local authority to undertake the work. Though the surveyor’s report confirmed the works were minor internal works, the man is still concerned and discusses the matter with his solicitor.
What advice is the solicitor likely to give regarding this issue?
A That the work has been carried out to a listed building and so planning permission was required for the work.
B That the work is considered to be development and thus the seller should have obtained planning permission.
C That the work is not considered to be development and thus planning permission was not required.
D That the work constitutes a material change of use and thus the seller should have obtained planning permission.
E That the work is considered to be development but nonetheless did not require express permission because it could be carried out under the permitted development regime.
That the work is not considered to be development and thus planning permission was not required.
(C) The solicitor should advise the client that the work is not considered to be development and thus planning permission was not required. Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, planning permission is required for any development of land. Development includes building and making a material change of use. However, minor internal work is not considered to be development and so planning permission is not required. The survey confirms that the work was minor in nature. Therefore, (B) is incorrect. (A) is incorrect because while any alterations to a listed building (that is, one listed as historical or otherwise significant) usually need planning permission, there is no suggestion in the facts that the property here is a listed building. Additionally, the facts indicate the property is a house that is only 20 years old. It is highly unlikely to be on the list. (D) is incorrect because merely creating two rooms from one internally would not constitute a material change of use. Change of use contemplates changes such as conversion of one house to two flats or a house to a shop and a flat. (E) is incorrect because if work is not considered to be development in the first place, then deemed permission under the permitted development regime is irrelevant (because no permission is required)
Question
A store owner is granted a 40-year lease on a shop on 1st January 2023. The premium payable is £55,000 and the net present value of the rent payable is £175,000. Annual rents under the lease are £6,000 per annum (a total of £240,000).
On what amount will the stamp duty land tax be calculated?
A £0, as stamp duty land tax is not owed on leases.
B £55,000, as stamp duty land tax will be calculated based only on the premium paid.
C £175,000, as stamp duty land tax will be calculated based only on the present value of the lease payments.
D £240,000, as stamp duty land tax will be calculated based only on the actual value of the rent to be paid.
E £230,000, as the stamp duty land tax will be calculated based only on both the premium paid and the present value of the lease payments.
£230,000, as the stamp duty land tax will be calculated based only on both the premium paid and the present value of the lease payments.
A landlord owns an office building. Several floors of the building are only partially filled. A potential tenant has offered to lease space in the building if the landlord can lease an entire floor of the building to the tenant. The third floor of the building has only one tenant who leases half the floor. That tenant’s lease will expire in eight months. So that she may lease the third floor to the prospective tenant, the landlord would like to terminate the lease of the current tenant at the end of its term and offer that tenant similar office space on the fourth floor of the building.
The landlord and current tenant did not contract out of the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (Part II) (‘1954 Act’) when they entered the lease that is about to expire.
May the landlord terminate the tenancy at the end of the lease term under these circumstances?
A No, because the time for a section 26 notice has already passed.
B Yes, because the landlord will offer suitable alternative accommodations to the tenant.
C No, because none of the statutory grounds for possession under the 1954 Act apply.
D Yes, because the contractual term of the lease will have ended.
E No, because the time for a section 25 notice has already passed.
Yes, because the landlord will offer suitable alternative accommodations to the tenant.
(B) The landlord may terminate the lease because the landlord will offer suitable alternative accommodations to the tenant. Under the 1954 Act, a tenant can continue to occupy leased commercial premises under the lease after the term of the lease expires unless the landlord serves a section 25 notice on the tenant between six to 12 months before the end of the lease term. The notice must state a statutory ground for termination of the lease. Such grounds include breaches of obligations under the lease by the tenant; the availability of suitable, alternative premises for the tenant; and the landlord’s desire to demolish, reconstruct, or move into the premises. Here, the landlord will offer suitable alternative premises to the tenant (making (C) incorrect). Additionally, the facts indicate that there are eight months left on the lease, so the time for a section 25 notice has not expired (making (E) incorrect). (A) is incorrect, both because the time for a notice to terminate the tenancy has not passed and because the notice from the landlord is a section 25 notice (a section 26 notice is a notice from a tenant to request a new lease at the end of the lease term). (D) is incorrect because merely reaching the end of the term of a lease is not a ground for terminating a commercial tenancy under the 1954 Act.
A woman died intestate, survived by her husband and her daughter from a previous relationship. The assets in her sole name totalled £700,000, comprising the family home (£450,000), personal belongings (£50,000), and £200,000 in shares.
Which of the following best describes how the woman’s estate will be distributed?
A The woman’s daughter will be entitled to a statutory legacy of £322,000 only.
B The woman’s daughter will have no entitlement to the woman’s estate, and the whole estate will pass to the husband.
C The woman’s estate will be split so that the husband and daughter receive half each.
D The daughter will be entitled to the sum of £164,000 from the estate.
E The personal belongings and family home will pass to the husband, whilst the shares will be divided equally between the husband and the daughter.
The daughter will be entitled to the sum of £164,000 from the estate.
(D) The daughter will be entitled to the sum of £164,000 from the estate. The rules of intestate succession apply when a person dies without a will. Under these rules, when the deceased is survived by a spouse or civil partner and issue, the spouse or civil partner will receive personal chattels, £322,000, and one-half of the residue. The deceased’s issue will take the other half of the residue. The intestacy rules classify children born to unmarried parents as issue, and so the daughter is entitled to share in the estate. The husband will receive the personal belongings (worth £50,000), a statutory legacy of £322,000, and half of the remaining assets. Once the personal belongings and statutory legacy are received by the husband, this leaves £328,000 of the £700,000 estate remaining. This sum is split equally between the husband and daughter, and so the daughter receives £164,000 under the intestacy rules. (A) is incorrect. It is the spouse, not the daughter, who is entitled to the statutory legacy. (B) is incorrect. Under the intestacy rules, the daughter is entitled to share in the estate. It does not matter that her parents were unmarried. (C) and (E) are incorrect as they do not accurately describe how the estate will be shared in this intestacy situation.
