SGS 5 MCQ’s

Question 1

You are prosecuting a Defendant accused of dangerous driving. He has been found guilty.
The Defendant is not represented. You know that when he committed the offence he had
just been told that he was suffering from incurable cancer. You take the view that if the
court were informed of this fact it would have the effect of reducing the sentence. He does
not mention this when asked by the clerk of the court if he has anything to say before the
court passes sentence.

Which ONE of the following is CORRECT?

[A] You should do and say nothing about the cancer.

[B] You should inform the Defendant that it might be advantageous, as regards sentence, to
tell the judge about the cancer.

[C] You should inform the court about the cancer in any event.

[D] You should withdraw from the case because you would be professionally embarrassed if
the judge does not take the cancer into account when deciding sentence.

ANSWER: B is CORRECT

Farq. 6.9 states that Counsel should, when prosecuting an unrepresented Defendant, tell
the court about any mitigating circumstances that might affect sentence. Usually you would
mention mitigating facts, but use your judgement. The difficulty here is that the Defendant
may not want others to know about his condition - for example, his wife, who perhaps does
not know about the cancer may be in court. The proper course, where there is a chance the
defendant may not want the matter mentioned, is to inform the defendant that it would
help his sentence but leave it to him to decide whether or not to raise it. If the Defendant
had been legally represented then it would not be for the Prosecution to say anything about
the cancer either to the defendant or to the court. He must leave the Defendant's counsel to
deal with the matter.

Question 2

You are defending someone charged with possession of cocaine. In conference the client,
who is publicly funded, tells you that he is guilty but wishes to plead not guilty. You take the
view that the Police evidence is flawed because of breaches of PACE and that, without it the
Defendant will be acquitted.

Which ONE of the following is CORRECT?

[A] You should keep the Defendant's instructions confidential and may continue to represent
the Defendant at trial on his not guilty plea.

[B] You should withdraw from the case but not inform the Legal Services Commission of his
instructions.
[C] You should withdraw from the case and inform the Legal Services Commission of his
instructions.

[D] You should inform the Legal Services Commission of his instructions but continue to
represent the Defendant at trial on his not guilty plea.

ANSWER: A is CORRECT.

Although the Defendant is guilty he has a right to have that proved against him by
admissible evidence. Accordingly where, as here, Counsel takes the view that there is no
such admissible evidence s/he has may represent the client to test the prosecution evidence
(2/C1 gC9.2) (albeit that s/he cannot make any assertion which suggests the Defendant is
not guilty). Here Counsel would apply to exclude the Prosecution evidence (by reason of
breaches of PACE which would not require any assertion of innocence) and, if the
application were successful, would make a submission of no case to answer at half time
which if accepted by the court, would entitle the client to be acquitted on a submission, at
the end of the prosecution case, of no case to answer. In these circumstances there is no
duty to inform the Criminal Defence Service because the public funding is appropriately
granted.

Question 3

You are having a conference at court with a client charged with possessing explosives. The
trial is due to commence today. You have emphasised to the client that the contents of the
conference will be kept totally confidential unless the client instructs you otherwise. During
the conference the client tells you that he knows that a bomb has been planted at the local
police station and instructs you to use this information to persuade the Prosecution to drop
all charges but otherwise to keep it confidential. You believe what the client has told you.

Which ONE of the following is CORRECT?

[A] Save for negotiating with the Prosecution as instructed, you should keep this information
confidential.

[B] You should wait to see whether the negotiations with the Prosecution are successful
before deciding whether or not to tell the police.

[C] You should withdraw from the case and tell no-one.

[D] You should tell the police about this immediately.

ANSWER: D is CORRECT.

There is a general duty of confidentiality to the client but this need not be preserved if the
client consents to disclosure or if disclosure is "permitted by law": CD6, 2/C3 rC15.5. The
conduct committee has issued guidance to the effect that disclosure is permitted where the
client issues a threat which counsel considers to be genuine and where there is a danger of
harm to a third party. In such circumstances counsel should report the matter to the police.
So in the circumstances of this case D is the correct answer and the remaining answers are
wrong.
Question 4
You are prosecuting. You notice from your papers that there is some CCTV footage which
you consider might help the defence but about which the defence knows nothing.

Which ONE of the following is CORRECT?

[A] Your duty is to secure a conviction, so you should say nothing to the Defence.

[B] You should use your best endeavours to ensure that the existence of this CCTV footage
is disclosed to the Defence.

