We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
But I have always wanted to intern at Trilegal and I have been constantly applying but I have not received any response..
What could be the reason ??
In first year currently, did not join anything and don't plan to in the future. Can I still land good internships and eventually a PPO or placement?
Any tips. Any particulars to cover?
I think he fell victim to Cal HC lawyers and those who are known to be mostly "district court" folks lobbies. Sort of the NLU vs TLC stuff.
NKC appointees got eased out by AG bfr OVN took over. Now it's all OVN till Brutus happens.
MPS did bypass EC and not always for right reasons. But he finally got felled by the EC. Same with NKC. EC is never bypassed. It supports the frontman as long certain equations run smoothly.
I am a 4th year student from a Tier-3 NLU (Bordering Tier-1). I had an upcoming assessment internship in june/july that fell through, and since those are the two most crowded months of the year, almost all the good places are packed already.
I have previously interned with several Tier-1 and Dispute-resolution centric law firms, as well as in some of the most intense contemporary chambers. I have several personalised letters of recommendations, and I recently published a book on securities regulation in India.
This is a long shot, but if any recruiters happen to see this, if you can help me out that would be wonderful!! reach out to me at lawyerinthemaking2027@gmail.com
This is not about rejection disappointment. The HRs don't have proper processes. They aren't up to scratch. First have a Linklaters/Freshfields-style graduate recruitment office, then come here giving big big lectures to students. Do you hear students complaining about HRs when they get rejected from Hogan Lovells or A&O Shearman? Of HRs never responding to emails or phone calls or just ghosting after a point? Do you even hear of this cold-mailing kind of practice going on in such environments? Do you hear about complaints re: Reed Smith HR going to a university and commenting on the physical looks of female students or how their looks seem to indicate that they aren't from the type of background suitable at a law firm? (Talking about stuff coming to mind from what I've read on LI re: behaviour of Indian law firm HRs.) Or to take an even more concrete example, of any reputable global law firm's HR shouting at a university's representatives because they presented them with a disabled student telling them that said disabled person would be the best candidate? (This latter, apparently, did happen with a visually impaired student at one of the older NLus, whose RCC presented said VI student to a law firm's HR, who exactly behaved in the way I described.) Why do you hear more of that in our setup than in the globally reputed setups? Please go on LinkedIn for five minutes and look at the "I am pleased to announce" type of posts about people being offered vac scheme places in the current cycle, or TC places in earlier cycles. You will see them actually thanking the HR for actually making the process one that gets students to believe they are actually doing something meaningful.
Sure the students complain, even in those setups, but that's usually about how devilishly hard it is to get into a top-class law firm. And as re: my other question, please go on TCLA and other forums and find me one person who has tried anything like this and boasted about getting a vac scheme or TC. You know the contrast between how those folks are talking and how our people are talking? It's not because our folks are lower quality or have fewer scruples than those guys - just the opposite, in fact. It's because your side haven't fixed your recruitment processes. Before writing such patronising and insulting nonsense in the future, please look in a mirror, first. Before doing that, have one last spot of enjoyment by reading the below, because not only is it one of those classics people will be talking about for years, but because it's actually a much more useful and hard-hitting cautionary tale than the unreflective tripe you have wasted our time with:
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/firm-cancels-students-interview-after-hearing-deez-nutz-voicemail
The college is run by politically affiliated principal (just google her name, you'll find tons of complaints), professors who are admitted via quota (prof. GDP will make you make videos of yourself and edit them in Capcut as part of assessment while he himself looks like a joker and has no knowledge of his subjects)
Placement is negligible, all the college placement is done smaller firms or in-house companies. T1 or T2 are usually PPOs through student's own hardwork in internship, except 2-3 campus hires.
I believe you would need to score above 99 percentile in order to aim for GLC, even higher if you're OMS I guess.
A month or so would suffice for preparation probably.
All the best!
I force my juniors to stay in office, even if there is no work because one must not leave before their seniors.
