Legal English test
200 questions across chapters 1 to 11, four short readings and one writing task
Work saves locally in this browser
How the test works
Read this before you start. It takes one minute.
- There are 200 scored questions. Sections 1 to 8 follow the chapters; section 9 has four short readings; section 10 is a writing task marked by Otto.
- Each exercise has a Check exercise button. Your score updates as you check. Unanswered items count as wrong when you finish.
- Choose the best answer. Many items test how carefully you hedge: a statement that is true in one country is not always true everywhere.
- Your answers save in this browser. Nothing is sent anywhere until you press Grade my email in section 10, which sends only your email text to Otto for marking.
- When you have finished, press Finish test at the top. You will see your total, a section breakdown and your weakest areas. Your teacher can then unlock the answer key with you.
Intellectual property
Chapter 1: patents, trade marks, copyright and the language of licensing.
Competition law
Chapter 2: dominance, cartels, merger control and the regulator’s register.
Employment law
Chapter 3: dismissal, redundancy, discrimination and cautious drafting.
Contract law
Chapters 4 and 5: formation, terms, breach, remedies and clause language.
Real property law
Chapter 6: estates, leases, easements and the landlord and tenant relationship.
Company law
Chapters 7 and 8: entities, governance, insolvency and transactions.
Environmental law
Chapter 9: principles, permits, participation and enforcement.
Maritime law
Chapters 10 and 11: ships, cargo, casualties, cover and caution.
Reading
Four short texts of the kind a legal English user meets every week. Five questions each; the twenty questions count towards your 200.
Clause 12: Termination
12.1 Either party may terminate this Agreement with immediate effect by written notice if the other party (a) commits a material breach which, if capable of remedy, is not remedied within thirty (30) days of receipt of written notice specifying the breach; or (b) becomes insolvent, enters administration or liquidation, or suffers any analogous event in any jurisdiction.
12.2 The Supplier may terminate this Agreement on ninety (90) days’ written notice if the Customer fails to pay any undisputed invoice within sixty (60) days of its due date.
12.3 Termination shall not affect any rights or remedies accrued before termination, nor the continuance in force of clauses 8 (Confidentiality), 10 (Limitation of Liability) and 14 (Governing Law and Disputes).
12.4 On termination for any reason the Customer shall pay for all Services performed up to the date of termination, and the Supplier shall return or destroy all Customer Data within thirty (30) days, save to the extent that retention is required by law.
Extract from a services agreement, drafted for this test.
Notice of investigation
Dear Ms Okafor,
Suspected exchange of pricing information: Norden Foods Ltd
The Authority has opened an investigation under section 25 of the Act into a suspected exchange of commercially sensitive pricing information between Norden Foods Ltd and two other suppliers of frozen bakery products between January 2024 and March 2026.
No finding has been made against your client. The purpose of this letter is to inform Norden Foods of the investigation and to request the documents listed in the Schedule within 21 days of the date of this letter. The request is made under the Authority’s statutory powers, and failure to comply without reasonable excuse may result in a penalty.
Your client should also take immediate steps to preserve all documents, including electronic messages, that may be relevant to the matter. The deliberate destruction of relevant material is an offence.
Should Norden Foods wish to apply for leniency, it should contact the Cartels Unit before making any other submission. Any application is treated in confidence.
We would be grateful for confirmation of receipt by return.
Yours sincerely,
D. Halvorsen
Senior Case Officer
Letter from a national competition authority, written for this test. Names are fictional.
The Aurelia Bay (2025)
The claimants, receivers of a cargo of bagged rice, sued the carrier for wet damage discovered on discharge at Valletta. The bills of lading were clean and incorporated the terms of a voyage charterparty, including a London arbitration clause. The carrier applied for a stay of the court proceedings in favour of arbitration.
The court held that the words of incorporation were wide enough to bring the arbitration clause into the bills, and that the receivers, as lawful holders, were bound by it. The proceedings were stayed. The court did not decide who was responsible for the damage; that question was for the tribunal.