[C] You should wait to see if the Defendant is convicted and only then inform the Defence
about this.

[D] You should seek advice from the CPS on what to do.

Answer: B is CORRECT.

The Prosecution has a duty to disclose material if it "might reasonably be considered

capable of undermining the case for the prosecution against the accused or of assisting the
case for the accused"s.3 CPIA 1996. You should always consult with the CPS on matters
of disclosure but they expect you to advise them and you should advise that it must be
disclosed. In relation to [A], it is not your duty to seek a conviction by all means at your
command - you have a duty of fairness and impartiality: CCP 2.4. In addition, a barrister is
personally responsible for their own professional conduct and decisions 2/C3 rC20, so
must abide by his duties of disclosure and not rely on advice from the CPS.

Question 5

Megan is defending Ahmed in his trial for murder. His defence is alibi. The defence will be
calling the following four witnesses: Ahmed himself; David, a character witness; Rachael,
who will give evidence as to alibi; and Dr Tyler, who will give opinion evidence as to the
cause of the injuries sustained by Ahmed.

Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?

[A] Megan cannot discuss Rachael's evidence with her.

[B] Megan cannot discuss Ahmed's evidence with him.

[C] Megan cannot discuss David's evidence with him.

[D] Megan cannot discuss Dr Tyler's evidence with him.

Answer: A is CORRECT

A barrister must maintain his independence (CD4) and must not coach (2/C2 rC9.4).
Megan can clearly speak to Ahmed about his proof of evidence. David does not give any
evidence in relation to the primary facts of the case, so Megan can speak to him. Dr Tyler
is the expert, and Megan has a duty to act in the client’s best interests, namely she must
have an understanding of the expert’s evidence in order to properly present it in court, so
can discuss the evidence with Dr Tyler. Rachael, however, gives evidence in relation to the
primary facts of the case, and Counsel cannot be seen to be interviewing a witness for fear
it may appear to be coaching. It follows that the only witness mentioned whom Megan
cannot interview is Rachael, the alibi witness.

Question 6

Xanthe is an experienced barrister with a largely criminal practice. One day, whilst in
chambers, she is instructed to attend a police station to advise a client during his police
interview. No one from the solicitor’s firm is available to attend. The client is legally aided.
She has received no training in such work but is satisfied she is competent to attend. She
attends the interview, after which the client is charged with GBH. In interview the client
admitted ABH but told the police that the alleged victim had grossly exaggerated his injuries
and was already back at work. The police denied this and said that he would not be able to
work for many weeks. On her way back to chambers, Xanthe goes to the alleged victim’s
workplace (a car repair workshop) and observes him working on a car. Later, when the case
has been sent to the Crown Court, Xanthe accepts the brief to represent the client at his
trial. Without consulting her solicitor, she writes a letter to the CPS requesting disclosure of
various items listed on the schedule of unused material, notwithstanding that she has no
practicing certificate extensions. On the evening before the trial she rings prosecution
counsel in chambers to discuss further issues of disclosure that have just arisen.

Consider whether Xanthe has breached the Code of Conduct by

(i) attending the police station interview;

(ii) accepting the brief to defend the client at trial;

(iii) writing to the CPS;

(iv) phoning prosecution counsel in chambers to discuss the case.

Which of the above would amount to a breach of the Code? Choose ONE of the following.

[A] (i) (ii) and (iii) alone

[B] All of them

[C] (i) alone

[D] (i) and (ii) alone

Answer: A is CORRECT

2/C3 rC30 / gC89 – Rule 30 means that you would not be required to accept instructions
to conduct litigation or attend a police station in circumstances where you do not normally
undertake such work or are not authorised to undertake such work.

2/C3 rC21.7 – you must not accept instructions where you are not authorised or
accredited to perform the work required.
3/B1 rS6 – you must not carry on any reserved activity unless you are entitled to do under
the LSA.

3/B2 rS18.1 – you may only offer legal services having obtained an amended practicing
certificate

2/C3 rC21.8 – you must not accept instructions where you are not competent or do not
have sufficient experience.

2/C3 rC21.10 / gC73 – you must not accept instructions if you may be unable to
maintain independence / an example is where you are acting as an advocate in a matter
where you might be called as a witness.

Xanthe is required by the LSC to be accredited to attend the police station so this would
amount to a breach. Xanthe is clearly a potential witness in this case, and writing a letter to
the CPS is conducting litigation, which Xanthe is not authorised to do, therefore A is the
correct answer.

