TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[llblawstudent]

Clyde and Co pfo post test

Sorry to hear that, when did you receive the test?

 

[Suii]

Sorry to hear that, when did you receive the test?

Bro I did it too early that I forgot I even did it.

 

[sumsum]

has anyone heard from Shakespeare Martineau

 

[NorthernerInLondon]

Clyde & Co London spring vac scheme Online Assessment Invite - anyone know if this is automatic or not?

 

[lawyersum]

no way the hill dickinson work experience section has a 50 word limit for each entry

 

[yk1906]

For Fieldfisher, do we need to include our GCSE and A-level modules, but not our undergraduate ones?

 

[ninarosee]

Travers Smith has included a ‘Legal High Potential Assessment’ as part of the DTC application. Does this also apply to the vac scheme application as well?

 

[Andrei Radu]

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

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:

1. An introductory executive summary heading with a short paragraph following it, which explains the scope of my analysis, the core point of each section, and the main conclusion.
2. Having different big headings for different parts of the task (ie if an email I had to respond to asked me three different questions, I would separate my writing in three different sections)
3. Having headings/subheadings for core assessment criteria: as you are reading the relevant information, ask yourself what are the core cost/benefit factors you need to consider; sometimes, this provides you an easy way to present information and structure your analysis.
4. Sometimes, separating section by subheading such as "Brief Summary" and "Analysis" can make sense, such as to clearly convey both what is uncontroversial factual information and what is your own viewpoint.

As for impact of news stories, when reading about a story I think you should always be asking yourself "how could this impact businesses?" and then "how does this impact change what they want from their lawyers?". Some stories have very easy and direct answers to both: eg a lowering of interest rates reduces borrowing costs, which makes deal financing cheaper and reduces valuation gaps between buyers and sellers, thus boosting demand for transactional practice areas such as M&A, PE, and banking & finance. Other stories (arguably, such as the new Budget) will not have this kind of straightforward analysis easily available, and, as such, should you choose to discuss them, you will need to conduct more in-depth research.

 

[Bree]

Does Macfarlanes read your application before Stage 2 assessment?

 

[BillSikes]

Anyone heard back from RPC after online assessments?

What is the test for RPC?

 

[p2bv]

For Fieldfisher, do we need to include our GCSE and A-level modules, but not our undergraduate ones?

Yeah, there’s no breakdown needed for undergrad

 

[Lawyergyal123!]

is latham stage two automatic ?

 

[Scottishlion]

I got 3-3-3-4 for Norton, is that an ok score?

 

[Suii]

I got 3-3-3-4 for Norton, is that an ok score?

Reading that sounded like a football formation lol but congratulations.

 

[Andrei Radu]

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.

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.

Even if this were not the case, and the firm's restructuring work in London was heavy on the contentious side, as long as you are careful with how you draft your answers I really do not expect this to be a problem in your application. Essentially, you should indeed avoid discussing any reasons for your interest in restructuring & insolvency that could weaken the credibility of your "why transactional" reasons - eg. if you say you are interested in transactional work because it is fast-paced and more business-focused when compared to other more technical practices, you should avoid saying you are interested in restructuring because it involves working on a single complex matter for a longer time and that you would enjoy it because of the incredible complexity and technical detail of regulation in this area. Nonetheless, as you can see, these kinds of tensions in motivations are quite obvious when you spell them out, and I therefore think it is quite unlikely you will inadvertently write conflicting narratives in the two answers.

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

@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?

Hi!

If the role you have started is relevant and genuinely adds value to your application (e.g. giving you more legal exposure, responsibility or skills) then it could be worth updating the graduate recruitment team. Whilst I haven't heard of many instances of this at the application stage, I have encountered this sort of thing in later stages in the process. Many firms do appreciate being informed of developments, but I can't say for certain whether the team will factor it into their decision. Still, a short and polite email is unlikely to reflect negatively, as long as you frame it professionally.

You could briefly mention:

• What you have applied for and the date you applied
• That you've since started a new legal role
• A brief sentence on what experience / skills you're gaining
• That you wanted to share the update in case it's useful for their consideration

If it's relevant and strengthens your profile, it may be worth sending - just make sure to keep it concise! Best of luck

 

[user55998384]

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:

1. 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.
2. 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.

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!

 

[CharlesT47]

@Andrei Radu @Abbie Whitlock How do law firms keep their salaried/ non-equity partners? I assume that these partners/ managing associates are extremely valuable to law firms and will be hungry to prove themselves to make equity partner. They are not nearly as established in their existing law firm since they don't own equity in it. This makes them ripe candidates to be poached. Outside of purely financial compensation, what are incentives law firms use to keep these individuals happy? I'm struggling to understand why K&E non-equity partners would choose to leave when the firm is so profitable. Is it simply because the path for development into an equity partner is perhaps easier at a different firm, where they would have more opportunities to bring in clients?

 

[Donuttime]

What is the test for RPC?

thier own early online assessment

 

[badmintonflyinginsect]

Hey - can someone give me insights into Latham's 1st stage automatic assessment? Does it include a VI?