Question
A man died three weeks ago, leaving a will in which his civil partner was appointed as his sole executor. The executor is keen to protect himself against claims from unknown creditors. He now plans to place advertisements to publicise the man’s death in the London Gazette, a local newspaper, and a few other appropriate publications.
How long should the man’s civil partner wait before distributing the estate to protect himself against claims from unknown creditors as a result of these advertisements?
A Two months from the date of the man’s death.
B Six months from the date of the man’s death.
C Six months from the date of the grant of probate.
D Two months from the date of the advertisements.
E Two months from the date of the grant of probate.
Two months from the date of the advertisements.
(D) Under section 27 Trustee Act 1925, an executor can receive protection from claims by unknown creditors by advertising the decedent’s death in the London Gazette, a local newspaper, and any other appropriate newspaper. They then must wait two months from the date of the advertisements before distributing the estate. Consequently, the time periods stated in (A), (B), (C), and (E) are incorrect.
A suspect is arrested on suspicion of involvement in a drugs cartel importing class A drugs into the UK. The officer in charge of the investigation wishes to prevent the defendant from having legal advice. The officer suspects exercise of the right to legal advice will result in other members of the cartel being alerted to the investigation and the consequent destruction of evidence.
Can the suspect be refused access to legal advice?
A Yes, access to legal advice can be delayed for a maximum of 24 hours.
B Yes, access to legal advice can be delayed for a maximum of 36 hours.
C Yes, access to legal advice can be refused entirely.
D No, access to legal advice can be refused only if the refusal is likely to prevent an act of violence.
E No, every person under arrest has the right to receive private legal advice during detention at any time.
Yes, access to legal advice can be delayed for a maximum of 36 hours.
(B) Access to legal advice can be delayed for 36 hours. Delay in accessing legal advice is permitted only when: (1) the suspect is arrested on an indictable only or either way offence, (2) a police officer of the rank of superintendent or above has authorised the delay in writing, and (3) the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that exercise of the right will lead to interference with evidence, interference with others, alerting other suspects, or hindering the recovery of property related to the offence. The right can be delayed 36 hours at most, and so (B) is the correct answer. (E) is incorrect as access to legal advice can in some circumstances be prevented. (A) is incorrect as it misstates the length of time legal advice can be delayed. (C) is incorrect as access to legal advice can be delayed for a maximum of 36 hours. (D) is incorrect because access to legal advice can be delayed for other reasons as stated above
A man approached the cashier at a local petrol station and offered to exchange a pair of sunglasses for some petrol. The cashier refused. The man then pulled a knife out of his pocket and told the cashier he wanted to fill up. The cashier, who was quite a bit older than the man, gave him some ‘fatherly advice’ that crime does not pay. In response to the advice, the man put the knife away. Feeling sorry for the man, the cashier then agreed to give the man some petrol for the sunglasses. The man then left. The cashier then discovered the man had taken the sunglasses from a display case in the store and clipped the tag off before offering them to the cashier. The man was arrested shortly thereafter.
With which offences should the prosecution charge the man?
A The man should be charged with theft and attempted robbery.
B The man should be charged with theft and robbery.
C The man should be charged with fraud by false representation and attempted robbery.
D The man should be charged with theft but not attempted robbery because he voluntarily abandoned the attempt.
E The man should be charged with fraud by false representation but not with attempted robbery because he voluntarily abandoned the attempt.
The man should be charged with fraud by false representation and attempted robbery.
(C) The man should be charged with fraud by false representation and attempted robbery. Fraud by false representation requires that the defendant dishonestly make a false representation intending to make a gain for himself or a loss for another. Here the man dishonestly represented that the glasses were his, intending to make a gain for himself (the petrol). The man can also be convicted of attempted robbery because he attempted a taking of the property of another in the presence of the victim by force and with the intent to permanently deprive the victim of it. The fact that the man was persuaded not to carry out the robbery does not affect his liability for attempt; that crime was completed as soon as he pulled out a knife and demanded the petrol. He did an act that was more than merely preparatory. However, he did not actually obtain the petrol by use of force. Therefore, he did not commit robbery, so (B) is incorrect. (A) and (D) are incorrect because theft occurs when the man intends to deprive the cashier of the glasses permanently. Here, the man just wanted to use the glasses as a way to convince the cashier to give him petrol. It is arguable that the man’s actions were analogous to acting as the owner by clipping off the tag. However, fraud by misrepresentation is more clearly made out and, therefore, a far more preferable charge to theft. (E) is incorrect because the rule is that abandonment is not a defence to attempt. As discussed above, the crime of attempted robbery was completed as soon as the man pulled the knife out of his pocket and demanded petrol
A defendant is charged with theft of a case of wine worth £100 from a grocery store. The defendant plans to plead not guilty.
Where will the case be heard?
A Magistrates’ Court.
B Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on where the defendant elects trial.Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on where the defendant elects trial.
C Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on whether the Magistrates’ Court accepts jurisdiction.
D Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on whether the Magistrates’ Court accepts jurisdiction and where the defendant elects trial.
E Crown Court.
Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on where the defendant elects trial.
(B) The case can be heard in the Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court, depending on where the defendant elects trial. Whilst theft is ordinarily an either way offence, theft under the value of £200 is treated as summary only in that the Magistrates’ Court cannot decline jurisdiction. However, the defendant is able to elect Crown Court trial. (A) is incorrect, as the defendant is still able to elect Crown Court trial. (C) and (D) are incorrect, as the Magistrates’ Court cannot decline jurisdiction. (E) is incorrect, as the matter will stay in the Magistrates’ Court if the defendant accepts
A minor beneficiary has an absolute vested interest under a trust of which they are the sole beneficiary. The beneficiary wishes to use the income for the payment of school fees.
Which of the following best states the legal position with regard to such use?
A The trustees must give the minor beneficiary income for the payment of school fees because the beneficiary has a vested interest.
