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?
(I assume the chances of you revisiting this thread are slim btw my bad)
Presentation tips nobody likes to hear:
- Articulation, speaking with clarity, improving your vocabulary. This becomes part of interview prep later in life as well, but even at work in Indian law firms, your ability to articulate well gives partners confidence that they can put you in client facing situations.
- A more neutral Indian English accent. Metro kids have the advantage on this through their schooling, but a few hours of YouTube and voice coach videos will do the job.
- Grooming and presentation. Splurge 10k on 2 smart outfits that you can wear to all special formal occasions (law firm interviews, moot courts, negotiation competitions - especially at the international level). It's an underrated investment.
Interviews are of limited time and people are continuously making assumptions from what they see and hear from you. I saw a few of my batchmates from small towns transform themselves, and by 4th year nobody could say they can't get a Tier 1 job / vac scheme / TC / do an LLM because they were not from a metro.
ON FILLING OUT THE ONLINE FORM:
1. Be patient with the form- the first few pages of the form are pretty tiresome, but must be filled carefully. You need to fill out all your grades, so have a transcript or list handy. Additionally, you need to give a mark equivalent. In my year, we used the lower mark in the mark range for the corresponding grade. So if you have an A, your mark is a 60, 65 for and A+ and 70 for an O. It doesn't really matter what method you use, but be consistent throughout the batch. You have the option to explain the grading system of college in a box at the end of the page.
2. Please don't lie- they don't ask you to attach your transcript or anything, and expect you to fill out the form honestly. They won't check your grades, but if you get selected for the interview, there is a chance that you may be asked to present your transcript. So please, please be completely honest about your grades. They don’t matter too much anyway.
THE ESSAY:
1. At least in our year, there was just one subjective essay component in the application. This means that you have only this space to uniquely express yourself. Please read the essay question carefully, and make sure you address all components of the same.
2. You can adopt any style of writing for the essay, but it needs to be clear and concise. You should try to give them as much relevant information about yourself in this section. This is the only space in the application where you can show how you stand out in comparison to others, so choose your merits carefully, and always tie them back to a quality that the firm will appreciate. They are looking for people who are academically sound, will work well in a team, can research well, and know how to handle high-pressure situations. Anything that forwards these qualities is a good accomplishment, and should be mentioned in the essay.
3. Get feedback: A lot of people just write the essay in half an hour, don’t proofread or get it checked, and still get shortlisted. If you are confident of your writing, then you should be okay. But I personally prefer getting my essay checked multiple times before submitting it. I got my essay draft checked by my parents, friends, and a lot of seniors who had been through the process. It’ll help you cut down on words and remove superfluous information. If you are not confident of your writing, or even if you simply want a second opinion, please get your essay checked by someone.
WORK EXPERIENCE:
I don’t know if you have this component in your application. We did. There is only one thing you need to keep in mind while filling this section out- always tie back your work ex to something that will be of use in a firm. You can put in all your litigation and policy and NGO internships- the more the better. But highlight them in such a way that the reader knows that the skillset you developed will be useful in a firm too.
MISCELLENEOUS TIPS:
1. Know a little bit about the firm when you are applying- it’ll help you formulate a better essay, and channel your achievements into something they are looking for. Know what they do, what their strengths are, and what they are looking for. You’ll have to spend about 20 minutes on their website for all this.
2. Try not to recycle the same writing for all firm applications. They all have their own questions to ask, so answer them individually. Additionally, the HR people who are checking your application are very good at their job, and have to go through a lot of applications. If you’re not keen and interested, they will know, and they won’t favour your application.
3. Don’t worry about grades too much- they really don’t care about your CGPA or class rank as much as Indian firms do. It is just one of the many things they look at.
4. Be humble in your writing- this is just a general tip, because I think it made a difference in my application. You can adopt any style of writing you are comfortable with. But the aim shouldn’t be to show how you are the best and super awesome and intimidatingly good. You should highlight your achievements, but also add a line about what they taught you, and how they contributed to your growth as a person. For example, I think there a big difference between saying, “I represented my university at XYZ competition, and won the competition”; and saying, “I was given the opportunity to represent my university at XYZ competition, and we placed first as a team. Through this experience, I learnt bla bla bla”. Again, it’s your choice at the end of the day.
5. On time management: I understand you don’t have too much time left to complete the HSF application. Worry not. Only the essay writing bit, and getting it checked takes time. The rest of it you can finish in half a day. Its just painful, is all.
2. Regarding that other comment: It was very unfortunately and disappointingly worded. It fails to capture the nuance of the position by quite a wide margin. Proviso: before explaining further, this explanation is written kind of assuming that when you say you are from a "very small town", that implicitly should also be understood as meaning you are not a rich person from a small town but a person of average means. Should choose to engage further with my response to your question, you do not need to state whether this a priori assumption is correct or not, and I hope it has not offended you, and apologise if it has.
