I am a lawyer with 6 years of practise in a tier 2 city. Worked for 3 years in AAG office. Liking the work. But thinking about moving to Delhi and having a hard time figuring out how to do that. Is it a good choice to move form tier 2 to tier 1? Don't want to work in a firm long term. Looking for independent practise after some time. Is it a good move? Is it possible to do it even? Genuinely asking

1. UK has some of the highest tax rates in the world. So while the pay is good, that's a bit of a problem. Plus, PPP is an issue too. The pay, in quantity, is higher than Indian firms. But the British cost of living is substantially higher, so a lot of that is going away for cost of living and tax anyway.

2. Sorry to hear you still feel this way. A good number of Indian-educated lawyers have done well for themselves at the MC firms. Therefore, if you are a good lawyer, please do not let that stop you from trying that career path if you want it.

3. Don't know how well the work experience would be received in India considering promotions etc (as I have never worked in an Indian firm), but I assume it would be regarded well? There may possibly be some issues, since the training contract system is slightly different from how things work in many Indian firms. The MC firms, because of requirements that the regulator (Solicitors' Regulation Authority (SRA)) have tended to impose in the past, give you exposure to multiple practice areas ('seats'). So remember you're not a qualified solicitor when you start your TC, the TC is still part of your learning and qualification process to become a solicitor - your 'QWE' (that's why most firms give you a job title such as 'Trainee Solicitor' or 'Trainee Associate'). You'd usually do about three or four 'seats' (random example combo: Banking & Finance, Regulated Payments, Banking and Lending, Corporate and Investment Funds). You'd then 'qualify into' your chosen seat as an 'NQ' (newly-qualified solicitor, specialising in that area), after having done perhaps six months of work in those seats. By contrast, the Indian firms would want you to specialise in one practice area pretty much from the start.

Heres one thing Chandrachud can do to positively affect his own legacy. Since he seems obsessed with it anyway. Retire. Quit. Dont take a job that any government offers you. Tell people that doing so would have been inappropriate and that post-retirement positions are used as carrots and sticks to influence the judiciary. Make it morally unacceptable for SC judges to accept post retirement positions.

Work in a law school somewhere teaching the law- GLC or MNLU or NLUD or CLC or something. Dont go to rajya sabha, dont try for president. All those things might put your name in some trivia books, but real legacy- the sort of legacy that H.R. Khanna, K Chandru, Santosh Hegde, Chelmeshwar -all of those people have- will take standing up for something real just a little bit just once.

He will have a tarnished legacy anyway- and he knows it. He didnt step up on babri or kashmir or heck even demonetisation, he didnt step up for gay marriage. He wrote toxic gender ideology into the law that will take decades of undoing so women and children can be safeguarded. He read things into the constitution that werent there at all. But he can at least be known as the judge who stood up to judicial corruption.

Come on! Do one thing right! He doesnt even need another job, he doesnt need to do what judges usually do- its entirely an unforced choice that hes making by following the usual route. If he just retires , lives a smaller life from here on , but makes it morally clear that SC judges shouldnt accept post retirement positions- he would have some sort of legacy that future historians would admire.

His father was only ever known for being a careerist coward who let indira gandhi make a joke out of the constitution. A career of being a great legal mind thrown into the dust because of cowardice and greed. He can at least save the family name somewhat instead of continuing to curse his children with that reputation.

1. Hi. I am a lawyer in the UK (England and Wales, to be specific).

2. I am completely blind. Have been since I was four years old. I work in London. I won't reveal anything more specific, as it may help narrow things down to an extent I'm not quite comfortable with.

3. I rarely have used Legally India, so am sorry if this seems like a very incongruous, random or strange thing to ask on here (as this website deals, as it should, largely with questions about legal practice in India). You, however, have plenty of blind lawyers in India and this website's design is quite accessible. Therefore, I would assume the concept of blind lawyers or law students using LI wouldn't be all that strange for you. You also have some stuff on training contracts, so people asking about work culture outside India wouldn't be so outlandish either, I assume?

4. To be clear, I obviously have spoken and will continue to speak with colleagues in my own jurisdiction about the below idea, but would like the opinions of colleagues from a jurisdiction which is of immense importance to us here, and to which I have a personal connection because of family.

