SQE2 Advocacy 2

Question 1

When examining a witness in chief, what type of questions should an advocate primarily use?

Accepted Answer

Open questions that allow the witness to tell their account in their own words

Answer

In examination-in-chief, the advocate should use open questions (who, what, when, where, why, how) to allow the witness to give their account naturally. Leading questions are generally not permitted during examination-in-chief except on non-contentious matters.

Question 2

An advocate is asked to represent a client in an urgent injunction application but has not had adequate time to prepare. What should the advocate do?

Accepted Answer

Decline the instructions if they cannot provide competent representation, and suggest the client seeks alternative representation

Answer

The SRA requires solicitors to act competently. If an advocate cannot adequately prepare for an urgent hearing and this would prejudice the client's interests, they should decline and help the client find alternative representation rather than provide substandard advocacy.

Question 3

What is the purpose of re-examination of a witness?

Accepted Answer

To clarify or repair matters arising from cross-examination

Answer

Re-examination allows the advocate who called the witness to clarify matters that were raised during cross-examination. It is limited to issues arising from cross-examination and must not introduce new matters. Leading questions are not permitted.

Question 4

In a bail application, which factors must the advocate address to persuade the court to grant bail?

Accepted Answer

The statutory grounds for refusing bail under the Bail Act 1976 and how proposed conditions can address any concerns

Answer

The advocate must address the statutory grounds for refusing bail (failure to surrender, committing further offences, interfering with witnesses) and demonstrate how conditions such as residence, reporting, curfew, or sureties can mitigate those risks.

Question 5

An advocate realises during their closing speech that they failed to put a crucial part of their client's case to the opposing witness during cross-examination. What is the consequence?

Accepted Answer

The advocate may be criticised for failing to comply with the rule in Browne v Dunn, and the court may give less weight to the unchallenged evidence

Answer

Under the rule in Browne v Dunn (1893), an advocate must put their client's case to an opposing witness so the witness has an opportunity to respond. Failure to do so may result in judicial criticism and the court may accept the unchallenged evidence.

SQE2 Practice Test

SQE2 Practice Test

SQE2 Advocacy 2