TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[Kodak123]

is there a benchmark for the Latham SJT where they filter out applicants?

 

[lawyersum]

What does PFO mean?

excuse my French, but it means: please f--- off

 

[Amma Usman]

@Amma Usman @Andrei Radu @Ram Sabaratnam

Hi guys, I just wanted a bit of advice on how I could leverage my previous seat in Debt Finance to support the reason I’m interested in the firm (for their banking and finance practice area). This seat was only a day long and I simply just did research tasks and briefed a supervisor.

Hey @Unknowncabbage ,

This question is a really good one. Just as @Ram Sabaratnam had said, the length of the seat is not as important as the specific experiences you had during that seat. What I believe is additionally valuable in your case, is that in addition to the indirect shadowing experience you got, you carried out specific research tasks. The way in which I would personally leverage this in an application is to (i) highlight what the research was on, (ii) how it contributed to wider departmental efforts, (iii) what you learnt, (iv) what you enjoyed and why, (v) why you feel you are more likely to work in this firm’s finance practice, than at other firm’s. I will touch on each of these in turn by highlighting their importance. Just as a granular point, you don’t need to cover all 5 points explicitly, you just need to find a way to weave them in given the word count of most applications. Some will also require more detail than others; for example, (i) and (v) are more important than point (ii).

(i) Highlight what the research was on: Simply, this helps provide more context and sets a foundational tone for the subsequent link of demonstrated interest you are about to show.

(ii) How it contributed to wider departmental efforts: This may be a bit difficult to establish as I appreciate that confidentiality rings and all, may mean that interns are not involved in the heavy tasks. However, the research your supervisor gave you will have definitely been used by them in a wider deal/ problem they were working on. What was this? What part did the research play in bringing it all together? Any feedback you got?

(iii) What you learnt: A rather funny point and a given of course, but it stands to confirm that you understood the work of the practice area and that you understand its general intricacies/ what is expected of lawyers in this realm. It also shows you are open to learning new things - key trainee qualities.

(iv) What you enjoyed and why: Another given, but you will need to touch heavily on this and why it appealed. At the end of the day, you should be applying to firms with practice areas you are genuinely drawn to. It’s difficult to show demonstrated interest if you don’t show the excitement part.

(v) Why you feel you are more likely to work in this firm’s finance practice, than at other firm’s: As @Ram Sabaratnam mentioned, what aspect of their finance practice appeals; clients, work scope, etc. Many firm‘s have finance practices.. what is it about X’s own specifically that appeals. This is what ties all the above points together and creates a solid answer.

You also briefed a supervisor. Highlight this too. It shows you can translate written work into an actionable presentation. Overall, this helps show good communication skills. Being affluent in a written format is great, but being affluent in both written and oral scopes is an asset. This is one thing a mentor of mine once said and has stuck with me ever since.

 

[Amma Usman]

Hey @jojo23 , these are really good questions that often came up for me as well, when I was applying. I don‘t have too much to add to @Ram Sabaratnam ’s wonderful response, but these are a few things I found helpful as well;

I believe it’s totally fine to reuse an answer for both questions, however, do so sparingly and in a way which brings out different variations of the same experience. For example, if I included that working in-house insurance sparked my passion for commercial law due to being able to see things from the clients perspective, my answer to why X firm would be different. For example, I would then cement it with how working in-house insurance and delivering a training on competition law to all personnel at the firm sparked my passion for exploring X firm‘s renowned competition law practice. So you see, I’ve used two different arms of the same experience to solidify both answers in a way which adequately shows demonstrated interest.

In relation to the second part of your question, I believe this is fine as well, depending on how you phrase this. For example, a lot of responses I have read from candidates which implement this approach, often leads to an indirect slandering of the other firms which they attended open days at. Thus, the way in which you tackle this is by referencing the difference in the scope of their work. For example, say you attended open days at X and Y. If firm X is largely transactional and firm Y is more disputes-focused, then when applying to firm Z who is also disputes focused, you will reference the differences in both areas and why the latter appealed more.