B The trustees must pay the minor beneficiary’s school fees, but the income must be paid directly to the school or to a parent or guardian.
C The trustees may, at their discretion, give income to the minor beneficiary to pay for the school fees.
D The trustees must give the minor beneficiary income for the payment of school fees if the beneficiary can demonstrate genuine financial need.
E The trustees may, at their discretion, pay the minor beneficiary’s school fees, but they must give the income directly to the school or to a parent or guardian.
The trustees may, at their discretion, pay the minor beneficiary’s school fees, but they must give the income directly to the school or to a parent or guardian.
(E) Under the power of maintenance, trustees have the power to pay or apply the income of the trust for a minor beneficiary’s maintenance, education, or benefit. The power is discretionary. Because a minor is not capable of giving a valid receipt, the income must be applied directly to the purpose required or to a parent or guardian for use in the beneficiary’s interest. Therefore, the trustees may, at their discretion, pay the minor beneficiary’s school fees, but they must give the income directly to the school or to a parent or guardian. (A) and (B) are incorrect because the power of maintenance is discretionary and applies to minor beneficiaries with vested or contingent interests. (C) is incorrect because the trustees must give the income to the school or to a parent or guardian, not to the minor beneficiary. (D) is incorrect because the power of maintenance is discretionary and because there is no requirement for the beneficiary to demonstrate financial need.
A 20-year-old woman was arrested and charged with manslaughter.
In what court will the case against the woman be commenced?
A The Crown Court.
B The Criminal Court.
C The County Court.
D The Justice Court.
E The Magistrates’ Court.
The Magistrates’ Court.
(E) Prosecution of all criminal offences, including murder, starts in the Magistrates’ Court. The magistrate is then obligated to transfer the murder case to the Crown Court. Other offences such as theft also start in the Magistrates’ Court, but they need not be sent to the Crown Court unless they are sufficiently serious to warrant greater punishment than the Magistrates’ Court can impose. Therefore, (A), (B), (C), and (D) are incorrect.
A defendant is charged with shoplifting. The allegation is that the defendant stole makeup worth £100.00 from the local supermarket.
In what court will the criminal prosecution for this offence begin?
A The Magistrates’ Court, as all prosecutions of adults begin in the Magistrates’ Court.
B The Magistrates’ Court, as low value shoplifting is considered summary only for the purposes of allocation and so cannot be heard in the Crown Court.
C The Crown Court, as high value shoplifting is considered indictable only and so will go to the Crown Court.
D The Magistrates’ Court, as high value shoplifting is considered an either way offence and so trial will take place in the Magistrates’ Court.
E Either the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court, as it is an either way offence and the defendant can elect where they have their first appearance.
The Magistrates’ Court, as all prosecutions of adults begin in the Magistrates’ Court.
(A) All prosecutions, for summary only, either way, and indictable only offences, start in the Magistrates’ Court. Shoplifting under £200 is considered low value theft, and so the Magistrates’ Court cannot decline jurisdiction (though the defendant can still elect Crown Court trial if they prefer). However, the issue here is that all first appearances for all offences take place in the Magistrates’ Court, and so (B), (C), (D), and (E) are all incorrect.
The managing director of a law firm’s client disputes a bill the firm recently issued for professional services. The firm agrees to reduce the professional fees by £500 to £3,500.
How should this reduction be reflected in the client ledger?
A In the client ledger account, credit the client side with £500.
B In the cash account, credit the client side with £500.
C In the client ledger account, debit the business side with £500 and £100 to reflect the reduction in VAT.
D In the client ledger account, credit the business side with £500 and £100 to reflect the reduction in VAT.
E In the client ledger account, delete the original entry and re-enter the correct sums.
In the client ledger account, credit the business side with £500 and £100 to reflect the reduction in VAT.
(D) The reduction will be shown as a credit on the business side of the client account (and a debit in the profit cost and HMRC ledgers) to reflect the reduction in costs actually billed. Thus (D) is correct. (A) is incorrect because it should be a credit on the business side. (B) is incorrect because the question specifically asked about the client ledger account rather than the cash account. (C) is incorrect because the reduction should be shown as a credit to the client and not as a debit. (E) is incorrect because the accounts must accurately track the sequence of events, including the issuing of the original invoice and the subsequent reduction in fees.
The title to Green Farm is registered at His Majesty’s Land Registry. There are three registered charges on the charges register: the first registered in February 2013, the second registered in March 2014 and the third registered in October 2015. All three charges are residential mortgages using standard mortgage deeds. The registered proprietor has stopped making payments to the third lender but has kept up his payments on the other two mortgages.
Which of the following best describes the position of the third lender?
A It can take possession proceedings only if it provides notice to the first and second lenders and both decline to take possession proceedings themselves.It can take possession proceedings only if it provides notice to the first and second lenders and both decline to take possession proceedings themselves. - incorrect
B It can take possession proceedings and can retain the sale proceeds in their entirety to pay off its charge.
C It can take possession proceedings but will have to discharge the mortgages in favour of the first lender and the second lender out of the sale proceeds before it can pay off its own mortgage.
D It can take possession proceedings and repay its own charge out of the sale proceeds first and then must pass on the balance of the sale proceeds to the defaulting registered proprietor.
E It can take possession proceedings and will have to split the sale proceeds equally between all three lenders based on the principles of equity.
It can take possession proceedings but will have to discharge the mortgages in favour of the first lender and the second lender out of the sale proceeds before it can pay off its own mortgage.
