TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[pfoapplicant]

Hi guys! I'm currently going through the work experience section of the Reed Smith application form - ordinarily, I'd list my work experience in reverse chronological order (with current work experience entries, and work experience entries with more recent end dates, being listed before entries with less recent end dates), but Reed Smith's form titles each work experience entry as "Second placement", "Third placement", "Fourth placement", and so on.

Do you think this means that candidates are expected to list their work experience entries in forward chronological order (with placements with earlier start dates being listed first, and followed by placements with more recent start dates), or am I reading a bit too much into the wording of the form?
As ever, if anyone has any ideas, I'd be super grateful!

 

[manifestingthetc]

Has anyone received an interview for Fieldfisher's pathways of practice yet?

 

[Wompycapy]

Hello, would anyone have inputs on Latham Stage 2 as in whether the questions are competency based or what kind? Can help with Macfarlanes Stage 1, FF Stage 2

I'm also seeking stage 2 insights. However, if this helps, their VI last year was something in the lines of 'tell us about a time where your personal character was challenged' and if I remember correctly, 2 mins to record and a reasonable amount of time to respond (more than 30 secs)...

 

[AMullin]

Hi guys! I'm currently going through the work experience section of the Reed Smith application form - ordinarily, I'd list my work experience in reverse chronological order (with current work experience entries, and work experience entries with more recent end dates, being listed before entries with less recent end dates), but Reed Smith's form titles each work experience entry as "Second placement", "Third placement", "Fourth placement", and so on.

Do you think this means that candidates are expected to list their work experience entries in forward chronological order (with placements with earlier start dates being listed first, and followed by placements with more recent start dates), or am I reading a bit too much into the wording of the form?
As ever, if anyone has any ideas, I'd be super grateful!

Hi!

I’m sure it’s not mega important but for what it’s worth I had my oldest WE as “First Placement” and my current job as “Second Placement”. I managed to scrape through to the next stage so that’s either correct or they aren’t too bothered 😂

 

[User2640]

Does anyone know whether Stephenson Harwood and WFW prefers bullet points or prose for the work exp section? Has anyone asked their early career team before? Any insight would be greately appreciated!

 

[elle woods]

FYI, I did Latham stage 1 assessment yesterday evening and got the invite for stage 2 invite just now. I know some people were asking yesterday, so please don't get too stressed if you don't immediately get the invitation to stage 2. I had pretty much ruled myself out of this process, but it's a good reminder not to read into what people are saying in online forums like this.

Reading this thread, I am assuming Latham, Hogan Lovells, and Freshfields PFO if I haven't received an invite to stage 2 after so long 😭
Lord Bless my Heart

 

[Ferran_]

Anyone got macfarlanes VI tips

 

[Jennifer2003]

Does anybody know how to interpret the HL assessment? I got personal responsibility and work ethic as two strengths and ambition as a weakness but I’m not sure if that means I did well or didn’t perform highly in more areas - does it always give one weakness and two strengths? Does it matter which they are?

 

[A worried paralegal]

has anyone heard back from macfarlanes post job sim ?? any ac invites ?

I did my job sim in mid September and haven’t heard

 

[legal18]

Anyone heard from BCLP Summer?

 

[Andrei Radu]

@Andrei Radu , I trust you are well.

I am currently applying to Squire, and I am struggling to understand how to approach this question.

"Please argue whether you are for or against stricter regulation of social media". Is it ok if, for example, I say:

I am in favour of/against stricter regulation for two reasons. Firstly [...]. Secondly [..]
The following sources support the above statements, and I can then conclude by providing feasible solutions.

Hi @AS24 I hope you are doing well too! Your approach looks fine: expressing what your stance is in a short introductory sentence and then signposting the different reasons you bring in support of your view shows you can present your argument in a clear and articulated manner, which is an important skill firms are looking for. There's only two things I notice I think you should be mindful of:

1. As opposed to university essays, I do not believe an important element of answering this question well is to cite sources of authority for the substance of your arguments. Recruiters have often indicated to me that when it comes to these broad moral/policy questions, they are interested in assessing the quality of your argumentation and the precision of your thinking in itself, rather than seeing if you are acquainted with the relevant literature on the topic. As such, you should be careful about how you go about citing sources - you certainly do not want to give the impression you are simply summarising and reiterating the thoughts and views of others. Personally, I would only cite sources for this type of question if I needed to back up a factual claim I bring up (eg "In 2024, it is estimated more than 20% of teenagers have experienced bullying or harassment on social media platforms") rather than the argument which is premised on the factual claim (I wouldn't cite a source for my follow-up thoughts on the matter, which could be something to the effect of "Considering minors are often unaware of such dangers on social media platforms and that severe mental health problems can result form exposure to bullying and harassment, tighter regulation is needed in this area."
2. Consider objections and counter-arguments: while I think the majority of your word count should be spent presenting a positive case for one view or the other, I also believe it would be a mistake to simply lay out your points and show no awareness of or engagement with responses that could be formulated by the other side. As such, I would advise you to consider and respond to at least one or two such points, even if you will only be able to present a very high-level analysis.