I will sit on an email that was sent to me on Monday, and will only allocate it to my junior on a Friday night, with a due date of Saturday morning (even if it is only due on the coming Wednesday). Thereafter, I will sit on the work product only on Tuesday evening and then chide my junior for not following instructions that I never gave. Instructions are something I never give; or if I give, they are too vague, something which an A0 won't have any context on. I will also tell my junior that "this was not done" when the junior has not received any instructions to that effect!
On Wednesday mid day the work would be due, so the entire night of the junior will be eaten by me and of course, I will create chaos, confusion and anxiety on Wednesday morning. I will make my junior take prints for something (that should have otherwise been done by the office boy). I will then go on to hog credit for the entire work in front of the partner. Ofcourse, if there is a fuck up, that would be blamed on the junior.
I will often shout at the junior for no other reason than to show that I am very "senior" (all this while nobody outside the firm knows me).
I am an SA/PA at a law firm. I am very senior.
It’s bad news for some of his minions in the EC. But the real event to watch out for will be the upcoming elections. If President’s rule is imposed because the SIR cannot be completed by early May, anything can happen. Still 50 lakh cases are left and then there will be an appeal stage.
If you receive partnership distributions of 30 crores a year for 10 years, you would receive 300 crores (mostly after tax, since the partnership pays a significant portion of the tax before distributions). You would have had 10 years’ worth of living expense (say 10 to 15 crores in total at that income level), leaving you with a balance of 285 to 290 crores. And then you have investment returns on that money as well.
Top non-founder equity partners (not average or every equity partner) in T1s with 200 crores+ net worth is eminently possible (even probable).
“We direct the Government of India and all states/UTs/Universities etc. to disassociate 3 of them forthwith and not to assign any responsibility which involves public funds”
https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-ncert-social-science-textbook-corruption-in-judiciary-suo-motu-contempt-525957
How should we read this? Does this mean dissociate only from Alok Prasanna, or also his organisation? Because another faction of Vidhi (Arghya Sengupta’s) keeps very good relations with both the Modi govt and the judiciary. They get tons of work from the Modi govt (which is their biggest funder) and they invite many current and former SC judges to their events.
There could be 2 solutions to this ambiguity:
1. Alok resigns from Vidhi and Arghya fully takes control. Because no statement yet from Arghya that he is standing with Alok. Silence so far.
2. A correction to the order exempting Vidhi. Because the court order also says: “This order shall be subject to their approaching this court for modification with an explanation.”
In the same week, I met with a partner at one of India's most prestigious tier-1 law firms. And separately, I spent time with one of India's wealthiest men, a billionaire who has built businesses spanning multiple countries, employing tens of thousands of people.
The contrast is something I cannot get out of my head.
The law firm partner, within minutes of sitting down, made it a point to tell me he doesn't engage with people who have less than five years of experience. He used words like "highly specialized group." He carried himself like he was doing me a favour by breathing the same air. I left that room feeling smaller than when I walked in.
The businessman treated me like I mattered. Warmly, genuinely, without any performance.
But it made me think about something I've been sitting with for a while. These firms operate in a protected domestic market. No real external competitive pressure forcing a culture reset. So the hierarchy calcifies. Seniority becomes the only currency. And the way you signal seniority is by making everyone below you feel it.
The businessman has actually built something. Thousands of families earn their livelihood because of decisions he made over decades. Genuine risk. Genuine skin in the game.
Yet he had more warmth in one conversation than I have encountered across multiple interactions with people a fraction of his stature in this profession.
Real security doesn't need an audience.
The legal industry talks a lot about mentorship and building the next generation. But it starts with how you treat a young person who walks into your room with nothing to offer you yet.
That businessman understood this instinctively. I wish more lawyers did.
The alumni base is strong in GLC, but that shouldn't be a surprise considering just how old it is. Besides these two factors, what REALLY sets GLC apart?
Most work is on commercial laws or labour laws. TMT work is negligible and majorly of their cash cow client.