(C) The third lender can take possession proceedings but will have to discharge the first and second mortgages before it can pay off its own mortgage. When a legal mortgage is entered on the register of title, it will have priority over any interest whose priority is not protected when the mortgage is registered. Here, the mortgages have priority in order of their registration on the register of title. Thus, due to the doctrine of priority of mortgages, the third lender must pay off the prior charges of the first and second lenders out of the sale proceeds before its own. (A) is incorrect because the third lender may take possession proceedings without notifying or allowing the first and second lenders to do so first. However, as explained above, the third lender must discharge the first and second lenders’ mortgages out of the sale proceeds before paying off its own mortgage. (B) and (D) are incorrect because, as explained above, the third lender cannot pay itself first out of the sale proceeds due to the doctrine of priority of mortgages. The third lender must apply the sale proceeds to the repayment of the prior charges in the order that they were registered. If there are any sale proceeds left once the first and second lenders have been paid off, this will be paid to the third lender, and any balance remaining will then go to the defaulting registered proprietor. (E) is incorrect because priority of mortgages requires that the sale proceeds are applied in the order that the charges were registered, with the first lender being first in line
A defendant was arrested on suspicion of criminal damage. He was interviewed under caution at the police station and answered questions, stating that he was at home at the time of the offence. At trial, on advice from his legal representative, the defendant does not give evidence.
Can an adverse inference be drawn from the defendant’s silence?
A Yes, as the defendant is compellable for the defence.
B Yes, as the defendant has not given an account and been subjected to cross-examination.
C No, as the defendant was following the advice of his solicitor.
D No, as the defendant gave an account in police interview.
E No, as the defendant has no obligation to give evidence at trial.
Yes, as the defendant has not given an account and been subjected to cross-examination.
(B) An adverse inference can be drawn from the defendant’s silence because he has not given evidence at trial and been subjected to cross-examination. The defendant is not compellable for either the prosecution or the defence, and so (A) is incorrect. However, a failure to give evidence and be exposed to cross-examination can result in an adverse inference being drawn. (C) is incorrect because legal advice to remain silent will not preclude the drawing of an adverse inference. (D) is wrong as an inference can be drawn from a failure to give evidence at trial, even when an account was provided in interview. (E) is wrong as, whilst there is no obligation to give evidence at trial, a failure to do so can lead to an adverse inference being drawn.
In his will a man gave £100,000 to trustees on trust to invest and use the income for the maintenance of the building of the Newtown Museum and Art Gallery. Shortly after his death, the museum closed, the building was sold, and the contents of the museum were dispersed.
Which of the following statements best describes the effect of the gift?
A The gift will be applied cy-pres if the court finds evidence of general charitable intention.
B The trust fails and the trustees hold on resulting trust for the residue of the man’s estate.
C The gift will be applied cy-pres for a similar purpose.
D The trustees have discretion to use the fund for a similar purpose.
E The trust fails because its terms breach the inalienability rule.
The gift will be applied cy-pres for a similar purpose.
(C) The gift will be applied cy-pres for a similar purpose. Where a trust for a charitable purpose has taken effect but subsequently fails because it is impossible or impractical to carry out, the funds will be applied cy-pres to a similar charitable purpose. This is a charitable trust because it is for a charitable purpose, it is for the public benefit, and it is exclusively charitable. The gift vested at the date of the man’s death, at which time the museum was still in existence. This means that the gift for a charitable purpose was effective at the date of death, and the funds will be applied cy-pres. (A) is incorrect because it is only necessary to find evidence of general charitable intention in a case of initial failure. (B) is incorrect because the trust does not fail. (D) is incorrect because the application of the fund is not for the trustees to decide. (E) is incorrect because the inalienability rule does not apply to charitable trusts.
A solicitor is acting for a woman applying for first registration of her unregistered title. She possesses the title deeds to the property and all necessary documentation. The woman mentions to her solicitor that she recently granted a five-year lease to a tenant who is currently occupying the property.
What class of title is likely to be granted to the woman when the property is registered?
A Freehold title.Freehold title.
B Good freehold title.
C Absolute title.
D Possessory title.
E Leasehold title.
Absolute title.
(C) On first registration, His Majesty’s Land Registry (‘HMLR’) is likely to grant absolute freehold title since the woman possesses the title deeds and all necessary documentation as to her ownership. The tenant’s lease may be an overriding interest (as a legal lease for seven years or less), meaning the woman’s registered estate will be subject to it, but the existence of the lease does not mean the woman will not be awarded absolute title. (A) is incorrect because it is not a class of title. A freehold estate is one of the two legal estates in land in England and Wales. (B) is incorrect because this is not a class of title. Good leasehold title may be awarded when the freehold title has not been produced to HMLR on application to register a lease. (D) is incorrect because possessory title is a class of title based on factual possession of the land rather than documentary evidence. It is commonly given when an application for registration is based on adverse possession or when the title deeds have been lost. Here, the woman possesses the title deeds and necessary documentation, so possessory title will not be awarded. (E) is incorrect because this is not a class of title. A leasehold estate is the other of the two legal estates in land in England and Wales.
A defendant appears before court charged with theft. The district judge believes that a custodial sentence is likely and is minded to refuse bail.
Which of the following best states an exception to the right to bail upon which the defendant could be refused bail?
A The defendant was previously charged with battery and was on bail at the time of the offence.
B There are grounds to believe that the defendant would fail to surrender.
C There are grounds to believe that the defendant would commit further offences on bail.
D There are substantial grounds to believe that the defendant would interfere with witnesses.
E There are grounds to believe that the defendant would obstruct justice.
There are substantial grounds to believe that the defendant would interfere with witnesses.
(D) Bail can be refused if there are substantial grounds to believe that the defendant would fail to surrender, commit further offences, or interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct justice. (B), (C), and (E) are all incorrect as they miss the key term substantial. Bail can also be refused if the defendant is charged with an offence that can be tried in the Crown Court (such as burglary, arson, or GBH), and they were on bail at the time of the offence. Whilst in (A) the defendant was previously charged with battery, this offence cannot be tried in the Crown Court because it is summary only, and so (A) is also incorrect
A woman asked her friend if she could borrow his car to drive to the grocery store. Although the friend knew the woman sometimes sold illegal drugs, he gave the woman his car keys and told her she could use the car to do her shopping. The woman drove to the store as agreed because that is where she had arranged to meet someone to sell them illegal drugs. The woman was arrested as soon as she passed the illegal drugs to the buyer. The police then traced the car back to the woman’s friend.