5. Currently, I use a long white cane as a mobility aid (a device that helps me understand information about my surrounding environment such as what obstacles are in front and/or on either side of, me, figure out where landmarks to known places are situated etc). You likely have noticed blind students, interns or colleagues in your own context using a similar device to navigate around university campuses, law firm offices or other spaces.

6. However, I wish, in order to increase my independence and efficiency, to transition to using a guide dog.

7. The matters I hope you will give me your valuable opinions on:

(a) How would you, coming from a country where (unless I am mistaken) assistance dogs (or guide dogs specifically) aren't really a thing yet, view a professional in a society where they were who used one and with whom you had to interact? If you have a fear or dislike of dogs, would that in any way be mitigated by knowledge that the guide (or other assistance, e.g. autism support) dog is there purely to support the disabled professional in question and extremely well-trained (i.e., not to do the typical things that untrained dogs do such as sniffing/licking people)?

(b) This one's really subjective/culture specific, so please feel free to skip this question if you like. Do you think, from any experience you may have had of the UK, that this might in any way detract from my or other peoples' professionalism? For example, do you think people might define me as the blind guy with the dog instead of thinking of me as a fellow professional like themselves?

Look forward to your responses and apologies if these questions seem awfully naive!

I can share insights about NLS, and most of this applies to other law schools as well.

If you want a good job by the end of your course, maintaining a high GPA is crucial. At NLS, aim for a GPA of 4.5+; it should not fall below 4. A GPA above 5.5 will likely secure you a job at any Indian law firm, provided you have a decent CV.

Now, addressing your questions:

1. It’s not mandatory to intern during all three breaks. However, in the 4th year, internships are taken more seriously for PPOs (Pre-Placement Offers). Depending on your RCC (Recruitment Coordination Committee) class and firm schedules, you may need to intern in all breaks during that year.

2. For corporate jobs, NGO internships don’t hold much weight. However, it’s worth interning at an NGO in your hometown to spend time at home while fulfilling any requirements.

3. NLS mandates a minimum of 28 days for internships. Most firms offer one-month internships, though some allow two-week durations based on availability.NLS is restructuring its academic calendar, which might result in longer breaks, but you’ll get at least one break per year even if you intern during two.

NALSAR, as far as I know, offers longer breaks.

4. There’s no fixed formula for securing a PPO. Some students land PPOs during their first 4th-year internship. Performance in internships (especially assessment internships) matters most.

In the first two years, focus on maintaining a high GPA, as it’s critical for shortlisting during placements and RCC internships.

Before the 3rd year, intern with a good advocate in the Delhi High Court or your local High Court.

Day Zero (placement day) is held in the first trimester of the 5th year, though you can secure a PPO before that. Keep your GPA in the top 25% of your batch, maintain a solid CV, and ensure strong basics to increase your chances.

5. Connections can help, but you can secure good internships even without them. Apply well in advance and send reminders. Reach out to alumni and ask for guidance from 4th and 5th-year students—they can serve as your "connections."

6. Types of Internships: Regular Internship: A general internship to understand the work culture and quality.

Callback Internship: If you perform well during a regular internship, the firm may invite you back for further assessment, depending on vacancies.

Assessment Internship: Some firms (e.g., S&R Associates) skip the regular internship stage and directly assess candidates during a single internship.

Finally, as a first-generation student, don’t worry—you’ll figure things out once you join law school. Keep researching, and create a LinkedIn account by your second year, but don’t let it overwhelm you. Trust the process, and everything will fall into place.

All the best!

Every law firm takes recommendations through contacts. These recommendations are from clients and partners' friends/family. The least they can do is return the favour to maintain their relationship through an unpaid internship. So, you always have a lesser chance than someone with a person of contact. I can tell you that DSK Legal 100% through contacts only and not through applications.

I switched In-House after roughly 3 years of experience in litigation and then a law firm so I am qualified (experience wise) to answer this question.

Pros- 1. Work Life Balance (no working weekends/16 hour work days).

2. Benefits like health insurance, fixed holidays which you can take guilt free.

3. Less probability of the office being Toxic. Although this largely depends on your manger, it is likely that the level of toxicity in an in house team will be less than a law firm team.

Cons- 1. Less Pay - Unlike in Tier I law firms, the pay does not increase exponentially. Hence, for improvement in salary, you may have to switch frequently.

