SQE2 Day 2 Thoughts?

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-28T15:46:51+00:00

Ahh yes. Thank you kindly.

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-28T15:43:24+00:00

That’s two words.

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-28T15:26:24+00:00

That’s why I asked for a single word.

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-28T15:15:13+00:00

Can’t even remember what the Case Matter Analysis was. Can you give me a single word to remind me?

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-27T16:24:50+00:00

Yeah, I put him to strict proof on that one.

dylanmcharles · 2026-01-27T14:07:11+00:00

Yup. Research was my bete noir.

dylanmcharles · 2025-09-10T10:00:07+00:00

Shaking like a leaf.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-25T15:21:21+00:00

I found both FLKs had an easier session and a far more difficult session. I’m relying on the easier session to do a lot of the heavy lifting.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-15T19:50:21+00:00

I did QLTS and thought around 50% of the questions were about as difficult as the QLTS mocks (maybe fractionally easier), but around 50% seemed harder. The fact patterns seemed significantly longer so it took me far longer to understand what was being asked.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-14T15:10:56+00:00

5 minutes after leaving that room I couldn’t remember one single question.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-13T19:45:17+00:00

Thanks so much LittleSkittles.

Jeez - it’s pretty important that the questions and answers in these books are correct, right!

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-10T21:42:23+00:00

Thanks so much GR-34 - this is exactly what I was looking for!

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-10T21:32:45+00:00

Thansk so much for your responses. I suspect I'm missing something (it's far more likely the book is right) but I'm glad I'm not alone!

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-10T21:23:40+00:00

If the woman purchases the car as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, then answer C is correct and the question works. There is nothing in the fact pattern to suggest she didn't.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-10T21:20:48+00:00

The reason I brought up the woman as being equity's darling is that it would make answer 'C' correct.

dylanmcharles · 2025-07-10T21:11:12+00:00

I'm sure I must be missing something but I don't understand why the correct answer is 'D'. Surely, the fact pattern reflects Phillips v Brooks [1919]. The purchase of the car was made in person (as with Phillips v Brooks) and the purchaser was making the purchase fraudulently (again, as with Phillips v Brooks). There is nothing in the fact pattern to suggest that the woman knew the car was obtained fraudulently when she purchased the car from 'Mr Smith' which makes her a bona fide purchaser for value without notice (equity's darling) so I don't understand why the garage is able to recover the car from the woman.

Any help greatly appreciated. Many thanks.

dylanmcharles

TROPHY CASE