What tends to happen is that many people from larger cities who aspire for such things are also people from economically stable to privileged backgrounds. Therefore, with all the costs that you have to take into account for such a venture (multipleliving in London, clothing, food, accomodation during your vac scheme (your firm is likely to help you with accommodation during your SQE studies)), people from such backgrounds tend to find it easier to take up such opportunities (and therefore, now that there is this level of awareness about such opportunities, aspire towards them). Also what tends to happen is that such people, even if they have non-lawyer parents but parents who work in related fields (investment banking, e.g.), can get tips, advice, ideas or perspectives from their families when readying themselves for such SJT type situations. For example, take me: my dad is from one such field. When I took one of the firms' SJTs for the first time, I went home and wondered to my dad aloud why was it they would ask the types of personality questions that they did. My dad had had only vaguely heard of the law firm I was applying to and has never studied law (engineer + MBA) but without a second's pause, he was able to tell me: "They are doing it to see how good a fit you'd be for them and how good you are at crisis management kind of situations". However, people from quite working class backgrounds with other categories of marginalisation impacting them as well, have got through, and done well in, international law firms. I suggest that you ask the graduate recruitment folks at the big international law firms about this. They will be outraged at the suggestion that comment makes and in fact encourage you to apply - they aren't like the shitty HR in Indian law firms, they are actually good: they even act as readers and (online equivalents of) scribes for blind applicants taking the SJT-type tests if the blind person finds the test format to be inaccessible (I have this personally from an associate in a European office of a magic circle law firm who did a TC in London and who cannot see).
What you have to remember is that as far as your merit is evaluated, the vast majority of applicants for stuff like this, regardless of whether they are from economically privileged backgrounds or from disadvantaged ones, are eliminated at the application stage itself, because their intellect or some other quality essential to what the law firms need (whether that be drive for working in commercial law, fit with a firm's ethos... whatever, is lacking). Take another example: I know a very smart person (born an Indian citizen but who recently took up a foreign passport, having lived abroad now for so long) who studied law at one of the best universities in the world, located in London. This one worked at an international law firm in London for several years post the studies and is now in-house. This person came from an economically privileged background and was almost at the top of their law cohort at the prestigious London university, from which the best law firms regularly recruit (with the father working in an investment-type field in India). She secured multiple vac schemes in her second year of university (in the British three-year LLB system). Now that's a huge achievement and has to be noted because I have it from the person's own mouth that regardless of all they had going for them, the hidden cost (from a personal/mental health perspective) of going through that law firm application process for multiple firms, prior to the vac schemes, was some four or five rejections for every one vac scheme offer that was given. The world doesn't see that: they see the bells and whistles of investor/top Indian business school MBA dad, smart kid who did fantastically at Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Maths at school, got a Russell Group uni degree (where also the performance academically and in CV-boosting activities was excellent), vac schemes, TC, associateship... in house and all those stuff. But the pain and tears of going through this process for anyone is alarming. Don't do it if you aren't ready for 95 to 99% rejections, many of which will come at the last stage of an individual law firm's processes (written application, SJT, interview... all will have gone well, seemingly, suddenly at Assessment Centre, they see something and decide you ain't for them). It is this that that comment doesn't capture: a working class kid and two rich kids could have this experience in common. They apply to six top world-class law firms in a particular application cycle. Four of those applications for all three of them come with a rejection stamp after SJT itself. One more application comes back for all three of them with an interview/assessment centre invite. Two of those kids then get rejected at that stage, with one going onto the vac scheme. Now there is even a not insignificant likelyhood that that one vac scheme student will get rejected by the firm for a TC, because they say that upon evaluation of how he performs in the actual workplace, they think he may not be ready for a law firm career yet.
Therefore, that comment inaccurately describes a phenomena. I hope this is more helpful. It shouldn't discourage you from applying, please do that if an international law firm career is what you want. But please know the scale of the challenge before you go in. That comment you asked about doesn't explain that properly.
1. First, get your terminology right: "training contracts", not "trainee contracts" or any other variation of the same you might see used on any website (including this one). Short form: TC (singular) or TCs (plural).
2. Importance of grades: Quite high. You need to be among the best students in your cohort if you are from an Indian university. I've seen students who are not as good or sincere students of law academically getting taken on from UK unis, but nobody who's not above average. So basically, the only difference is that you have to be excellent in your studies, whereas a UK uni applicant can afford to be above average.