2. Not being seen as a "real lawyer"- This is a softer issue and not always true. But some practicing lawyers think that in-house lawyers aren't "real lawyers" and hence look down upon you.

I have been working at Tatva Legal Hyderabad for the last 3 years and can tell you confidently that all the hatred laced allegations against Tatva are entirely false. Tatva has zero tolerance to lawyers who breach integrity or POSH policies and has made many enemies because of this.

Two factual issues here

1. The privileges provided to SC Judges are by definition, not ‘freebies’. They have worked hard and risen to the rank to deserve those privileges. These are afforded to them, not because of who they are but because of their rank and achievement and in support of the work that they do.

2. Loan Write off does not mean that the loan is ‘waived-off’, write-off means that the loan is written off the books and converted into NPA so they can initiate recovery procedures.

I’ll recommend you to please read critically before presenting your case, not only your comment comes across as juvenile and inept but reeks of the same mindless non-sense that is repeated on social media by ‘influencers’

There is legitimate criticism that can be made about this interview and how it was conducted. This, however, is not it. Very immature behaviour - commenting anonymously like this using ad hominem instead of arguments. Let me see you actually say all this to that guy's face? I bet you'd never dare.

I think the interviewer used very tried and tested interview techniques on a person on whom those wouldn't work. Among other things, he should surely know that Chandrachud could push back with arguments about conventions and processes. Take the commenting on judgments thing: if he had asked a judge in his own country (the UK) about it, there are similar understandings around not commenting too much on judgments there as well. As somebody who has some acquaintance with the UK legal system, I will say Chandrachud was good in that he didn't use the what-aboutary pushback ('what about in the UK?') too often. This interview largely seemed like he drew from a manual of techniques and just threw up whatever he knew to apply well. As somebody who heartily supports good journalism (especially the kind that questions the Modi government), this kind of an effort is both disappointing and unhelpful.

Hi Guys, just wanted to know that is there any chance for an intern (BO-2025) at KCO Delhi to get a PPO or a long term internship that could convert into a permanent position. The HR said it is not possible. Knew a person that got PPO from KCO Mumbai office.

Also is hiring done at KCO for 25' Batch pan India? How to know if any Corporate/ Cap Marks team might be looking for or is planning to hire within 4-6 months, I'll connect with them virtually. Please shed some light if there is any hope.

no. this would be a serious serious breach. If its just- go take an adjournment or tell them your senior is on the way or might be late- theres some judges who might look away but anyone telling you they argued in a court of law without a license is either lying or confessing to crime.

1. Creating false urgency or fake deadline which are not even near client deadline;

2. Not backing up junior in front of client;

3. rejecting draft without reading;

4. Reprimanding or shouting at junior over the work even without giving any instructions prior to giving work. Instructions would include expectations regarding work, or how to do and what to do; Just pure assumptions

5. Doing office politics,

6. unreasonable demand for doing office till late night 3-4 am or 1 am from office and then preparing them for heart attack or other lifestyle dises;

7. compulsory work from office when that can be work from home also;

8. Expecting to work fro junior like they are robot;

9. Incessant reprimand, shouting, abusive, taunt, partial behaviour for not reasonble reason, Hyperventilating for no reason ( even though partiality and taunt cannot be justified for any reason);

10. Creating atmosphere of abuse including but not limited to bullying of junior, abusing junior, politics, no leaves or withelding leaves so junior leave before bonus payout time, even not giving credit of work, not giving promotion ( classic tactic). some senior or firm people dont even give work to junior associate then questions why they dont fill their time sheet or not giving ample work so as to fire them.

11.Not understanding junior also have life, they are new to city and fighting their own war in term of getting to new realities of life

Besides junior also have responsibility to work diligently and have balance most compliance wont solve. Point both junior and senior have to understand their responsibility to make legal industry a better work place.

There's this left YTber by the name - The Deshbhakt. He has brought up UK's denial of bail in countless videos wherever he felt the need to. I was always pissed at the system for this.

Now I come to know that UK's team are seeking adjournments. That's so not what is being peddled in the media.

What happens when a fresh grad chooses a uk based high paying firm? Is the money they pay (60 lpa) good enough after deducing taxes when compared to Indian firms pay? I heard that prospects of making partner is bleak and shifting is not an option since they prefer oxbridge candidates. If he/she decides to return to India after working in the magic circle firm, what position will they be offered at sam, cam, ..?

