SQE1 July 2025 Results: What the 41% Pass Rate Tells Us

41%.

That’s the number of candidates who passed SQE1 in July 2025, the lowest rate since the exam was introduced. The Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) was meant to fix the old problems of the LPC system: inconsistent teaching standards, spiralling costs and opaque recruitment barriers. It promised a fairer, more accessible, more reliable route to qualification. But, almost 4 years in, and especially after the latest results, it’s increasingly looking like reform has simply made things different, not better.

The issue now isn’t just low pass rates, its unpredictability. While SQE1 plummeted to a 41% pass rate, the April-May 2025 SQE2 sitting reached a record 82% pass rate and the SRA hasn’t offered a detailed explanation for this swing beyond noting the different mixes of candidates in sittings. The College of Legal Practice, however, has raised doubts about whether that fully explains the scale of the drop, pointing out that the SRA’s own statistical report “doesn’t provide many answers”. Instead of a cohesive assessment pathway, many now feel the SQE behaves like two different experiences: one unpredictably harsh, the other manageable. That imbalance has become increasingly difficult for candidates and training providers to ignore.

At a recent Westminster Legal Policy Forum, the SRA announced that they would be appointing external assessment experts to review the SQE. Despite this, sharp swings in pass rates have already shaken confidence. For candidates spending thousands of pounds and months preparing, a swing from 56% to 41% feels less like natural variation and more like a structural problem. In the same vein, the LSB has urged the SRA to publish provider-level pass rate data “as soon as possible”, arguing it is essential for prospective candidates to make informed choices about their training options.

The original purpose of the SQE made sense. The old LPC route was expensive and unevenly taught across providers. Along with this, many candidates completed the LPC but could not secure a training contract, effectively wasting both their time and money. The SQE was meant to untangle learning from assessment and offer alternative paths to qualification, introducing the concept of qualifying work experience (QWE). In theory, this marked a move toward greater flexibility and a single national standard.

In practice, however, the experience of SQE has been far more complicated. The structure of SQE1, testing “functional legal knowledge” in a multiple-choice format, relying heavily on memorisation. This format may partly explain the stark disparities in results between demographic groups. In July 2025, 55% of white candidates passed SQE1 compared to only 28% of black or black British candidates. Degree classification also had a strong effect with 67% of people with a first-class degree passing compared to 19% of those with a 2:2. Seeing as these disparities haven’t yet been meaningfully addressed by the SRA it does seem as though the exam has magnified the inequalities it was designed to address.

Cost has been another sticking point. While the SQE was marketed as a cheaper alternative to the LPC, the total cost, when exam fees and prep courses are included, can still reach or even exceed LPC levels. For those without financial backing or firm sponsorship, the SQE becomes a major risk. If they fail, they pay again. Add in the mental strain and uncertainty and it’s easy to see why morale among candidates is low. Reports have even surfaced of law firms threatening to claw back funding or maintenance payments if trainees fail. Technical failures haven’t helped either. In one instance, 175 candidates were incorrectly told they had failed due to an administrative error, with knock on effects for career plans, finances and mental health. These issues together have left many feeling the SQE is not just demanding but destabilising.

That said, the SQE is not without positives. the idea of one national standard assessed by objective measures still carries weight and the inclusion of QWE has opened the door to apprenticeships and non-traditional training routes. If implemented properly, the SQE could still level the playing field, especially for candidates shut out of the LPC or traditional training contracts.

But ‘implemented properly’ remains the critical qualifier. A lack of transparency around pass mark setting, volatile results between sittings and widening demographic disparities have eroded trust. Candidates expect a tough exam, but not one where the goalposts feel invisible. If the exam is to deliver on its promise of fairness and consistency, the SRA will need to make its process clearer and its standards more reliable.

The upcoming review may present an opportunity. At the very least, the SRA could explain exactly how pass marks are set and why they change. This lets candidates know what they’re working towards. Publishing more detailed data, like performance by provider or background, may also help to rebuild trust. Even small adjustments like introducing more scenario-based questions in SQE1 rather than pure recall could align it closer with real legal reasoning while keeping its multiple-choice structure.

Until then, the SQE sits in an uneasy middle ground, designed to widen access but too often experienced as a complex, costly gamble. Whether it becomes the gateway it promised to be depends on whether candidates start to see consistency and clarity in how the exam works, not just the promises of reform.

Solicitors Regulation Authority, SQE1 July 2025 Statistical Report Solicitors Regulation Authority, SQE2 April 2025 Statistical Report College of Legal Practice, ‘July pass rate increases the urgency for a review of the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE)’ https://www.collegalpractice.com/news/2025/10/10/july-pass-rate-increases-the-urgency-for-a-review-of-the-sqe accessed 11 October Nick Holborne LegalFutures ‘SQE provider pass rates “must be published as soon as possible”’ accessed 13 October Jonathan Ames, ‘Law firm threatens to claw back fees for exam failures’ The Times accessed 13 October ‘Solicitors Qualifying Examination mired in chaos’ The Times accessed 13 October