Can the friend be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs?
A The friend can be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs as an accomplice.
B The friend cannot be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs because the friend’s acts were not sufficient for liability for aiding, abetting, procuring, or counselling.
C The friend can be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs because the friend knew the woman sometimes sold illegal drugs.
D The friend cannot be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs because supplying transportation is not part of the actus reus of illegally selling drugs.
E The friend can be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs because the friend’s actions were sufficient to impose liability on him as a co-principal.
The friend cannot be held criminally liable for the sale of the illegal drugs because the friend’s acts were not sufficient for liability for aiding, abetting, procuring, or counselling.
(B) The friend is not guilty of any crime because the friend’s acts were not sufficient for liability for aiding, abetting, procuring, or counselling. The best way to arrive at this choice is to eliminate the other choices. (A) is incorrect. An accomplice aids, abets, counsels, or procures another offender. Here, despite the fact the friend knew the woman sometimes sold illegal drugs, nothing indicates he thought the woman was going to the store for any purpose other than to buy groceries. Therefore, he did not act as an aider, abettor, etc. (C) is incorrect. The mere knowledge that a person sometimes commits crimes is not a sufficient basis for imposing criminal liability on anyone who unknowingly helps the person commit a crime. (D) is incorrect because a person can be guilty of aiding even if the person’s action is not part of the physical acts (actus reus) required for the crime. Any act that aids, abets, procures, or counsels can be a sufficient basis for imposing liability. (E) is incorrect because a co-principal is one who acts together with another to commit the prohibited act, and here the friend did not act with the woman in selling the illegal drugs.
A man is arrested on Monday at 2pm on suspicion of robbery. He enters the police station at 3pm. He is signed into the custody suite at 4pm.
Until when can the man be kept in custody without charge if all possible extensions of time are granted?
A Thursday 2pm.
B Thursday 3pm.
C Friday 2pm.
D Friday 3pm.
E Friday 4pm.
(D) The man can be kept in custody without charge until Friday 3pm. The maximum time that a suspect can remain in custody prior to charge is 96 hours from the ‘relevant time’. The relevant time is when the suspect arrives at the police station. The relevant time here is 3pm on Monday. 96 hours later is 3pm on Friday, and so (D) is the correct answer. Accordingly, (A), (B), (C), and (E) are incorrect because they use an incorrect relevant time or an incorrect detention period.
A man has instructed a solicitor to act for him on his purchase of a coastal property. The man is concerned about whether there are any public rights of way over the property and asks the solicitor to confirm that there are none.
How will the solicitor find out the information which the client is seeking?
A The drainage and water search.
B The local search.
C The commons registration search.
D The environmental search.
E The coal mining search.
(B) A local search gathers information from the local authority. The first part of a local search reveals whether there are registrations by the local authority in the land charges register. The second part is a standard set of enquiries of the local authority which include enquiries about roads fronting the property, public rights of way, and planning entries and building regulations relevant to the property. A local search may also include optional enquiries. (A) is incorrect because, as the name implies, a drainage search is an enquiry sent to the local water company that asks whether the property is connected to a public foul drainage system and public water supply. (C) is incorrect because a commons registration search is an optional search which is performed when the property appears to abut common land or a town or village green to determine whether use of the property is restricted or burdened by its proximity to public land. (D) is incorrect because an environmental search is an electronic database search that a solicitor may perform from their office to determine whether the property is likely to have been contaminated by hazardous wastes in the past (because if it was, the buyer could be liable for clean-up costs in the future). (E) is incorrect because, as you might expect, a coal mining search is performed in coal mining areas to discover whether the property might be impacted by a coal mine.
A defendant is standing trial on an allegation of grievous bodily harm (‘GBH’) on his ex-girlfriend in the Crown Court. The defendant is giving evidence. He states, “I was acting in self-defence. That bad girl is violent. She beat me and I had to fend her off. She’s been done for it before; it’s just what she’s like”.
What will be the effect of the defendant’s statement about his ex-girlfriend?
A Evidence of the defendant’s bad character remains inadmissible because his statement falls outside the seven gateways of admissibility.
B Evidence of the defendant’s bad character will be admissible only if it is relevant to an important matter in issue between the prosecution and the defence.
C Evidence of the defendant’s bad character will be admissible only if it is important explanatory evidence.
D Evidence of the defendant’s bad character will be admissible in the proceedings.
E Evidence of the defendant’s bad character will be admissible in the proceedings unless the defendant did not realise this would be the consequence.
Evidence of the defendant’s bad character will be admissible in the proceedings.
(D) The defendant’s statement about his ex-girlfriend will cause evidence of his bad character to be admissible in the proceedings. One of the seven gateways to bad character being admitted in evidence is when the defendant attacks the character of another, which is the case here. There is no requirement for the defendant to realise the effect of their statement, and so (E) is incorrect. (A) is incorrect as the defendant’s statement falls under the gateway of the defendant attacking another’s character. (B) and (C) are incorrect as, whilst evidence of the defendant’s bad character could potentially also be admissible under the grounds cited, these are not the only routes to admission because the defendant clearly attacked his ex-girlfriend’s character
An executor is administering the estate of a woman who died recently. The woman had a son, currently aged 18, who has an interest in the estate contingent upon him reaching the age of 21. The executor will continue to hold the son’s interest (comprising a sum in a high interest bank account) on trust in the meantime. The will contains no provisions in relation to the holding of this sum.
The son has asked for the interest generated on the bank account to be paid to him now and going forward.
Which of the following best states the position of the executors in relation to this request?
A The executor must accumulate the interest received in the bank account and cannot pay it to the son until he is 21.
B The executor is required to pay all interest to the son now, as he has reached the age of 18.
C The executor retains full discretion about whether to pay the interest to the son.
D The executor can choose to apply the interest only for purposes related to the son’s maintenance, education, or benefit.