The judge noted that a clean bill is strong evidence of the apparent order and condition of the goods on shipment, but that it does not by itself establish the cause of later damage. The receivers’ argument that the incorporation clause was too vague to be effective was rejected on the wording of this particular bill. Costs were reserved, so no order as to who pays them was made at this stage.
A teaching case note. The case is fictional and simplified.
Marco Bellini: possible dismissal
Hi Sara,
Thanks for your time on the phone. As discussed, we want to move quickly with Marco. He has been late eleven times since January and last week he was rude to a customer in front of colleagues. His line manager gave him a verbal warning in February, but nothing was put in writing. Marco has been with us for four years and has no other issues on file.
We would like to dismiss him this Friday. Can you confirm we are within our rights? I also want to know whether we have to pay him notice, and whether we should say anything about the customer incident in the letter.
One more thing: Marco mentioned last month that he is thinking of joining the union. I do not think that is relevant, but I would rather you knew.
Best,
Priya Nair
Operations Manager, Corelli Logistics
An email from a client to her lawyer, written for this test. Names are fictional.
Writing: preliminary advice email
One realistic brief, marked by Otto out of 20. Hedge where you must, instruct where you can.
Client matter: Bexley Components and Harlow Manufacturing
Your client, Bexley Components Ltd, supplies machined parts to Harlow Manufacturing under a two-year supply agreement with fourteen months left to run. As your client describes it, the agreement contains a minimum-order clause. This morning Harlow emailed to say it will stop taking deliveries from next month because it has found a cheaper supplier. Your client wants to know whether it can hold Harlow to the contract, whether it should stop production now, and what to say in reply. You have not seen the agreement.
Write a preliminary advice email of 250 to 320 words. State the provisional position, ask for the documents you need, give immediate instructions (including on mitigation and on not conceding anything), and set out the next steps. You may invent sensible names and dates.
Provisional, hedged, tied to the documents you have not seen. Name the doctrine if you can.
Agreement and schedules, variations, order history, committed materials, dispute clause.
Holding reply, no admissions, all rights reserved, keep producing what is committed, record mitigation.
What you will confirm, the open questions, and when you will write again.
Useful language
Subject to sight of the agreement…
Without prejudice to…
Please keep a record of…
We will need sight of…
You would be entitled either to… or to…
Once I have the documents, I will confirm…
Clear and careful
Subject: Supply agreement with Harlow Manufacturing: preliminary advice
Dear Mr Bexley,
Thank you for sending me Harlow’s email. On the present information, Harlow does not appear to have a right to stop taking deliveries. The agreement has fourteen months to run and, as you describe it, contains a minimum-order clause. If that is correct, Harlow’s email may be an anticipatory breach, which would give you the right to claim damages and possibly to terminate. I cannot confirm this until I have seen the full agreement.
Please send me the signed agreement with all schedules, any later amendments or emails that changed the terms, the last twelve months of orders and invoices, and Harlow’s email in its original form.
In the meantime, please do not reply to Harlow with anything that accepts their position. A short holding message is enough: say that you have received the email, that you are taking advice, and that all rights are reserved. Please do not stop production yet, but do not start any new long-term purchases of materials for this contract either. Keep a record of every step you take to reduce your losses, because a court will expect you to have mitigated them.
I would also ask you not to contact the cheaper supplier or Harlow’s customers.
Once I have the documents, I will confirm whether the minimum-order clause is enforceable, what Harlow owes you if it does not perform, and whether it makes sense to offer a negotiated exit. Depending on the wording, there may be a dispute-resolution clause that fixes the forum.
I will write again within two working days of receiving the documents.
Kind regards,
Ana Costa
- Answers the three questions the client asked (hold Harlow to it, stop production, what to say) without deciding any of them before the documents arrive.
- Every legal conclusion is hedged (On the present information, If that is correct), and the hedge is tied to the missing agreement.