Question 7

You are instructed to represent Desmond who is charged with conspiracy to supply Class A
drugs. He is legally aided (i.e. publicly funded) and has not been required by the Legal Aid
Agency (‘LAA’) to contribute financially towards his representation. In the course of taking
instructions from him you become aware that he has certain assets which he did not declare
when he obtained legal aid. You are satisfied that had he declared them he would have
been required to make a contribution.

Which ONE of the following is CORRECT?

[A] You should advise him to disclose the true financial position to the LAA but, if he does
not do so, you must still continue to act. You cannot yourself make disclosure to the LAA
without his agreement.

[B] You should advise him to disclose the true financial position to the LAA and, if he does
not do so, you must withdraw from the case. You cannot yourself make disclosure to the
LAA without his agreement.

[C] You should advise him to disclose the true financial position to the LAA and, if he does
not do so, you must withdraw from the case. You should make disclosure to the LAA of the
true financial position either yourself or through your instructing solicitor.

[D] You should advise him to disclose the true financial position to the LAA and, if he does
not do so, you must withdraw from the case. You should make disclosure to the LAA of the
true financial position either yourself or through your instructing solicitor and you should
report the matter to the police.

Answer: C is CORRECT
2/C3 rC25.1 requires you to withdraw from a case if action to remedy the
misrepresentation to the LAA is not taken by the client immediately. You should therefore
advise Desmond of this. If he refuses to make disclosure you must withdraw from the case.
You must also inform the LAA of the true financial position, either yourself or via your
instructing solicitor. You should not report the matter to the police, even though your client
may be guilty of fraud. You have a duty of confidentiality to the client which continues after
you cease to act for him (CD 6). In the absence of the client’s consent you can only go
behind this duty where “permitted by law”. You are permitted to breach confidentiality to
the LAA in the circumstances described; but not to the police. It follows that answer C is
correct and the remaining answers wrong.

Question 8

Tony is prosecuting a defendant charged with s.18 OAPA 1861 (GBH with intent) at a Plea
and Case Management Hearing. The defendant pleads not guilty and the case is fixed for
trial in three months’ time. Later that day Tony is sorting through his papers and finds a
statement made by the defendant to his solicitor setting out his defence in detail. It’s clearly
come from the defence counsel and has somehow got into Tony’s papers by mistake.
However, Tony has read most of it before realising what it is.

Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?

[A] Tony should return the document to defence counsel and withdraw from the case so
that other counsel can be instructed in good time.

[B] Tony should return the document to defence counsel and tell her that he will not use the
content of it during the trial.

[C] Tony should retain the document to assist in his preparation of the prosecution case, but
without disclosing the content to the CPS or the police.

[D] Tony should retain the document to assist in his preparation of the prosecution case and
should disclose the document to the CPS and the police.

Answer: A

A barrister must act with honesty and integrity under CD3. The document clearly belongs
to the opposing party and so it would be dishonest to keep it, and wrong not to disclose
that you have had sight of it, therefore C and D are wrong.

rC26.6 provides that a barrister may withdraw if he becomes aware of confidential or

privileged information or documents belonging to another person which relate to the matter
on which you are instructed. This is clearly the case here. In deciding whether to withdraw
the barrister must consider the client’s best interests (gC83). In this case there is plenty of
time for the client to instruct new Counsel and not be prejudiced, therefore A is the correct
answer.

B is wrong because it suggests you should continue but not use the information. This would
be in breach of your duty as a prosecutor to be fair, independent and objective, and to act
in the interests of justice and not solely to secure a conviction under CCP 2.4
Question 9
Karl is instructed to represent Julie at the Crown Court where she will be pleading guilty to
an offence of domestic burglary. The list of her previous convictions provided by the
prosecution shows numerous past offences of dishonesty, the most recent being a domestic
burglary three years ago. When Karl is going through her antecedent history with her Julie
tells Karl that she has another conviction (not shown on the prosecution's list) for a
domestic burglary two years ago. Karl advises her that if the judge is told about that he will
have to sentence her to a mandatory minimum term of 3 years' imprisonment under the
"three strikes" rule for domestic burglaries. Julie instructs Karl not to tell the judge about it.

Which ONE of the following statements is CORRECT?

[A] Karl should advise Julie that unless she authorises him to make disclosure of the
conviction he must withdraw from the case.