Ugh. Why is the court saying any of this? It is not the courts job to comment on politics or decisions made by the executive or parliament unless they are unconstitutional. You are not elected! You have neither the legitimacy or competency to decide what "freebies" are and what adequate welfare schemes should be run by the government. You are in your cushy government job where you get much more money than any of those women getting 1500 a month will ever see and servants at your beck and call and official cars and chambers and bungalows and the rest because we need people to interpret the constitution and the law. No one appointed to elected you to run economic policy. We are supposed to live in a goddamn democracy.

Honestly prashant bhushan should have refused to justify and simply asked the court why they saw any locus to intervene at all.

I generally think young folks apply the toxic label to everything nowadays. Here is what I think is okay and what is not.

Not okay behaviour:

-Verbal abuse, shouting, screaming your head off, degrading, or humiliating based on immutable characteristics.

-Demanding that every single deliverable be "due yesterday" at the time youre assigning it.

-creating a false sense of urgency especially when the timelines for deliverables are flexible.

-Sexual harassment of women. Repeatedly and unwantedly propositioning coworkers , forcing yourself on them, demanding sexual favours in exchange for concessions at work. When you do date someone at the workplace- automatically treating them more favourably than other coworkers at the workplace. If you must date- keep that outside of work. They should have to earn every single thing other associates do.

-A culture that encourages young new joinees to date and get into relationships with older colleagues.

- assuming that because someone is female or is a certain caste or whatever means that they will be worse at their work. The opposite is often true in the law field.
-Micromanaging to the extent that you demand coworkers sit in front of you while they do their work. -Trust the people you hire or dont hire them at all. They can work in their own space in office as long as they send in their work on time.
-Not paying on time. Not paying the amount promised. Not giving credit for the work done- if you have to present research done at a conference say- put a slide in that adequately acknowledges contributions of everyone involved. Cutting a half a day or a full days pay for being with 15 minutes late- traffic exists. And if you cut the pay, the employee would be fully justified to leave the office and not return for the day. Probation periods that are extremely long and pay less than if you were a full employee.
-not providing sick leave or leave when family is sick, or at least work from home when family is hospitalised.

-Not allowing your colleagues to do their work well by limiting their access to resources or burying them in meaningless paperwork that doesnt actually solve problems.

-assuming that the people you hire owe you their lives or loyalty. Loyalty is built over time brick by brick. Assume that anyone who joins your organisation will leave if its not a good fit. Do not assume anyone should be grateful or feel lucky that you have hired them.

-refusing to provide references/ letters of recommendation especially when the employee has worked hard- simply because you are resentful that they want to move on.

-opaque processes for evaluation and appraisal.

What is okay but I have seen described by others as "toxic"

- Sternly expressing disappointment or disapproval of a colleagues work ethic. harsh evaluations. Sternly worded emails that talk about how employees are failing. Dont shout you can often make more of an impact speaking in a low voice but speaking sternly than you can shouting abuses.

- Tight deadlines now and then that can require a person to work more than the 8 hours they are obligated. Your employees should still be able to be out when theres sunlight a significant portion of time.
- Asking out a colleague on a date once, politely, and not broaching the subject again if denied. Not pressuring that colleague by having others in the office talk to her. Not punishing a colleague for denying your advances. Dating colleagues if consensual and it doesnt adversely affect the workplace performance and appraisals of the lower ranked colleague or others in the workplace.

- disagreeing with other colleagues about political or social issues. just try to not discuss it at all at the workplace, but if you must- you should be mature enough to disagree with each other without ruining the professional relationship.

- refusing to pay for extended leaves away from work. If someone is gone for a whole month or more than a month, and they havent asked for approval of such leave and they havent worked with you long enough to establish credibility- go ahead and refuse to pay them for the time they have been away.

- demanding that deliverables be turned in on time and demanding as many revisions as it takes to get it right.

- not buying every excuse for shirking off work possible. If someone is constantly in crisis, constantly talking about burnout, constantly talking about mental health and anxiety and depression, if theyre doing this more than they are working. It is reasonable to ask the person if they would like to take a few months off, pull themselves together, and then return to work. And you can make clear that their behaviour is not contributing to a productive workplace.

- not preferring for promotion employees who have done less work because they wanted greater "work life balance." actions and choices have consequences.