E The executor may pay the interest to the son only if he is able to demonstrate a need for this money.
The executor is required to pay all interest to the son now, as he has reached the age of 18.
(B) The executor is required to pay all interest to the son now, as he has reached the age of 18. This situation concerns the executor’s power to maintain a minor. When property is held for a minor beneficiary, PRs may apply the income for the maintenance, education, or benefit of the minor. Otherwise, the PRs must accumulate the income. Once the beneficiary turns 18, ongoing income must be paid to them until their contingent interest is satisfied. Here, now that the son is 18, he is entitled to receive all future interest received on the sum held. When he turns 21, he will receive the capital plus any accumulated income. (A) is therefore incorrect. (C) is incorrect because the executor must pay the interest to the son now that he is 18. (D) is incorrect because the executor must give the interest to the son regardless of the purpose for which he plans to use the income. (E) is incorrect because the son does not have to demonstrate a need for the money.
A man who was not domiciled in the UK died, leaving his estate of £140,000 to his sister. The estate includes a house worth £120,000 in the UK and a bank account with a UK bank worth £20,000. The man made a lifetime gift of £10,000 from his UK bank account to his son two years ago.
Which of the following statements is correct with respect to the man’s estate?
A The estate is not an excepted estate for inheritance tax purposes because of the property in the UK.
B The estate is an excepted estate and does not have to file an inheritance tax account.
C The estate owes inheritance tax because the man died as a non-UK domiciliary.
D The estate is an excepted estate, and so the PRs have to deliver an account to HMRC within six months from the end of the month of the man’s death.
E The estate is not an excepted estate because of the gift to the son.
The estate is not an excepted estate for inheritance tax purposes because of the property in the UK.
(A) The estate is not an excepted estate because of the property in the UK. An estate which owes no inheritance tax (‘IHT’) and does not have to file a formal IHT account is called an excepted estate. To be excepted, the estate’s total gross value plus specified transfers cannot exceed either (1) the inheritance tax threshold, currently £325,000, or (2) £3 million if the net chargeable estate does not exceed the threshold. In addition, if the deceased was not domiciled in the UK, an estate can be excepted only if the deceased’s UK estate consists solely of cash and/or quoted shares which do not total more than £150,000. Here, the man owned a house worth £120,000 in the UK. Consequently, the estate is not excepted, and an IHT account is required. (B) is, therefore, incorrect. (C) is incorrect. The man being a non-UK domiciliary does not mean his estate owes inheritance tax. Even if he was not domiciled in the UK, the deceased’s estate will still owe inheritance tax on the UK estate. (D) is incorrect because the estate is not excepted. Also, an IHT account is needed, but it must be delivered to HMRC within 12 months (rather than six months) from the end of the month of the man’s death. (E) is incorrect. The gift of £10,000 to the son is considered a specified transfer that must be added to the value of the estate. An estate can be excepted if specified transfers do not exceed £250,000 in the seven years before the deceased’s death
A defendant is standing trial for burglary. He is jointly charged with his nephew. The nephew pleads guilty before the start of the trial. Both the prosecution and the defendant want the nephew to give evidence. The nephew is tired of dealing with the criminal justice system and does not want to give evidence.
Which of the following best describes whether the defendant’s nephew will have to give evidence?
A The nephew is competent and compellable for both the prosecution and defence.
B The nephew is competent for both the prosecution and defence but only compellable for the defence.
C The nephew is neither competent nor compellable for the prosecution but both competent and compellable for the defence.
D The nephew is neither competent nor compellable for the prosecution but competent but not compellable for the defence.
E The nephew is competent but not compellable for both the prosecution and the defence.
The nephew is competent and compellable for both the prosecution and defence.
(A) The nephew is competent and compellable for both the prosecution and defence. Co-defendants are not competent or compellable for the prosecution, but they are competent but not compellable for the defence. However, if a co-defendant pleads guilty or the case is dropped, the co-defendant becomes an ordinary witness. Ordinary witnesses are competent and compellable for both parties. Here, after pleading guilty, the nephew became an ordinary witness and is both competent and compellable for the prosecution and the defence. This means either side can force him to give evidence. (B), (C), (D), and (E) are incorrect as they do not identify that the nephew is both competent and compellable for either side.
A buyer and a seller of a property are ready to exchange contracts. Their solicitors have agreed to use the Contract Incorporating the Standard Conditions of Sale (5th edition - 2018 revision), unamended, and the Law Society Formulae for exchanging contracts by telephone. The solicitors both have time available the following week and wish to exchange using Formula B.
How will the solicitors effect exchange of contracts?
A The buyer’s solicitor will send the contract signed by the buyer to the seller’s solicitor, along with the deposit. The seller’s solicitor will confirm both contracts are the same over the telephone, insert the exchange and completion dates in both, and send the part signed by the seller to the buyer’s solicitor.
B Each solicitor will hold their own client’s contract and will confirm the versions are the same over the telephone. They will then send their client’s signed part to each other, and the buyer’s solicitor will send the agreed deposit to the seller’s solicitor to hold as stakeholder.
C The buyer’s solicitor will send the contract signed by the buyer to the seller’s solicitor, who will confirm both contracts are the same, insert the exchange and completion dates in both, and send the part signed by the seller to the buyer’s solicitor. The buyer’s solicitor will then hold the agreed deposit as stakeholder.
D Each solicitor will hold their own client’s contract and will confirm the versions are the same over the telephone. They will then send their client’s signed part to each other, and the buyer’s solicitor will hold the agreed deposit funds as stakeholder.
E Each solicitor will send the other their client’s signed contract. The solicitors will confirm the versions are the same over the telephone, and the buyer’s solicitor will then send the deposit funds.