[B} Karl should advise Julie that he can represent her without mentioning the conviction and
that he can say to the judge in mitigation that "the record clearly shows that she has no
convictions for burglary in the last three years".

[C] Karl should advise Julie that he can represent her without mentioning the conviction but
that, he is not allowed to suggest that she has no recent conviction for burglary or that the
minimum term does not apply.

[D] Karl should advise Julie that he can represent her but that he is obliged to disclose the
previous conviction whether or not she authorizes it.

Answer: A

Answer [A] is correct. 2/C1 gC12 clearly states that where a mandatory sentence applies,
a barrister must advise the client to authorise disclosure or he must withdraw.

Answer [B] is wrong because of gC12 above, but also Karl would be misleading the court to
suggest Julie had no conviction for burglary in the last 3 years. - although counsel has tried
to word it cleverly by referring only to "the record" - it is still misleading: there is a clear
implication that the record is correct. In mitigating counsel must say nothing which
expressly or impliedly adopts the position as outlined by the prosecution.

Answer [C] is wrong because of gC12 above, even though he will not be making any
submissions in relation to Julie’s previous convictions.

Answer [D] is wrong as the duty of confidentiality still applies to Karl, and gC12 states that
if consent is refused the barrister must case to act.

Question 10

Pamela is representing Claudia at her trial for murder. A defence expert will be called to give
evidence as to the significance of the blood distribution at the scene.

Which ONE of the following statements is WRONG?

[A] Before calling her to give evidence Pamela may advise Claudia that she should speak
clearly and slowly whilst giving evidence.

[B] Before calling her to give evidence Pamela may advise Claudia to avoid irrelevant
comments whilst giving evidence.

[C] Pamela should advise the expert in conference to answer all questions in cross-
examination as best he can, whether or not they relate to his specific expertise.

[D] Before calling the expert to give evidence Pamela may give him advice as to the clearest
way to present the technical aspects of his evidence to the jury.

Answer is C (in that it is wrong)

R v Momodou suggests that it is acceptable to undertake witness familiarisation, to include

speaking clearly and slowly, and keeping evidence relevant, therefore A and B are correct
statements (and therefore not the right answers). Your advice to avoid irrelevancies is also
consistent with your duty to avoid wasting the court's time rC3.3.

Answer C is an incorrect statement (and therefore the right answer) - you should advise the
expert not to stray beyond his expertise, particularly where you think he may come under
pressure to do so (para 6). Since his opinions beyond his expertise will be irrelevant you are
doing no more than advising him to avoid irrelevancies.

Answer D is a correct statement (and therefore not the right answer) - you are entitled to
discuss an expert's evidence with him. Often that evidence will be very technical and
difficult for a lay person to follow. You may give him guidance on how to present it (without
coaching him as to its contents). This is because you must act in the client’s best interests
and provide a competent standard of work under CD2& 7, and you can only do that if you
understand the evidence and can ensure the court understands the evidence.

Question 11

Stephen is representing the defendant Hamish in the Crown Court in relation to a possession
of firearms offence. An expert has been instructed on behalf of the defendant to assist on a
technical issue regarding the firearm itself.

Which ONE of the following statements is WRONG?

[A] Stephen may advise the expert as to the issues she should address in her report.

[B] Stephen may advise the expert as to the form of the report and any matters which are
required by the rules of court to be included in it.

[C] Stephen may, if requested, draft the expert's report on the expert’s behalf.

[D] Stephen may advise the expert as to any opinions and comments which should not be
included because they are inadmissible as a matter of law.

Answer C is correct (because it is wrong)

See the guidance arising from Momodou and Limani

Stephen may advise on all of the matters in A, B, and D. However C is wrong (and therefore
the right answer). Expert reports should be seen to be the independent product of the
expert in question. For this reason it is wrong for counsel to seek to draft any part of the
report.

UNSEEN MCQ’s

Question 1

You are representing the Claimant in a personal injury case following a road traffic accident
and are instructed to draft the particulars of claim. Your instructions are not explicit about
how the car accident occurred but it appears from the evidence that the allegation is that
the defendant was speeding and overtook on a blind hill. You infer from the statements
that the Claimant swerved to avoid a collision, or the damage would have been much worse.
What information are you able to give in relation to these events when drafting the
particulars of claim?