3. Importance of moots: High. You can talk about transferrable skills from moots you will find useful in the law firm environment on your written applications or perhaps even at interview. Also participate in negotiation competitions. Your uni administration, I have heard, regards this latter as a bit of a waste of your time. Totally not true. That's one of the few things that your VC, otherwise a smart guy who is up there with the best, being a Rhodes Scholar and an Oxford DPhil, gets wrong because of his status as a total theory person and his lack of experience of law firm environments.
4. Commercial awareness: This is an atypical one. For a host of complex reasons, they don't at this point (treating you as an applicant) care so much about evaluating your technical knowledge as evaluating your knowledge of the market and your ability to think about the law firm's position within the market as a business, and how various events might impact it. That's commercial awareness in a nutshell. You might also see the term "commercial acumen" used, this means the same thing, though most people in the UK who talk about these things use "commercial awareness". How do you gain this? Well, reading the Financial Times or Wall Street Journal or the Economist for a start. Personally, I'd spend a lot of time with the FT, if I could. If your uni doesn't have access to a subscription to it, ask them (fight with them, very fiercely, if needed) to ensure you have access to one. I'd especially concentrate on newsletters (and articles within the FT paper itself linked within them) such as FT Due Dilligence (a great newsletter, which gives you regular updates every weekday Tuesday to Friday about goes on in the PE and VC worlds, even with some great stuff about law firms), First FT Europe/Africa, FT Briefing UK Morning Headlines (providing a list of articles in at least two of the categories of "Politics", "Public Policy", "Companies", "Economy" and "Business") (you'll need to ensure that a premium subscription is taken out for this one, unfortunately, but the product is excellent so don't let that stop you) and "Inside Politics" (usually written by Stephen Bush, but sometimes by equally good colleagues of his), which gives analysis of large issues in UK politics. Why do you need all this? Because "commercial awareness" means understanding not just legal or economic implications of stuff, but evaluating the political or tech ramifications of stuff. Some people tend to analyse events to put their best foot forward in terms of demonstrating commercial awareness by using something called the 'PESTLE method' - each letter of that name is an ingredient of what your analysis should encompass. I won't bother explaining PESTLE to you, you can yourself read about it on a website called lawcareers.net, which is great if you want a UK law firm career. Other than that, listen to the podcasts that some law firms do which can help to raise commercial awareness. Shoesmiths, for example, has an excellent one, I believe. Other than that, read a book called 'Everything You Need to Know about the City', by Chris Stokes, which explains how London works as a financial hub.
5. Understand the difference and gain knowledge: Indian and British law firm environments are very different in various ways that you will get to know over time. For now, one way which is very important for you to know is something you may find a bit counterintuitive. In England and Wales, they don't expect you to specialise in a practice area in the training contract stage. So going in hot saying I want to do regulated payments or b&f is not necessarily the smartest thing to be doing when you're trying to persuade them to recruit you. You need to be open to learning through your vac scheme and/or TC from work the firm does in multiple practice areas. This is because of regulator expectations imposed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), which requires trainee solicitors to be exposed to multiple practice areas in their Qualifying Work Experience (QWE) (which a TC is) period of two years. The way most firms handle this requirement is to expose you to (usually) four practice areas with rotations over a six month period. These rotations are usually called "seats". Each "seat" is six months in duration. Once you are done with your TC, you "qualify into" one of the four seats you did when you were a trainee, as a Newly Qualified (NQ) solicitor. Therefore, at the stage of you being an applicant, it may not be too good an idea to be too firm on what practice area you want to get into. You can (and should, obviously) mention which are your interests, but your cover letters/written application answers should focus more on how exposure to different types of work at a particular firm will help your career development as a lawyer. Therefore, you'll have to basically swallow the websites of the law firms you choose to apply to, because ideally, no sentence you write about a law firm in a cover letter for that law firm should be the type you can copy-paste into a cover letter for another firm, i.e., you know firm x's deals so well that you can write a cover letter aimed so specifically at that firm that people will gain the impression that your life's ambition, ever since you were able to do more as a baby than sucking your mother's thumb, has been to, let us say, work at HSFK. Make a note of this very carefully, because our cultural assumptions about the British is that they don't do things like this. We assume American unis make people do more generalised learning before becoming specialised, while Indians and the British expect you to go in with your specialism set right away. MC and U.S. law firm environments in London... don't work exactly like that.
Obviously, there are exceptions to this (which still fulfil the SRA requirement of exposure to multiple practice areas), such as the leveraged finance (LevFin) TC that Milbank's London office does: https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/01/milbank-creates-training-contract-for-aspiring-leveraged-finance-lawyers/
In these cases, like you see in the article, they expose you to let us say LevFin as a practice area, while also getting you to do other stuff. For such TCs, you can be more enthusiastic in your applications about work the firm does in that particular practice area.
