All Practice Exams
100+ Free FE-1 Law of Contract Practice Questions
FE-1 Final Examination - First Part: Law of Contract practice questions are available now; exam metadata is being verified.
✓ No registration✓ No credit card✓ No hidden fees✓ Start practicing immediately
Not published Pass Rate
100+ Questions
100% Free
Loading questions...
Same family resources
Explore More Ireland FE-1 Solicitor Exams
Continue into nearby exams from the same family. Each card keeps practice questions, study guides, flashcards, videos, and articles in one place.
2026 Statistics
Key Facts: FE-1 Law of Contract Exam
Sale of Goods Acts 1893 & 1980
Key Examined Statutes
Law Society of Ireland FE-1 syllabus
3 hours
Single Written Paper (3.5 hrs online)
Law Society of Ireland
Answer 4 of 5
Essay/Problem Questions
Law Society of Ireland
50%
Pass Mark Per Subject
Law Society of Ireland
7 years
To Pass All 8 FE-1 Subjects
Law Society of Ireland
100+
Practice Questions Here
OpenExamPrep question bank
FE-1 Law of Contract is one of eight subjects in the Law Society of Ireland's FE-1, the entrance examination for solicitor training in Ireland. The paper is a single three-hour essay/problem exam (3.5 hours online) of five questions, of which candidates answer four, with a 50% pass mark. It is examined on Irish contract law and authorities. Core topics include formation (offer, acceptance, consideration, intention, and certainty), the terms of a contract and the statutory implied terms under the Sale of Goods Acts 1893 and 1980, and the vitiating factors of misrepresentation, mistake, duress, undue influence, and illegality. The paper also covers privity, discharge including frustration, and remedies - damages under the remoteness rule in Hadley v Baxendale, mitigation, and the equitable remedy of specific performance. The FE-1 is sat twice yearly (Spring and Autumn), subjects can be taken individually, and all eight must be passed within seven years.
Sample FE-1 Law of Contract Practice Questions
Try these sample questions to test your FE-1 Law of Contract exam readiness. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 100+ question experience with AI tutoring.
1A shopkeeper displays a jacket in the window marked "€50". A customer enters and says, "I will take that jacket at the marked price." The shopkeeper refuses to sell. Which statement best reflects Irish contract law?
A.The display is an invitation to treat; the customer's statement is the offer, which the shopkeeper may refuse.
B.The display is an offer, so the shopkeeper is bound to sell once the customer indicated acceptance.
C.A binding contract was formed the moment the customer entered the shop intending to buy.
D.The shopkeeper must sell because advertising a price is a unilateral offer to the world.
Explanation: A display of goods in a shop window with a price is an invitation to treat, not an offer (Fisher v Bell; Minister for Industry and Commerce v Pim). The customer makes the offer to buy, which the shopkeeper is free to accept or reject. No contract arises until the seller accepts.
2A company advertised a chemical smoke ball, promising to pay £100 to anyone who used it as directed and still caught influenza, and stated it had deposited money in a bank to show sincerity. A purchaser used it correctly and caught the flu. Applying the principle most influential in Irish law, what is the position?
A.No contract arose because the advertisement was mere sales puff with no intention to be bound.
B.A binding unilateral contract arose; performing the stipulated conditions constituted acceptance.
C.No contract arose because the purchaser never communicated acceptance before using the product.
D.A contract arose only if the purchaser first notified the company of an intention to use the product.
Explanation: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co establishes that a clear promise in an advertisement, supported by an indication of seriousness (the bank deposit), can be a unilateral offer accepted by performing the stipulated act. Communication of acceptance is waived in unilateral contracts; performance is acceptance.
3A offers by letter to sell goods to B and asks for a reply. B posts a letter of acceptance which is correctly addressed and stamped, but it is delayed and never arrives. The post was a reasonable means of reply. When, if at all, is the contract formed?
A.No contract is formed because A never received the acceptance.
B.A contract is formed only when A acknowledges B's reply.
C.A contract is formed when B posts the letter of acceptance.
D.A contract is formed when the letter would ordinarily have arrived.
Explanation: Under the postal acceptance rule (Adams v Lindsell; applied in Ireland in Sanderson v Cunningham and Kelly v Cruise Catering), where post is a reasonable mode of acceptance, acceptance is complete on posting, even if the letter is delayed or lost. The contract is therefore formed when B posts the letter.
4A offers to sell a car to B for €5,000. B replies, "I will give you €4,500." A refuses. B then says, "Very well, I accept your original price of €5,000." A says the deal is off. Is there a binding contract at €5,000?
A.Yes, because B ultimately matched A's stated price exactly.
B.Yes, because a counter-offer does not affect the validity of the original offer.