 

[Andrei Radu]

Does anybody know how to interpret the HL assessment? I got personal responsibility and work ethic as two strengths and ambition as a weakness but I’m not sure if that means I did well or didn’t perform highly in more areas - does it always give one weakness and two strengths? Does it matter which they are?

While I do not know much about the HL test in particular, I do know these kinds of assessments usually give you at least one low-scoring area or weakness by design (as you have to make choices which improve your score in one area but necessarily lower it in another).

 

[Amgrad]

For Kirkland & Ellis, the second question is asking about what news stories that captivated me which relevant to the firm's client. I pick Restructuring & Insolvency, but considering the third question ask "Why do you want to be a trainee solicitor in a transactional focused firm?" Made me wonder whether my answer to previous question would be weaken my points as Kirkland also excel in Restructuring & Insolvency, even according to UK Chamber (Band 1). In my third question I highlight its strong tax and leveraged finance, while the last question for why Kirkland, I pick private equity as it's the strongest and known for Kirkland, even in the US and global.

I've drafted my app and these 2 questions are hanging me. Please tell me how to approach them @Andrei Radu

 

[LegalLigase]

Could anyone who passed Latham's stage 2 online assessment previously give any insights and advice on preparation?

 

[Andrei Radu]

For Kirkland & Ellis, the second question is asking about what news stories that captivated me which relevant to the firm's client. I pick Restructuring & Insolvency, but considering the third question ask "Why do you want to be a trainee solicitor in a transactional focused firm?" Made me wonder whether my answer to previous question would be weaken my points as Kirkland also excel in Restructuring & Insolvency, even according to UK Chamber (Band 1). In my third question I highlight its strong tax and leveraged finance, while the last question for why Kirkland, I pick private equity as it's the strongest and known for Kirkland, even in the US and global.

I've drafted my app and these 2 questions are hanging me. Please tell me how to approach them @Andrei Radu

Hi @Amgrad I am not sure I completely understand your question, so please feel free to follow up and clarify if I am getting it wrong. Is your main concern that you may be undermining how persuasive your responses to the "why do you want to work at a transactional firm" and "why Kirkland?" questions by discussing a restructuring story for the second answer but then not expressing a direct interest in the practice area the third and fourth answers? If so, I would not worry too much about this issue. Recruiters are well aware that candidates can be interested in several practices at the same time, and therefore do not have sufficient space to cover all of them in sufficient detail in every relevant answer.. As such, if you go ahead with your answers in the current form, I think they will likely conclude that you are interested in restructuring alongside PE, lev fin, and tax; which, if anything, perfectly fits a candidate profile Kirkland would see as fitting its London practice.

 

[anon78365222111]

Anyone that did DLA AC yesterday PM me

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Hi guys! I'm currently going through the work experience section of the Reed Smith application form - ordinarily, I'd list my work experience in reverse chronological order (with current work experience entries, and work experience entries with more recent end dates, being listed before entries with less recent end dates), but Reed Smith's form titles each work experience entry as "Second placement", "Third placement", "Fourth placement", and so on.

Do you think this means that candidates are expected to list their work experience entries in forward chronological order (with placements with earlier start dates being listed first, and followed by placements with more recent start dates), or am I reading a bit too much into the wording of the form?
As ever, if anyone has any ideas, I'd be super grateful!

Hi!

I don't think you're overthinking it at all - those labels do look a bit like they're nudging you toward a chronological order! However, I don't think you need to do anything specific here. As long as you are consistent in the order you choose and its clear for the graduate recruitment team to follow, either direction is absolutely fine.

Most applicants will stick to reverse chronological order because it highlights recent experience first, but the opposite is also completely acceptable too. The key is just to keep it tidy and logical.

I hope that helps - best of luck with your application!

 

[Amgrad]

Hi @Amgrad I am not sure I completely understand your question, so please feel free to follow up and clarify if I am getting it wrong. Is your main concern that you may be undermining how persuasive your responses to the "why do you want to work at a transactional firm" and "why Kirkland?" questions by discussing a restructuring story for the second answer but then not expressing a direct interest in the practice area the third and fourth answers? If so, I would not worry too much about this issue. Recruiters are well aware that candidates can be interested in several practices at the same time, and therefore do not have sufficient space to cover all of them in sufficient detail in every relevant answer.. As such, if you go ahead with your answers in the current form, I think they will likely conclude that you are interested in restructuring alongside PE, lev fin, and tax; which, if anything, perfectly fits a candidate profile Kirkland would see as fitting its London practice.

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.

 

[stilltrying]

Recently been invited to a Jones Day interview if anyone has any insights into this that would be great can offer insights into Latham and HSFK AC and several VI's.

 

[annalise.joyn]

I have my Latham and Watkins VI which will be competency questions I (I think) tomorrow morning. it's 1 minute prep, 3 minute video. I've never done a video interview, how do I prepare, what do I do in the 1 minute preparation time, how should I speak/structure/talk about, what kind of questions should I expect from Latham and Watkins? I would like any sort of advice/tips/guidance as I have never done a video interview before and honestly every time I had a competency based question, it has always been terrible due to my anxiety even when I use STAR.