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?
2. How much is the salary do they pay to freshers?
Then you’d stop considering this place altogether
The issue is that kindness alone does not make a successful practice or a good career move. Associates need clarity on what they are being trained for, what the long-term vision is, and where the practice is headed.
The biggest concern has always been the lack of a clearly defined focus. A mentor cannot effectively guide associates if the destination itself keeps shifting. For any associate looking to build expertise, credibility and a marketable skill set, that uncertainty can be damaging.
Joining a team without a clear strategic direction is not a leap of faith. It's a career gamble. And for many associates, it can quickly become career suicide.
No difference at all.
Such is the aura of madam that she can even sell ice to Eskimos!
Why is everything on the left about identity and not about material circumstances ? Because lgbt is about identity and they frame the debate.
This lobby is rich, well funded by international organisations - and have done more in two decades that Dalits have gotten done in 2 centuries. But when someone does speak up for poor women who need sex segregated spaces to participate in public life- the lobby inevitably plays victim. As if women are attacking trans people and being violent - when the violence these people face mostly comes from other men or from their own communities.
They also make the claim from the other end - if a woman identifies as a man she shouldn’t lose rights she would have had as a woman. That doesn’t seem to be rooted in excluding trans people
IB has 3 verticals, primarily 2 that non math kids venture into, one being client facing and pitching/marketing of securities, second being execution.
1st being its on ball game where u work on PPTs and marketing securities and handle the very start that is bringing in clients and selling the securities or debt to raise funds and draw up attention.
exceution is what lawyers do but done in house, IB execution teams draft documents and essentially are the ones giving comments to the cap marks/B&F teams in law firms, finalising drafts and doing DD alongside the firm (this is most people in IB)
for the client facing roles, you either come from a top 3-5 MBA and might make slightly more than a t1 lawyer and when you are in execution you make less even at t1 indian banks only maybe 2-3 foreign IBs pay more than a law firm but even that is offset by the tax benefits of being a lawyer on retainer.
Text someone on linkedin who's made the switch, they can explain these things to you a lot better than ▮▮▮ after watching suits who are really just law students who dont work at a firm or a bank giving gyan about who does what and pays what like this entire thread.
I am interested in understanding how AI is currently being adopted in the Indian legal profession, particularly from the perspective of practicing lawyers.
I would love to hear your experiences and opinions on a few questions:
1. AI Tool Adoption: Are you currently using AI tools in your legal practice? If yes, which tools do you use (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, SCC Online AI, Manupatra, CaseMine, etc.) and for what purposes?
2. Professional Background: Are you practising independently as a solo lawyer, working with a law firm, or associated with a chamber, legal organisation, or bar association?
3. Practical Limitations: What are the biggest drawbacks you have encountered while using these AI tools? For example, inaccurate case citations, hallucinations, lack of Indian legal context, poor document analysis, data privacy concerns, or anything else.
4. Unmet Needs: Are there specific tasks in your daily legal practice that existing AI tools fail to address effectively or that you wish could be automated?
5. Trust & Reliability: How much do you trust AI-generated legal research, drafting, and analysis? Do you use AI-generated outputs directly, or do you always independently verify them?
I am particularly interested in hearing from both lawyers who actively use AI and those who have chosen not to adopt it.
There is no right or wrong answer. Real-world experiences, criticisms, and suggestions would be extremely valuable.
Looking forward to hearing your perspectives. Thank you!
At my current organisation, I’ve been asked about my caste by my former legal head and by the founder’s EA. Recently, a colleague was mocking people from reserved categories, and I simply walked out. I’ve spoken up in the past when someone said something like this, but this time I couldn’t. I already have a lot going on in my life.
I’ve often wondered why we don’t form a group to support each other. Sadly, even my batchmates from reserved categories don’t follow Ambedkarite thought or think about organising. If you’re planning anything along these lines, count me in.
However, that's not always the case. Another example would be politicians - many (if not all) would prefer to be CMs in their respective states rather than being a central minister.
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/delhi-ncrs-new-pollution-rules-explained-older-vehicles-banned-50-wfh-and-strict-commute-curbs-12265746
Work wise our mandates are not limited to any state.
Cravath system agrees with you.
Yes
In their case WDII points to cases where biological males have competed against women in judo tournaments, where they’ve gotten jobs as female nurses, where they’ve claimed reserved jobs for women in the police, contested in women’s reserved constituencies, and where they’ve been housed in women’s prisons-
Which of these things are we supposed to think are not a problem? Would you want your daughter to have to fight men in tournaments, be checked by men claiming to be female nurses, lose reserved jobs to men and share restrooms with men and god forbid - share a prison cell with a male rapist ?
Why does allowing transgender people human dignity have to mean that ? Why can’t they just be - men who are very feminine and dress like women and all of that - and still be men ?
OP is right, they have set back LGBTQ rights by decades.
It's a PIL to actively deny rights to a class of people. It doesn't need representation.
I would suggest you to speak with folks who can give u insider info (teams that sit in that floor) and then take a decision. Wishing you luck!
tried emailing them but got nothing
A lawyer should not be defending something.
Why? Because its wrong
Please tell that to the legilsature so that our criminal justice system is done away with
1) you don't know it, the opposing counsel knows it, he will simply switch to kannada while talking to the bench and you might be left wondering what just happened, in which case you are at a disadvantage of having lost context. This extends to getting adjournment etc as well because there is a personal relatability to kannada for most, hence your request feels more connected when spoken as such.
2) the clerks are busy individuals with only real duty officially towards the judge. In which case when you want some information they know, kannada can get you that in seconds, with English, you might have to wait for longer to grab attention etc.
Now for either of those examples you will be forced to make extra actions to get to the same point that a person knowing kannada won't have to, hence it becomes more attractive to hire anyone in disputes who knows the local language (especially if the said team deals a lot in regional matters accross junior courts) . So what's the answer? Prove you can deal with it beyond what's just required. That proof of ability is your main factor in my opinion, rest for actually working, start catching up to the language for your own good and not because anyone has asked you too. Best of luck!