วีดีโอ

Interesting comment! There’s not much to disagree with there! For someone like me who only speaks English, there are only a limited number of other jurisdictions to choose from, but remember, some may require (like most reputable law schools in the UK) that you undertake a law conversion course before attempting that jurisdiction’s professional exams, which would add to the overall cost. On the subject of the exam fees, there is no doubt that the SQE is at the high end when it comes to the fees charged for simply sitting the professional assessments, which is why I have been leading a campaign with several influential lawyers and organisations to convince the SRA to fund and set up a large means-tested bursary fund to help candidates with their SQE exam fees. It’s a scandal that the SRA and Kaplan have failed to provide any such support, which is why my campaign group will be doubling-down our efforts in the New Year, as there is, regrettably no sense of urgency or ownership by the regulator on the issue.

You're very welcome! ☺️

We couldn't agree more! 🎅🏼

It shouldn’t make much (if any) difference. The previous pass marks of 61% and 62% for most recent sits would now be converted to 300/500.

Thank you for your kind comments about what we are trying to achieve on SQE TV! You make some interesting observations. Adopting your numbering, I would reply as follows: 1) Solicitors Accounts - I get what you’re saying here, but there is also an argument for ensuring that there is a minimum level of understanding of the rules of solicitors accounts, which I think is important for any NQ solicitor to know on Day 1. 2) Breaking up FLK1 and FLK2 into smaller ‘bankable’ parts is a great idea. Perhaps the SRA should turn SQE1 into 4 FLK papers rather than 2, which would be easier to schedule than modular exams, as there are, effectively 4 parts of each FLK assessment already with half of each paper being sat in the morning and then half in the afternoon. 3) The 3 sit rule is unlikely to change: I think it’s important for candidates to only sit when they are ready, so the SRA should make cancellation easier (financially) than it currently is. The problem with the harsh cancellation policy is that a number of candidates who perhaps shouldn’t sit still feel compelled to attempt an assessment, as the penalty for cancellation quickly becomes very significant. 4) SQE1 doesn’t just cover what is in your LLB, it also covers legal practice. The SRA would say that legal practice still needs to be tested in FLK1 as well as FLK2, although I can see you make a good case for removing the pure black letter law MCQs from SQE1. I completely agree that having the whole of one part of the assessment as MCQs doesn’t reflect practice at all. The SRA would probably say it is one way to both test a candidate’s knowledge and application of the law in a cost effective way over a vast syllabus. But as I’ve said on SQE TV, exclusively using MCQs for SQE1 is not an inclusive way of assessing a candidate’s competence as the ethnic and social mobility attainment gaps will testify, and also because MCQs are especially challenging for a significant proportion of the neurodiverse community.

My pleasure! Please do share with your network as we've got lots of exciting and informative content lined up! 😄

Thanks for your kind words! 😀

Giving candidates the option of sitting FLK1 and FLK2 in different assessment windows has been suggested to the SRA by a number of law schools, which I hope the SRA and Kaplan are seriously considering. After all, there is pretty much universal support from law firms, candidates and SQE providers. However, even if Kaplan and the SRA agree, I don’t see the necessary changes happening before January 2026: there would be a number of operational and administrative implications which would need to be considered first before Kaplan and the SRA could commit.

Thank you. We've got plenty of sample question breakdowns on the channel. Do check them out. 😄 Also, let us know if there's anything specific things you would like Jonny to cover.

It is not altogether clear how the £66m in projected SQE revenue for 2024-24 is to be divided between the SRA and Kaplan. Ultimately, it will depend on how well the SRA negotiated their contract with Kaplan!

Good question! The tax reforms in the budget on 30 October 2024 came after the cut off date for changes in the law for the January 2025 assessments. As such, you should not be examined on those changes in the January 2025 SQE assessments.

@SQETV Thank you !

That's very kind of you and I'm glad I can be of service! 😀

Glad we can be of service! 😀 Good luck!

Hi, thanks for your comment. SQE TV is my own independent TH-cam channel. If you have any enquiries about any provider or course, you should make a direct enquiry of that provider.

@@SQETV the COAS from the BSB Bar Standards Board ??