Each solicitor will hold their own client’s contract and will confirm the versions are the same over the telephone. They will then send their client’s signed part to each other, and the buyer’s solicitor will send the agreed deposit to the seller’s solicitor to hold as stakeholder.
the contract, confirms they are the same, and then sends it. The buyer’s solicitor will also send the deposit funds to the seller’s solicitor to hold as stakeholder pursuant to the unamended Standard Conditions of Sale. (A) is incorrect, as it describes a Formula A exchange – the buyer’s solicitor will send the contract signed by the buyer to the seller’s solicitor, along with the deposit. The seller’s solicitor will confirm both contracts are the same over the telephone, insert the exchange date in both, and send the part signed by the seller to the buyer’s solicitor. (C) is incorrect because it describes a Formula A exchange, and it also incorrectly provides that the buyer’s solicitor will hold the deposit. (D) is incorrect because although it describes a Formula B exchange, as just explained under the unamended Standard Conditions of Sale, the seller’s solicitor will hold the deposit funds as stakeholder. (E) is incorrect because no formula for exchange requires both solicitors to send their client’s contract to the other solicitor before confirming they are the same
In her will a woman appointed two trustees to hold her residuary estate on trust for her son for life with remainder to his children. The trust fund includes a plot of land which the trustees decide to sell. The land has been valued at £100,000. After obtaining informed consent from the woman’s son and the other trustee, one of the trustees buys the land from the trust at a public auction for £100,000.
Did the trustee act properly in purchasing the land?
A Yes, because he obtained the informed consent of the son.
B Yes, because he appears to have paid fair value for the land.
C No, due to potential conflicts of interest.
D Yes, because the land was sold in a public auction.
E Yes, because he obtained the consent of his co-trustee.
No, due to potential conflicts of interest.
(C) The trustee may not purchase the land due to potential conflicts of interest. Trustees must not place themselves in a position where their personal interests conflict with their fiduciary duties to the trust. The ‘self-dealing rule’ applies to prevent a trustee from purchasing trust property, and any such purchase is voidable at the instance of the beneficiaries. (A) is incorrect because a trustee’s purchase of trust property remains voidable, even if a beneficiary’s consent was obtained. (B) and (D) are incorrect because the rule applies to whatever sum the trustee pays for the trust property and regardless of whether it is sold at auction. (E) is incorrect because the consent of a co-trustee does not prevent the application of the self-dealing rule
A landlord owns the freehold of a unit which it let to the original tenant under the terms of a lease dated 20 July 2009. The original tenant assigned his interest in the lease to the second tenant 10 years ago. The second tenant assigned his interest in the lease to the current tenant five years ago and provided the landlord an Authorised Guarantee Agreement. The lease still has eight years left to run in its term. The current tenant is in arrears with his rent and is on the verge of bankruptcy.
Which of the following best describes the steps that the landlord could take regarding the rent arrears?
A The landlord must sue the current tenant for the rent arrears before the current tenant’s bankruptcy is finalised.
B The landlord must wait until the bankruptcy order is made against the current tenant and then contact the Trustee in Bankruptcy to demand payment as a creditor.
C The landlord may sue the current tenant or the second tenant for the rent arrears.
D The landlord must bring proceedings against the second tenant for forfeiture of the lease in order to collect any rent arrears.
E The landlord can bring proceedings against the original tenant or the current tenant for non-payment of rent.
The landlord may sue the current tenant or the second tenant for the rent arrears.
(C) The landlord may sue the current tenant or the second tenant for the rent arrears. In leases made after 1 January 1996, tenants are automatically released from their covenants upon assignment. A tenant will not be liable for a subsequent tenant’s breach of covenant after the assignment. However, as a condition of giving consent to an assignment, a landlord can require an outgoing tenant to enter into an Authorised Guarantee Agreement in which the outgoing tenant will act as guarantor for his immediate successor in title. In such cases, the landlord can sue the tenant-guarantor for the current tenant’s breach as well. Here, the lease is dated after 1 January 1996 and the second tenant guaranteed the current tenant’s performance. Thus, the landlord may pursue either the current tenant or the second tenant for the rent arrears. (A) and (B) are incorrect because, as explained above, the landlord does not need to proceed only against the current tenant. The landlord may seek to recover the rent arrears from either the second tenant due to the Authorised Guarantee Agreement or the current tenant (regardless of that tenant’s pending bankruptcy, though this situation may make collection difficult). (D) is incorrect because the landlord does not need to rely on forfeiture as the only means to collect the rent arrears, nor must they proceed only against the second tenant. As explained above, the landlord can sue either the current tenant or the second tenant for non-payment of rent. (E) is incorrect because the landlord cannot proceed against the original tenant. The original tenant was released from liability on assignment and provided no Authorised Guarantee Agreement under which he may have continuing liability.
A road barrier is erected at the end of a private road to stop members of the public accessing it. A man, angered by the restriction to access, unscrews the different sections to the road barrier and leaves them and the screws by the side of the road. The owner of the barrier hires a technician to put the barrier back in place. The technician is able to do so using all the original fittings, which are all still in perfect working order.
Is the man guilty of criminal damage?
A No, as none of the parts were damaged.
B No, as the technician was able to reassemble the barrier and it is in working order again.
C Yes, as the man was reckless about whether any damage occurred to the constituent parts of the barrier.
D Yes, because the impairment to usefulness was more than minimal.
E No, because the impairment to usefulness was minimal.
Yes, because the impairment to usefulness was more than minimal.
(D) The man is guilty of criminal damage. A person commits criminal damage when they destroy or damage property belonging to another, intending to do so or being reckless as to whether the property is damaged. Damage is anything that is more than minimal impairment of usefulness or value. Here, a technician is required to repair the barrier and put it back together again, so the damage is more than minimal. (A) and (B) are incorrect, as it is irrelevant that the barrier can be repaired and the parts are not damaged; the barrier’s usefulness was impaired. (C) is incorrect because the damage done here was intentional; the man deliberately dismantled the barrier. (E) is incorrect as the impairment to the barrier’s usefulness is more than minimal – it does not function at all
A woman would like to purchase a house on a large plot of land. She intends to use the space in the rear of the property for a garden featuring her prizewinning roses. The woman has heard, though, that one of the property’s neighbours has a right-of-way over the land in question which would prevent her from planting her garden. The woman’s solicitor has sent her a copy of the register of title of the land.
