Bro I did it too early that I forgot I even did it.Sorry to hear that, when did you receive the test?
Bro I did it too early that I forgot I even did it.Sorry to hear that, when did you receive the test?
Hi @panda1989 unfortunately I cannot give you very specific advice as to how to structure a written exercise, simply because the type of structure that works will depend a lot on the details of the exercise itself and the information you have to cover. Looking back at my written exercises, the only common features in terms of structure that I tended to observe were the following:Hi @Andrei Radu @Abbie Whitlock! Could I please have some advice about how to structure an written exercise e.g. an email, as I have seen a lot about using headings and bullet points but I'm not too sure on the overall structure? Also if anyone has any resources to practice them!
I also wanted to know how I should go about preparing my commercial awareness. For example, I know about the annual budget but I don't really know how this impacts law firms. Alongside this, are there any key standout challenges effecting law firms/clients currently?
Would really appreciate any guidance!
Thank you![]()
What is the test for RPC?Anyone heard back from RPC after online assessments?
Yeah, there’s no breakdown needed for undergradFor Fieldfisher, do we need to include our GCSE and A-level modules, but not our undergraduate ones?
Reading that sounded like a football formation lol but congratulations.I got 3-3-3-4 for Norton, is that an ok score?
I see - my answer is still mostly the same as the one before: I generally do not think there is any issue with expressing an interest in a multitude of practice areas that a firm is known for, even if they span across the transactional-contentious-advisory spectrum. More particular to the matter at hand, I do not see the restructuring & insolvency point to raise any issue at all, as it is not even formally classified as a contentious practice. Instead, it has elements of both, with restructuring work in particular being very transactional-heavy (as at its core it involves getting enough creditors to agree to CVAs to keep the company alive), while insolvency is more contentious. Particularly at Kirkland, who has a core focus on highly-profitable private capital led mandates in London, I would expect the restructuring part of its practice to be more important than the insolvency one, and, as such, I do not think the firm would assume you are a person who is more interested in disputes than transactions if you choose to discuss the this story.I meant I want to highlight restructuring and insolvency in the second question as it resonates to my background from emerging market where the issues become hot right now. I cited an article from Financial Times to strengthen my point as well as link it back to the recent deal and my work exp.
However, I am aware the next question (Q3) asked about a focused transactional firm which could crossline or weaken what I wrote about restructuring in the previous question since it's known as contentious work. Is there a R&I practice that focus on transactional only?
Also, I know firms love the multidisciplinary topics or areas to discuss, but just to strengthen my third question I add Tax & Lev Finance as it's tend to be more non-contentious than R&I.
And of course, I dedicated PE in the last (Q4) because of what I've mentioned before.
Hi!@Abbie Whitlock I am not sure if you would know the answer, but any advice would be great. I started a new legal role (and have now been there over a month) after submitting an application over a month ago, and it’s been really strengthening my experience. Do you think it would be appropriate to email graduate recruitment to update them on this, or could that come across negatively?
thank you so much @Andrei Radu this is super helpful. Also idk if this is rlly stupid but what like major life experience would be applicable for the first one i am really confused as normally for why comm law i will talk about insight schemes/internships etc. also for the second q - how would you say being successful in an insight scheme differs from trainee/tc level? also for the second q can personal life exp allude to work exp/things like that? sorry for the overload!Hi @user55998384 these questions definitely overlap in terms of the themes and experiences you can discuss, particularly since, as opposed to most other firms, Fieldfisher here makes it a point to hone in on "personal" rather than academic/professional experiences in both of them. The way I interpret them, I think the distinction in scope is this:
- The first question is focused on your motivations: you can essentially read it as a combined (i) why commercial law and (ii) why the firm question. Moreover, crucially, you are being asked to connect only one major life experience or event to both points, so I would advise you to pick something that can easily be presented in more detail without appearing to be unnecessarily verbose.
- The second question is instead focused on skills/abilities at a high level of generality (as you will be discussing how this influences your "perspective" - ie. your thinking process and decision-making): the way I read it, you are essentially supposed to answer a "why you" question, and, importantly, here you will be allowed to bring in more than one life experience (as the plural form is used). Furthermore, I think here it will be important to showcase your understanding of what you will be expected to do in an insight scheme and how you can perform successfully - this is once again a change of scope compared to normal "why you" question, as you are being asked what would make you succeed in the insight scheme rather than what would make you succeed in your TC/broader career as a commercial solicitor.
thier own early online assessmentWhat is the test for RPC?
no only stage 2 has VI - stage 1 is just a typical SJTHey - can someone give me insights into Latham's 1st stage automatic assessment? Does it include a VI?