6. Another significant difference in the working method - the vac scheme and the TC: In the Indian law firm environment, they usually make you do an internship, then call you back for another, then decide whether to offer you a job. Not so in the MC and U.S. law firms' UK operations. Essentially, think of the vac scheme as an assessment internship for the TC, because, if you get onto a vac scheme, many law firms will assess your potential for a TC through your vac scheme performance without necessarily needing you to apply again. In fact, some firms do things such that they won't accept direct TC applications, but only assess TC potential from their vac scheme cohort. Therefore, your vac scheme is your one big chance to convince them that you're worth it for a TC, because they're giving you that one opportunity to prove yourself worthy of a TC. Then, the TC is basically a drawn-out, two-year-long, assessment internship for them to decide whether you're worth it as an associate (i.e., whether it's worth them keeping you on as an NQ post TC).
7. SQE: Once they've offered you a TC, they'll make you study for the SQE (the Solicitors Qualifying Exam, imposed by the regulator), which you'll have to pass as a condition of your TC offer - if you don't pass, they will withdraw your TC offer. Basically, how this works for many firms is that they make you get on a university course (that they pay for) called an SQE LLM, that helps prep you for the SQE. Why these courses (offered by providers such as BPP and ULaw) are called 'SQE LLM' is that in addition to SQE training, they offer elective modules in various areas, e.g., IP. NB/warning: It's not a good idea for you to try and disrupt the order of this process, by self-financing your 'SQE LLM' studies and then applying to law firms. Many law firms will have specific electives that they will ask you, as part of your TC offer, to take up. If you do the SQE LLM on your own, you may not do the electives a particular law firm will want you to do. That's why take things in their order: apply for a vac scheme (or direct TC), then go for the SQE LLM on their money, because that's how they want you to do things. They pay your course fees and give you a stipend.
8. Practicing assessments: Foreign law firms tend to have a more involved and complex interview and testing process than their Indian counterparts. One of the things many of them (especially the MC guys) do a lot is the so-called 'Situational Judgment Test (SJT)'. This might be a type of multiple choice question test where they give you situations that crop up in everyday law firm life and give you four options out of which you have to choose one to deal with that situation. There is no "objectively" correct answer to many of those situations, reasonable people might disagree how to handle each of those, according to their own personalities. But you will have to answer based on your knowledge of the firm's ethos and culture. Therefore, you'll have to go past the corporate buzzwords on the websites, and actually get to know current trainees or NQs working at whichever firms you are applying to and ask about the culture. Based both on what you've read and understood from your networking research, you can answer those SJT type questions. Many also use more standardised kind of tests such as Watson Glazer. Get as many of these practice tests done as you possibly can, only way to handle this aspect. Also, in both interviews (individual chats between you and a law firm person or sometimes a pannel) and Assessment Centres (ACs) (a type of assessment in which they see how you work in a group of your fellow applicants), they might give you a case study and ask you to work on it. Get hold of some of the kinds of things they've tended to give out in the past (maybe from your seniors, maybe from trainees of other kinds at those law firms) and practice this element, too. This is where your question on the RCC comes in. Most law firms do not really recruit from the RCC in that way. Some might have some involvement with the RCC in some way, but that really depends from firm to firm. But what you can try to get your RCC to do (because this is the type of thing student law societies at UK unis do) is to get the firms to send along let us say a trainee + graduate recruitment pannel who'll present the law firm to you and maybe talk you through a sample of such an exercise. But mostly, it's applying on your own.
9. Final point - non-legal work experience: Another substantial difference between Indian and foreign law firm environments. If you've worked at a Pizza Express or something, for example, in an Indian law firm setting, you'd be made to defend yourself and justify why you did such work. Not so in the case of foreign law firms. In fact, they tend to take quite an encouraging tone towards getting at least some non-legal work experience. They believe it to be useful as a source of developing transferrable skills that will be useful in a commercial environment. Therefore, you need to understand what are the core skills and attributes each firm you'll be applying to is looking for in a trainee, then in your written application, CV or cover letter, find a way of arguing how your non-legal experience would have contributed towards building those attributes. If you really want to go into a foreign law firm environment, doing some of this type of thing might be a better use of your time than doing repeated and random Indian law firm internships, though some of those are likely to be useful to you, too.
I am a first year student at nls. From everything I have gotten to know till now, be it from my interactions with seniors or personal research, one's batch rank/cgpa here is the most important factor for any domestic corporate job opportunity (and in cases like internships offered by rcc, the only factor even), but what about trainee contracts offered by magic circle law firms in various t1 nlus? What do they look for? Is it also only grades or moots/ecs as well? What about publications? I know they are significant for domestic corporate law.
A very important question, do the people who secure these contracts do it by applying on their own or through rcc? Does any foreign law firm come to rcc here to get few candidates?
Thanks