[A] You must draft the particulars of claim using only the Claimant’s own words. Any
inference added by you would not be the Claimant’s own account and would therefore be
misleading and dishonest.

[B] You may draft the particulars of claim containing the facts you believe to be true. This
would, however be subject to you taking instructions from the Claimant to confirm the
accuracy of the inference.

[C] You may draft the particulars of claim containing the facts you believe to be true. You
would not need the Claimant’s input on this as you are independent and have personal
responsibility in each case.

[D] You must never draft a particulars of claim without a litigation extension to your
practising certificate as this would be conducting litigation.

Answer - B

B is the correct answer. Whilst a barrister should not draft any statement of case containing
facts or contentions which are not supported by the lay client or his/her instructions (2/C2
rC9.2.a) nothing prevents them drafting a document containing specific factual statements
or contentions included by the barrister, as long as they reasonably believe it will be
evidence the witness will give orally (2/C2 rC9.2.d)

A is incorrect because the barrister is not drafting a witness statement here and thus cannot
be seen to be importing anything; drafting a particulars of claim using the witness’s own
statement means that the barrister is free to clarify the sequence of events with the client
so as to enable them to draft a coherent statement of case (in this case a particulars of
claim), You must not encourage a witness to give evidence which is misleading or untruthful
(rC9.3) you must not rehearse, practice or coach a witness in respect of their evidence
(rC9.4). Drafting a particulars of claim is not within the definition of conducting litigation
and is therefore within the ambit of counsel’s role. Drafting a particulars of claim is not
‘conducting litigation’ and so no litigation extension would be needed for counsel to do this.

Cis incorrect because while you are permitted to draft in this way you must still ask on your
client’s instructions and not import your own opinion or interpretation into the claim. D is
incorrect as you do not need a litigation extension to draft a particulars of claim.

Question 2

You are representing the Claimant in a personal injury case following a motorbike accident.
At trial one of the Claimant’s witnesses says in cross examination that he did not clearly see
the accident as he was distracted at the time. You want to clarify this in advance of re-
examining him as he has always said in conference that he had a good view of the accident.
Before you begin re-examination, the court adjourns for the day. What are you able to do in
relation to clarifying this evidence with him?

[A] Nothing – you must never under any circumstances discuss the evidence of a witness
with them whilst they are in the process of giving evidence, to do so would place you in
contempt of court.

[B] You may discuss the evidence with the witness so long as you have permission from the
court and your opponent.

[C] You may discuss the evidence with them so long as you have permission from the court
or your opponent.

[D] You may discuss the evidence with the witness in order to refresh his memory as to his
original account as court is adjourned and so they are no longer in the process of giving
their evidence.

Answer -C

A barrister must not, except with the consent of the representative of the opposing side or
of the Court, communicate directly or indirectly about a case with any witness once that
witness has begun to give evidence until the evidence has been concluded (2/C2 rC9.5) C
is therefore the correct answer, and A is incorrect.

You do not need permission from both the court and your opponent to discuss the evidence
with your witness and so B is incorrect. You must not rehearse, practice or coach a witness
in respect of their evidence (rC9.4) and you must not encourage a witness to give evidence
which is misleading or untruthful (rC9.3)

Consequently, D is incorrect as the witness is still in the process of giving his evidence,
despite the adjournment as it is part heard and so you can therefore only clarify the
evidence with the witness with the consent of the representative for the opposing side or of
the Court and must be very careful what is said to the witness so as not to risk coaching.
Question 3

You are representing the Father in a family dispute in which he is seeking primary custody
of two children. During conferences, your client instructs you to cross examine the
Respondent Mother about her flirtatious manner so that it might unsettle and embarrass her
during her evidence. He is adamant that you follow his instructions on this. Which is the
best advice to give your client on these instructions?

[A] You should inform your client that you may cross examine the Defendant about her
flirtatious manner if he considers it to be in his best interests to do so since you owe him a
duty to that effect under CD2.

[B] You should inform your client that you may not cross examine the Defendant about her
flirtatious manner because it would be make you look like you were victimising the witness
which could damage your reputation and damage to the confidence the public vest in the
profession under CD5.

[C] You should inform your client that you are duty bound to cross examine the Defendant
about her flirtatious manner as if you didn’t you would be failing to put the Claimant’s case
in line with his instructions.

[D] You should inform your client that you are duty bound not to cross examine the
Defendant about her flirtatious manner as the questions would be designed to unsettle and
embarrass her which would be an abuse of your role as an advocate.

