Disclaimer – All mock test materials provided by BL Translations have been crafted using publicly available publications from NAATI, aligning with the appropriate levels and testing components. Copyright for these mock materials is exclusively held by BL Translations. These mock materials are intended solely for educational purposes. Unauthorised commercial use or copying without proper source attribution is strictly prohibited. It is important to note that none of our materials have been recycled or modified from any similar materials owned by other individuals or institutions.
As mentioned in the instructional videos, the NAATI CPI test encompasses various scenarios. Below, you will find sample dialogues to assist candidates in practicing before their NAATI test.
These mock tests adhere to the structure of the NAATI CPI test, enabling you to become more accustomed to its format and pacing. It’s worth noting that the actual test may vary slightly in terms of duration compared to these practice exercises.
Additionally, it’s crucial to keep in mind that during the actual test, your interaction management skills will be evaluated.
While you can request repeats as needed, excessive requests can disrupt the flow of the conversation and are discouraged. It’s important to strike a balance, as too many repeats may hinder your ability to complete the dialogue within the time constraints of the NAATI CPI test.
| Topic: | Legal Contract Challenges |
| Field: | Legal |
| Difficulty: | Intermediate |
Audio
Transcript
Briefing – This dialogue takes place between Ms. Tran, who is the respondent in a civil case involving a contract, and her legal representative, Mr. Johnson. Their conversation begins now.
Mr Johnson: Good afternoon, Ms Tran. I understand you’ve found yourself in a difficult situation regarding the contract you signed. Can you please explain why you signed it without realising its nature?
Ms Tran: Good afternoon, Mr. Johnson. Well, at the time, my English wasn’t very good, and I trusted my ex-partner completely. He pressured me into signing without explaining anything.
Mr Johnson: I see. That’s unfortunate. But can you provide any evidence or details about the illegal dealings between your ex-partner and the applicant that you mentioned earlier? Specifically, with regards to the contract you signed, have you considered the possibility of “non est factum”? It is a legal defense that suggests a person signed a document without understanding its nature due to a fundamental mistake. If you can demonstrate that you were misled or coerced into signing the contract under false pretenses, it might help your case.
Ms Tran: I’m afraid I don’t have concrete evidence, but there were a number of shady deals behind the scenes. My ex had connections with the applicant and I believe he manipulated me into signing this contract.
Mr Johnson: While the illegal dealings are concerning, establishing them as proof might be challenging. The applicant has strong evidence showing that you’ve made payments on the loan multiple times.
Ms Tran: But it was like I was between a rock and a hard place, Mr. Johnson; I had no choice. I should also spill the beans that I’m currently involved in a family court case with him, and he’s up to some shady business, like bringing in illegal sex workers. The loan was like a Pandora’s box, intended for these unlawful activities.
Mr Johnson: That’s indeed a serious matter. By signing what appears to be a sham contract, you might also be held responsible for these illegal activities.
Ms Tran: I’m scared, Mr. Johnson. What if I mention this in court and get prosecuted by the police?
Mr. Johnson: Well, you do have the option to use the privilege against self-incrimination. This legal concept allows you to refuse to answer questions or provide information that could incriminate you in a criminal matter. It’s like a shield that protects you from potentially implicating yourself in illegal activities. However, it’s important to understand that while this privilege exists to safeguard your rights, it’s not without its risks. By asserting this privilege, you may raise suspicions or lead others to believe that you have something to hide. It’s like walking a tightrope; you’re protecting yourself from self-incrimination, but it can also be a double-edged sword. In this case, if you decide to use the privilege against self-incrimination, it would be considered a separate issue from the paperwork you signed. It won’t directly address the contract matter but rather your concerns about potential criminal implications.
Ms Tran: The paperwork itself has been altered by the applicant; it’s different from what I originally received.
Mr Johnson: In that case, you’ll need to find all the records you received and prove that they’ve been altered. If established, the applicant can be considered for perjury.
Ms Tran: My computer is dead, and I’ll need someone to restore it before I can start finding the evidence.
Mr Johnson: Restoration is indeed a crucial step. Once you’ve gathered the evidence, let’s schedule another meeting to discuss our options further. We’ll work through this together.
This is the end of the dialogue.
BL Translations 