C.No, because the price was uncertain throughout the negotiations.
D.No, because B's counter-offer destroyed the original offer, which was no longer open to accept.
Explanation: A counter-offer rejects and extinguishes the original offer (Hyde v Wrench). Once B offered €4,500, A's original offer lapsed and could not later be accepted. A's offer was only revived if A chose to renew it, which A did not.
5A promises to keep an offer to sell land open to B for 14 days. On day 5, A sells the land to C. B, who had given no money for the promise to keep the offer open, seeks to hold A to the 14-day period. What is the legal position?
A.A may revoke the offer at any time before acceptance because B provided no consideration for the promise to keep it open.
B.A is bound for 14 days because A expressly promised to keep the offer open.
C.A is bound because a promise to keep an offer open is enforceable without consideration.
D.B can sue A for breach of the 14-day promise regardless of consideration.
Explanation: A bare promise to keep an offer open (an option) is not binding unless supported by consideration (Routledge v Grant). Because B paid nothing for the option, A was free to revoke the offer at any time before acceptance, including by selling to C.
6A posts an offer to B. Before B accepts, A posts a letter revoking the offer. B posts an acceptance before A's revocation reaches B. When does revocation take effect, and is there a contract?
A.Revocation is effective on posting, so no contract is formed.
B.Revocation is effective only when it reaches B; as B accepted first, a contract is formed.
C.Revocation is automatically effective once the original offer is made by post.
D.No contract is formed because revocation and acceptance crossed in the post.
Explanation: Unlike acceptance, revocation must actually be communicated to the offeree to be effective (Byrne v Van Tienhoven). Because B's acceptance was posted (and thus complete) before A's revocation reached B, a binding contract was formed.
7An uncle writes to his nephew, "I would be glad to buy your horse for £30.15s. If I hear no more about it, I consider the horse mine at that price." The nephew intends to sell but never replies. Is there a binding contract?
A.Yes, because the nephew intended to accept the offer.
B.Yes, because silence operated as acceptance on these terms.
C.No, because silence cannot generally constitute acceptance.
D.No, because the price was not sufficiently certain.
Explanation: An offeror cannot impose a contract by stipulating that silence will be treated as acceptance (Felthouse v Bindley). Acceptance must generally be communicated by words or conduct; the nephew's mere uncommunicated intention is insufficient.
8A places an advertisement: "Lost dog. Reward €200 to anyone who returns him." B, who has never seen the advertisement, finds the dog and returns it to A, later learning of the reward. Can B claim the reward?
A.Yes, because B performed the act required by the offer.
B.Yes, because rewards are payable to anyone who returns lost property.
C.No, because advertisements can never give rise to enforceable offers.
D.No, because B did not act in reliance on or with knowledge of the offer.
Explanation: Acceptance of a unilateral offer requires knowledge of the offer when performing the act (R v Clarke). A person ignorant of the reward when returning the dog cannot be said to have accepted the offer, so no contract arises.
9A buyer's purchase order contains the buyer's standard terms; the seller acknowledges with a confirmation containing the seller's own conflicting terms and a tear-off slip; the buyer signs and returns the slip without further objection, and the seller delivers. Whose terms most likely govern under a 'last shot' analysis?
A.The seller's terms, because the seller fired the last counter-offer which the buyer accepted by returning the signed slip.
B.The buyer's terms, because the buyer initiated the transaction with a purchase order.
C.Neither set of terms applies; the contract has no terms at all.
D.Both sets of terms apply cumulatively to the contract.
Explanation: In a 'battle of the forms', each conflicting set of terms is a counter-offer; the contract is usually on the terms of the party who fired the 'last shot' that was then accepted by conduct (Butler Machine Tool v Ex-Cell-O). Here the seller's terms prevailed once the buyer returned the signed slip and accepted delivery.
10A agrees to perform an existing contractual duty already owed to B, and B promises extra payment for it but obtains no additional practical benefit beyond performance already due. Under the orthodox Irish position, is B's promise of extra payment supported by consideration?
A.Yes, because performing a duty always supplies fresh consideration.
B.No, performance of an existing duty already owed to the promisor is generally not good consideration.
C.Yes, because the promise of extra payment is conclusive of consideration.
D.No, because consideration must always be of equal value to the promise.
Explanation: Performance of a pre-existing duty owed to the same party is generally not good consideration for a fresh promise (Stilk v Myrick). Although Williams v Roffey recognises a 'practical benefit' exception, that is engaged only where the promisor obtains a real additional benefit, which is absent here.
About the FE-1 Law of Contract Practice Questions
Verified exam format metadata for FE-1 Final Examination - First Part: Law of Contract is pending. The practice questions above remain available while official exam length, timing, passing score, fee, and administrator details are reviewed.