- demanding clear and sufficient communication on any planned leave and sufficient notice for when a person wants to exit. maintaining friendly relations after and not burning bridges by denying f&f etc.

- clearly explaining your reasons for evaluations and promotions.

At the end of the day- your goal should be to hire the best people possible and to make it possible for them to stay. Most people hate quitting jobs and joining elsewhere. They want to be at one job with one company as long as possible. They only leave when they feel theyre being subjected to unfairness or unprofessionalism. And people who are good at their job know their worth. They will not be grateful or loyal to you unless you give them a reason to.
Your goal should not be to extract as much work as you can from very junior employees, make the workplace unpleasant, and drive them out only to replace with a new crop every year. If your attrition rates are high- you need to think about what youre doing wrong. Your HR should be geared not to simply hire as many people every year as possible, but to hold on to good people as long as possible. It will cost more money to hire 100 people every year and find out the 20 that can do reasonably good work only to lose them every two three years, than to hire 50 people a year, find 10 that are good- keep them for 5-10 years. When a good employee wants to leave- ask what it is you can do to make them stay, let them depart on good terms and keep a good professional relationship going.

Firstly trimester is a bad idea in law school. It creates unnecessary workload and stress. Plus reduces time for internships. NLS should think moving to semester system with two rigorous teaching semesters of 4 months each followed by 2 months of internships in winter and summer.

I m a male A0 in lit team of a firm based in Delhi. Should I be only vacating my seat for designated sr. counsels or also for old unknown advocates as well. These oldies are usually very rude if u do not get up for them nd threaten to call the bar assoc. and create a scene. Please shed some light on the tradition to be followed.

PhD (law) from NLSIU without LLM.

1. do they even admit LLBs (2 yr PQE) for PhD -genuine data would be helpful

2. will it be difficult to enter academia aafter completing phd wo LLM

3. where can one get place with such degree after completion

4.is 1 yr LLM +ugc net +becoming Asst prof and puruing phd better OR the former option (point 1)-pls share pros of both.

Pls share this message as i am in dilemma as i have clat pg rank and thinking to apply NLS phd.

In Corporate Litigation the requirement of designated senior is mirage. Niche and knowledgeable designated seniors are in scare. Abhijeet Sinha used to charge 2.5 lks without gown. Mr. Mitra charges 1.5 without gown.

It’s now only a thing for SC and Hc where designated senior may be available at 33k also. NCLAT NCLT works very different now.

As of the past two years, even a foolish won't compare CLAT with JEE. CLAT is throwing childish textbook passages. It's not difficult at all. It's just GK was difficult, but that too is changed now, passage based. So likely we have nothing to do except concentrate for 2 hours.

NLUD now has to contend with NFSU Delhi. As a state university with no relative location advantage, it can never compete with a national one. DTU (as DCE) was established 20 years before IITD. In the first 2 - 3 years, everyone scoffed at the idea of IITD being ever able to compete with DTU. We know where they are now. So, it is what it is. NLUD's relegation is a process in motion.

NLSIU this NLSIU that bro shut up. This is Legally India, not National Law School Forum. Stop posting every little thing that happens in NLS onto LI. It's a forum for all lawyers and all law students, don't turn it into an NLS Circle-jerk.

Sincerely,An NLS Student who uses LI for a break from NLS but is disappointed to find half the threads being about NLS because all its students have a superiority complex about their institution and feel the need to tell everyone about it on an online forum.

Just found out of the judges in the finals of the moot is a ex senior of one of the members in the finalist teams. And the entire moot court association know about it. Not only that 2 of the members of the finalist team were ex moot court members. This is the tip of the ice berg of how shady the GLC MCA is.

OP, if you feel strongly about the issue, make sure to write in. I've only had a quick overview, a few good provisions, some tolerable, and yes, some which leave me scratching my head as why even?

I intend to send my comments, as do few of my colleagues and seniors. Glad to note that this issue is being highlighted on L.I.

Cause LI is rife with college students, not actual practitioners. Saraf is one of the best law firms to work at. Their renumeration scale is at par with most tier one firms. Most partners are experts at their practice areas, and the level of mentorship they are willing to provide their juniors is unparalleled.