- Immediate instructions are concrete: a holding reply, no admissions, keep producing what is committed, record mitigation steps.
- 276 words as rendered, subject line and sign-off included, inside the 250 to 320 limit.
Analytical and measured
Subject: Harlow Manufacturing: threatened cessation of orders, preliminary view
Dear Mr Bexley,
Thank you for your instructions and for forwarding Harlow’s email of 14 March.
On the present information, and subject to sight of the signed agreement, Harlow’s stated intention to stop taking deliveries appears inconsistent with a contract that has fourteen months left to run and contains a minimum-order commitment. A clear statement that a party will not perform, made before performance is due, may amount to an anticipatory repudiation. If it does, Bexley Components would be entitled either to affirm the contract and hold Harlow to it, or to accept the repudiation, treat the contract as at an end and claim damages. That election has consequences, so nothing should be said to Harlow that could be read as accepting their position.
I should be grateful if you would send me the executed agreement and schedules, any variation correspondence, the order and invoice history for the last twelve months, evidence of materials already committed to Harlow’s orders, and any dispute-resolution or governing-law clause you can identify.
Pending that review, I recommend three immediate steps. First, send Harlow a brief acknowledgement stating that their email is under consideration and that all rights are reserved. Second, continue production only to the extent already committed, and document every decision, since any claim will be reduced by losses you could reasonably have avoided. Third, preserve internal communications about Harlow, as they may become disclosable.
The open questions are whether the clause is enforceable as drafted, whether Harlow can point to any termination right or force majeure event, how damages would be measured, and whether the agreement fixes a forum. I would rather not speculate on figures before I have seen the documents.
I will revert with a fuller analysis within two working days of receipt.
Yours sincerely,
Ana Costa
- Names the doctrine (anticipatory repudiation) and the election it creates (affirm or accept), then draws the practical consequence: say nothing that could be read as acceptance.
- Requests are specific and purposive, including evidence of committed materials, which feeds straight into the mitigation analysis.
- The closing paragraph lists the open questions rather than answering them, which is what a first email should do.
- 306 words as rendered, subject line and sign-off included, inside the 250 to 320 limit.
Results
Press Finish test at the top of the page. Your summary appears here.
No summary yet. Check your exercises, then press Finish test.
Teacher’s answer key
Answers, notes, marking scheme and placement guidance.
Test answer key
Using this test
- CodesThis answer key uses 0880 and stays with you. The model answers for the writing task use 1234, which you can give to learners after they have submitted their own email. The Lock button hides them again.
- PurposePlacement before the course, or progress after it. The same paper works for both because the items are drawn from all eleven chapters and every item carries a teacher note. For progress testing, compare the section breakdown with the placement result rather than the raw total.
- Placement bands170 to 200: C1 range, ready for chapters 9 to 11 as consolidation and for extended drafting. 140 to 169: secure B2, start at chapter 4 or wherever the breakdown is weakest. 100 to 139: B2 threshold, start at chapter 1 and use the vocabulary decks. Below 100: the course will be hard without a general English bridge first. Moderate every band with the writing mark; the questions reward recognition, the email rewards production.
- GuessingHalf the items (100 of 200) are two- or three-option judgements, so a random paper scores roughly 60 to 70. Treat anything under 90 as no evidence of legal English at all.
- Once checked, an item is lockedChecking a set locks its answers and disables its Clear button, so a learner cannot cycle through the options until the tick appears. Feedback is limited to Correct or Not quite, with no clue, and the answer key is not built into the page until you unlock it with 0880. This is a client-side test, so a determined learner who reads the page source can still find the answers: for a placement decision that matters, sit the test in the room.
- TimingTwo hours is comfortable for a C1 learner and workable for B2: roughly 25 minutes for the email and about half a minute an item for the rest. The timer is optional; for placement, let learners run over and note the time taken.
Educational material. The readings and the client matter are fictional. Verify current law, terminology and local procedure before relying on any legal proposition.