Answer - D

The correct answer is D. The Handbook prevents you from asking questions which are
merely scandalous or intended or calculated only to vilify, insult or annoy a witness (2/C1
rC7.1) hence D is correct as you MUST NOT cross examine on the point. This duty
overrides your duty to the client under CD2 & 7. You are personally responsible for your
own conduct (rC20) and must maintain your independence (CD4) and must not let your
client limit or dictate the proper conduct of the case and so A is incorrect.

The issue of CD5 is irrelevant here as family proceedings are heard in private and you must
therefore advise the client that you cannot ask questions of the Defendant as instructed
irrespective of her instructions as you must retain your independence hence C is incorrect. If
the client insisted, then you would be required to withdraw (rC25) on the basis that he is
asking you to act otherwise than in accordance with the handbook (rC21.6) and is seeking
to limit your discretion in conducting the case (rC21.5).

Question 4

You accepted instructions 10 days go to appear in case ‘A’ (a civil case fixed to be heard
week beginning 22nd April). You have done a lot of preparatory work upon it and have seen
the professional and lay clients in conference on a number of occasions. You have then
accepted instructions last week to defend in a criminal case (case 'B’), initially expected to
be tried in the week beginning 8th April and to last for seven days. Before you have
conferred with the client in case ‘B’, you learn that case B will now not be heard until the
week beginning 15th April. Both solicitors assert priority and both clients are anxious to have
your services. What action would you take?

[A] Inform client A that you must withdraw from their case because the risk to client B of a
last minute change of instruction in a criminal defence trial would be more prejudicial to his
interests than client A.

[B] Inform client B that you must withdraw from their case because you have done more
preparatory work for client A and therefore the risk to client A of transferring instructions to
another barrister would be greater.

[C] Inform client A that you must withdraw because case B is likely to last longer and
therefore will be more lucrative for you.

[D] Inform client B that you must withdraw from their case because client A’s instructions
were received first and the date is fixed for trial.

Answer - D

The correct answer is D. You accepted the instructions to act for client A first (10 days ago)
and the date was fixed. The first instruction in time takes priority and when you accepted
instructions to act in Case B there was no fixed trial date. rC26 therefore applies which
states that you may cease to act on a matter on which you are instructed and return your
instructions if you are a self-employed barrister and despite all reasonable efforts to prevent
it, a hearing becomes fixed for a date on which you have already entered in your
professional diary that you will not be available. This may include a prior arranged hearing
relating to another case. B and D are incorrect because although in some cases it will be
appropriate to weigh prejudice to the client (BSB Clash of hearing dates guidance) this
will not be one of them because of the fact that the hearing was already fixed in the diary
when the instructions in B came through. C is incorrect because, in accordance with the Cab
Rank Rule, you cannot choose which case you take by reference to your own personal
interests (rC29).

Question 5

You are asked to advise, in conference, upon the acceptability of an offer of £3000 as an out
of court settlement of your adult client’s claim for damages in a personal injury case. The
medical report, which has been disclosed to the defence, is now ten months old. In the
course of the conference, your client informs you that the doctor’s prognosis was unduly
pessimistic as his condition has improved since the report was prepared, albeit still
significant. In the circumstances, the offer is generous.

Consider the following statements:

(i) You owe a duty to act in the administration of justice under CD1 and so must
disclose this information to the court.
(ii) There is no duty to disclose this to the court because this is an out of court
settlement and so CD1 and CD3 do not apply.
(iii) There is no duty to disclose this to the other side so long as you don’t actively
mislead them in suggesting the original prognosis has been borne out.
 (iv) You owe a duty to act with honesty and integrity and so you must disclose this to
the other side

Which of the statements are correct?

[A] (i) and (iv)

[B] (ii) and (iii)

[C] (ii) and (iv)

[D] (i) and (iii)

Answer – B

The correct answer is B and the correct statements are (ii) and (iii). You owe a duty of
confidentiality to your client (CD6 & rC15.5) There is no duty to disclose this to the other
side therefore the duty to the client is overriding subject to the general duty not to mislead
(rC9.1), so statements (i) and (iv) are incorrect.

This is an out of court settlement and so CD1 and rC3 do not apply. It is only the client’s
opinion of his improved condition, not an expert. The other side should have sought an up
to date report. You can advise the client to accept the offer as you should be acting in the
client’s best interests under CD2