Good set of questions! I'm currently in a senior batch at NLS, hopefully this comment helps for anyone else who comes across it in the future:

Q1. Is it essential to do 3 internships every single year- can I take a break next summer, for instance (have a sibling’s wedding likely some time in 2026). Or is that a big red flag/missed opportunity for the CV.

A1. No. Honestly the bulk of us do like 2 internships, and you can get by even on one internship especially in your first two years.

Obviously, once you reach your third year, it makes sense to try and intern a bunch to find different interests (do you like corporate litigation? do an internship; what about white collar crime? do an internship; the world opens up in terms of choices. That being said, people have gotten Corp internships in 4th year having done one internship a year before, it doesn't particularly matter too much from what I can tell? I think interning less just gives you a more narrow outlook on the possible paths you have.

Q2. NLS requires the first internship (Feb 2026) to be with an NGO. Does NALSAR have a similar requirement? Does it matter which NGO, from the point of view of subsequent internship applications?

A2. Someone from NALSAR will have to answer that first part :p

Does which NGO matter? Nope, although finding an NGO in a field you care about / want to explore can help indicate interest in what you want to do, but by and large it's inconsequential.

Q3. What’s the minimum duration for an internship? Will the entire semester/trimester break go on an internship, or can I hope for a week or two off.

A3. Haha the trimester break is unfortunately usually a month, so you're interning the whole time but every once in a while we get a 5 week break which means you intern for a month and spend a week at home.

Q4. As of now, I hope to end up in corporate law. However someone told me that internships in law firms are open only from 3rd year onwards and the earlier internships should mostly be in litigation/with advocates . Is this the case? In that case, what would the ideal mix of internships look like for first and second year, assuming 2-3 internships per year? I’m a bit confused as to how many corporate law internships one should try for and when, considering I also read somewhere that 3rd or 4th year is the crucial year for PPOs and hiring, and that it’s almost all over by 5th. Is this actually how it happens?

A4. Yep. (Corporate) Law firms tend to entertain applications (without connections) from late-3rd year onwards.

What does an ideal mix of internships look like? depends on you. Corp firms know they have to teach you from scratch regardless, use internships to explore things you are interested in. You can tie this into corp - ex: interning with a lawyer that takes on corporate litigation matters in your 2nd/3rd year but don't sweat it.

"I’m a bit confused as to how many corporate law internships one should try for and when, considering I also read somewhere that 3rd or 4th year is the crucial year for PPOs and hiring, and that it’s almost all over by 5th. Is this actually how it happens?"

Haha don't stress about this before you've even reached campus for the first time lol - applications to corp firms at universities is mostly done through RCCs (Recruitment committee that gets set up in every batch). You are not getting a PPO in your 3rd year. Point-blank, chances are you haven't even finished the corporate law-2 course yet. 4th years is when PPOs really take off and a few offers can be made in 5th year. You also have Day 0 right at the start of 5th year, where firms come to the campus to hire.

Q5. How intense is the selection process for internships for 1st/2nd/3rd year students ? Is it mostly references or is there a structured hiring process for interns with interviews etc.

A5. Depends on where you're applying. Some internships are more rigorous in terms of selecting (Project 39A for example), some are a lot more chill (just apply lol, which btw if you are an organisation which does this - ily <3 )

Q6. What’s the difference between a regular internship, and an assessment internship? What exactly are “callbacks” and when do they happen?

A6. This is really only corporate law internship jargon so worry about this in 4 years but essentially assessment internships and callbacks are the same thing. A lot of corp firms like to have a model of having an internship (the first one), at the end of the internship you have the opportunity to apply for a "call back" where you tell them you want to come back to the firm for a second internship / opportunity to be considered for a PPO. If the firm likes you on the basis of internship #1, they will 'call you back' to assess you (Assessment internship AKA internship #2). The assessment internship is essentially still the work, it's just the team you worked with scrutinising you again to see if they want to offer you a PPO. It's common place to do this and a lot of firms require you to do a call back to even be considered for a PPO but some don't (one internship policy FTW).

Hopefully this answers all your questions, another comment mentioned just asking a senior when you go to campus which I would support haha. Most seniors (including myself) have been in your position where we had no idea what was going on, and would be happy to help (If you do end up coming here - best college btw, maybe I'll run into you) for any other worried juniors reading this, worry less about internships especially for the first couple of years and think more about using your time to explore more things! (both in and outside law).