Thanks so much for you kind words! 😃

If you are on a law conversion course which includes SQE1 preparation as well, if and when you pass SQE1, you will need to pass SQE2 as well to complete two years of QWE to qualify - if you are not qualified in your home jurisdiction. SQE2 standalone courses are available at several providers, several of whom run online/Distance Learning versions. Whilst you might be able to sit the SQE1 and the written SQE2 assessments in or close to your home country (you’ll need to check the international venue list with Kaplan/the SRA), you will need to sit the SQE2 oral assessments in the UK - in either Birmingham, Cardiff, London or Manchester. In terms of the QWE aspect of your SQE journey, if you are not already qualified in your home jurisdiction, you could get a training contract, QWE or a paralegal role in the UK, subject to any visa requirements you may require. But don’t underestimate the possibility of accruing QWE in your home country - as long as you can get the work signed off by and English/Welsh qualified solicitor. If, on the other hand, you are already qualified in your home jurisdiction, you’ll need to check to see whether you are eligible for an exemption from SQE2 and QWE. For more details see: www.sra.org.uk/become-solicitor/qualified-lawyers/sqe-exemptions/

Hi, thanks for your comment. Please see my responses below: 1. Lower case ‘c’ for the Claimant would be marked down in a drafting exercise as you will have defined the Claimant with a capital ‘C’ already. A claim for costs in an unliquidated claim (which is the SRA’s example I commented on in my video) is not necessary nor is it custom and practice to include in the prayer in the prayer. In any case, the Civil Procedure Rules allows successful parties to claim their costs - see CPR 44. 2. There are no rules on this. In complicated cases, subheadings in pleadings might sometimes help, but I don’t believe you would be marked up or down if you do or don’t use them in the SQE. On balance, as the example from Kaplan which the SRA has published doesn’t have headings, I probably wouldn’t use any in the SQE exam. Hope this helps! 😀

Thank you, very grateful for the support! 😃

Thanks for your comment. So glad you've been able to take something from this video. You've done all the hard work now it's just about applying it. Best of luck! 😃

Thanks for your support! 😀

Thanks for your comment! 😊we've got lots more in store. Watch this space!

Thanks so much for your kind words. If you ever change your mind and want to know more about the SQE, you know where to come! 😉

Hey there! Glad you found the tips helpful! It's a great question, and the answer can vary depending on individual circumstances. In the video linked below, we delve into some key considerations between the LPC and the SQE. Each pathway has its pros and cons, so it ultimately comes down to factors like your prior legal experience, preferred learning style, and career aspirations. Give the video a watch for a detailed breakdown, and feel free to reach out if you have more questions! Best of luck with your legal journey! 📚⚖ th-cam.com/video/oLFBVf3zMTE/w-d-xo.html

Thanks, glad you're enjoying the content! 😉

Hi Safa, thanks so much for your comment and pleased you’re finding the content helpful! You will be provided with an online calculator to help with those questions, as you are not permitted to use your own! 😃

@@SQETV Hi, thanks very much for your response and, taking your advice, I'll practice getting used to a computer calculator 👍 Thanks again for your helpful content

Thanks for sharing your story - congratulations on passing. You are very much the exception to the norm, as the vast majority of non-law graduates who try the SQE without a comprehensive law conversion course will struggle to get anywhere near to passing SQE1, because the required depth of understanding and breadth of knowledge simply won’t be there. SQE1 is an incredibly challenging assessment with a pass rate of barely over 50%, with a 27% fail rate for students with first class degrees. So, cutting corner in SQE preparation in the vast majority of cases will prove a false economy, not least because of the cost of resits. Recruiters won’t just be looking at whether you pass or fail: they will be checking how well you have passed. All candidates get advised of the quintile their mark puts them in - i.e. the top 20%, the top 40%, and so on. That will be particularly instructive when employers look to distinguish candidates from each other, so to improve your employment prospects, candidates need to optimise how they prepare in the design, content and style of course they choose. I would agree that regular tutor input is essential to not just maximising your chances of passing SQE1, but also to passing well. And that’s not just an opportunity to chat with someone every other week - the added value to most students of attending several live teaching sessions each week will in many cases make a difference between whether they pass or fail. For a subject as complex and multi-layered as law, validating your understanding in class and seeing others do so is an essential pedagogical asset in the development of most students. Where it is missing completely or lacking in regularity and opportunity can end up amounting to a fatal omission from an SQE student’s preparation.

Because of the nature of the SQE assessments (especially the written assessments) a lot of the prep at many providers will be solitary, with several having little or no live or face to face teaching at all. Exemplar answers are often used by candidates to benchmark their mark against the standard required to pass. I think it's particularly important to get feedback on your oral skills in a live taught session, because of the nature of the skills themselves (e.g. advocacy and interviewing/advising). Having instant validation that you are getting something right and getting tips on how to improve, as well as observing other candidates in class is a great way of developing quickly and would leave you with a better idea of how you are doing. I would therefore recommend you research other providers if it is a live/face to face SQE2 experience you are looking for.

@@SQETV Thank you. Really appreciate your advice and response.

The SQE assessment fees are determined by the SRA and will, from time to time, be reviewed in accordance with what they agree with Kaplan, who set and administer the assessments. The SRA have gone on record and explained that they increased the fees for 2023-24 because Kaplan asked them to do so because of increasing costs at a time of high inflation. It is, however, less clear as to how regular such reviews will be going forward.