Where should reference to the right-of-way appear on the title?
A The Proprietorship Register.
B The Property Register.
C The Charges Register.
D The deed of easement which created the right-of-way.
E The conveyance which created the right-of-way.
The Charges Register..
(C) The Charges Register. The woman is interested in purchasing land which is subject to the burden of a right-of-way because another property enjoys an easement over that land. The burden of a right-of-way would appear on the Charges Register of the burdened title. (A) is incorrect as the Proprietorship Register specifies the class of title held and the name of the current holder or holders of the legal estate. (B) is incorrect as the Property Register identifies the property by its postal address and reference to the title plan. It also specifies the legal estate held, and, if a leasehold, it will give brief details of the lease (date, parties, term, rent, et cetera). It also will indicate whether the property has any benefits (such as rights-of-way) over neighbouring land. (D) and (E) are incorrect because the facts ask specifically where the reference should appear on the title – and the question makes it clear that this is a registered title. It might be necessary to look at a conveyance or deed if the right-of-way is not yet registered.
A woman owned the following shares:
5% of the shares in X Ltd which she bought for £1,000 5 years ago. X Ltd manufactures and sells ladies fashion items.
20% of the voting shares in Y PLC. Y PLC is not listed. It makes and sells kites. The woman inherited the shares from her father 8 years ago.
75% of the voting shares in Z PLC. Z is listed on the London Stock Exchange. Z builds high value flats in city centres and rents them out on short term lets. The woman bought the shares for £50,000 10 years ago.
The woman died last month leaving a valid will including the following gifts:
I give all my shares in X Ltd to my son, Marco.
I give all my shares in Y PLC to my best friend, Alice.
I give all my shares in Z PLC to my colleague, Simon.
All of the beneficiaries are still alive.
Which of the following best describes the legal position regarding the availability of business relief for the gifts made in the woman’s will?
A All 3 gifts will attract 100% business relief.
B The gift of shares in X Ltd will attract business relief at 100%, and the gift of shares in Y PLC and Z PLC will attract business relief at 50%.
C The gift of shares in X Ltd and Y PLC will qualify for 50% business relief, and the gift of shares in Z PLC will not attract business relief.
D The gift of shares in X Ltd and Y PLC and will qualify for 100% business relief, and the gift of shares in Z PLC will qualify for 50% relief.
E The gift of shares in X Ltd and Y PLC will qualify for 100% business relief, and the gift of shares in Z PLC will not attract business relief.
The gift of shares in X Ltd and Y PLC will qualify for 100% business relief, and the gift of shares in Z PLC will not attract business relief.
(E) Shares in an unlisted trading company qualify for 100% relief so long as the shares have been owned for at least 2 years. This rule applies regardless of the percentage of the shares held and regardless of whether the company is private or public. Here, the woman owned her shares of X Ltd for 5 years and Y PLC for 8 years. Ltd indicates the X is private, and a private company cannot be publicly traded. Therefore, X cannot be a listed company. A PLC is publicly traded and can be a listed company, but the facts indicate that Y is not a listed company. Therefore, the gifts of X shares and Y shares each attract the 100% deduction. Shares in a quoted trading company can attract a 50% relief, but only if the deceased had voting control over the company (that is, owned more than 50% of the company’s shares). Here, the woman owned 75% of the voting shares of Z PLC, and the facts indicate that Z PLC is a quoted company. However, the facts indicate that Z PLC builds flats and rents them out. Renting flats out is not a trading activity, and so the gift of Z shares does not qualify for business relief. (A) is incorrect because it indicates that the gift of Z shares would qualify for 100% relief. (B) is incorrect both because it indicates that the gift of Y shares would qualify for only 50% relief and because it indicates that the gift of Z shares would also qualify for 50% relief. (C) is incorrect because it indicates that the gifts of the X shares and Y shares would qualify for only 50% relief. And (D) is incorrect because it indicates that the gift of Z shares would qualify for 50% relief.
A man who was blind died recently. He made a will two years ago, leaving all of his assets to a friend. A neighbour has told the man’s children that the friend exerted a lot of influence over the man and behaved in a controlling manner towards the man in the final years of his life. The man’s children are upset not to receive anything under his will.
Which of the following best describes whether the children can challenge the validity of the man’s will?
A The children can challenge the validity of the will if they can prove that the friend’s actions amounted to coercion.
B The children have no basis on which to challenge the validity of the will.
C The children can challenge the validity of the will on the basis of lack of capacity.
D The children can challenge the validity of the will if they can prove that the actions of the friend amounted to strong persuasion.
E The children can challenge the validity of the will if they can rebut the presumption that the man acted with knowledge and approval when making the will.
The children can challenge the validity of the will if they can prove that the friend’s actions amounted to coercion.
(A) The children can challenge the validity of the will if they can prove that the friend’s actions amounted to coercion. For a will to be valid, the testator must have acted with an intention to make the particular will. A challenger may prove lack of intention by showing the testator made the will as a result of duress (that is, as a consequence of a threat of force), due to fraud, or because of undue influence (meaning coercion or pressure overpowered the testator’s free will). The children can, therefore, challenge the will on the basis of undue influence if they can prove that there was coercion or pressure that overpowered the freedom of action of the man. (B) is incorrect, as it may be possible to challenge the will on the basis of undue influence. (C) is incorrect. A will may be challenged for lack of capacity (that is, that the testator was unable to make decisions for themselves because of impairments of the brain). However, there is nothing to suggest that the man lacked capacity, and blindness does not affect a testator’s legal capacity. (D) is incorrect. Strong persuasion does not constitute undue influence. A higher level of pressure or coercion is required. (E) is incorrect. The usual presumption of knowledge and approval does not apply here, as the man was blind. This will assist the children in challenging the validity of the will