Another thing I did often was to include how attending X open day sparked my passion for commercial law, and repeating the contents of the day in more detail when discussing my motivations for that specific firm (or again, a firm which has a strong expertise in its line of work). By expanding on the contents of the day, such as presentations by trainees, the firm’s trainee offering, or even mock case study workshops, I trust that you will be able to approach both questions in a different light and show this breadth of exposure that is needed.

@Jessica Booker

Is it bad to use the same experience to answer different questions if we're using it to talk about different skills from different tasks. For a recent internship, I wrote briefs for clients and also handles multilingual communication between countries. Can I use the first reason to explain interest in a practice area and then use the internship again in a later question if discussing communication skills, or is that considered being repetitive?

Hey @AI212121 , I have answered a similar question on this regarding the degree to which I believe candidates should be repetitive in answers. I have quoted it above. In short, you can, but do so carefully and in a way which touches on different tasks/aspects of the experience/ competencies. This will become apparent based off the needs of the given question.

 

[legal18]

Does anyone know of any of Willkie's London office's precedent-setting litigation cases? Or where to find information on these? I have found one but it is from 2016.

 

[xxx]

Any advice on VI? What are firms assessing/ looking for in performance? How many points should I cover per question (i.e. how did you show x value)?

Thank you!

 

[yasmars]

Does anyone know of any of Willkie's London office's precedent-setting litigation cases? Or where to find information on these? I have found one but it is from 2016.

They recently were involved in a huge competition litigation case involving Mastercard. It’s pretty recent too

 

[Tintin06]

They recently were involved in a huge competition litigation case involving Mastercard. It’s pretty recent too

They also won that case too.

 

[Deleted member 37508]

CMS PFO

Post app or vi.

 

[Deleted member 37508]

Holding myself accountable again (another app).

CC* ✅📝❌
HSF ✅📝❌
NRF ✅📝❌
Weil ✅❌
Akin ✅
Sidley ✅❌
Orrick ✅
Willkie ✅🎥❌
Cooley ✅
Latham ✅
Milbank ✅
Kirkland ✅
Dechert ✅❌
Skadden ✅
Goodwin ✅
Covington ✅❌
Linklaters* ✅📝❌
Paul, Weiss ✅
Slaughters* ✅❌
Gibson Dunn ✅
Macfarlanes* ✅📝
White & Case ✅
Morgan Lewis ✅
Hogan Lovells* ✅
Cleary Gottlieb ✅❌
A&O Shearman ✅📝❌
Vinson & Elkins ✅
Arnold & Porter ✅
Baker McKenzie ✅
King & Spalding* ✅
Winston & Strawn ✅
Morrison Foerster ✅
Sullivan & Cromwell ✅❌

Key: ✅ = application submitted; 📝 = test received; 🎥 = video interview; ❌ = rejection.

*Training Contract applications

I'm actually ineligible for S&C VS. I'll be applying for their TC. 13 firm's rejections overall now.

Applications left to do: Fried Frank; McDermott, Will & Emery; Paul Hastings.

You need to add UK firms. Most if not all the firms you have left all take under 20 applicants on for a TC with most of them taking under 10. You need to apply to different firms then move laterally or you’ll be here for another cycle.

 

[SonghaivAngel]

I just got the call that I made it to the the A&O Shearman Summer Vac!!!!!🤯

 

[omnium]

anyone still waiting to hear back from CC direct tc?

 

[omnium]

I just got the call that I made it to the the A&O Shearman Summer Vac!!!!!🤯

Congrats!!!

 

[aspiringcitylawyer]

I just got the call that I made it to the the A&O Shearman Summer Vac!!!!!🤯

Congratulations!! Me too, got the call at 15:23 and it still feels surreal 🥹 Looking forward to meeting you!

 

[Amma Usman]

I just got the call that I made it to the the A&O Shearman Summer Vac!!!!!🤯

Congrats! @RJvAngel

 

[Amma Usman]

Congratulations!! Me too, got the call at 15:23 and it still feels surreal 🥹 Looking forward to meeting you!

Congrats @annad

 

[Tintin06]

You need to add UK firms. Most if not all the firms you have left all take under 20 applicants on for a TC with most of them taking under 10. You need to apply to different firms then move laterally or you’ll be here for another cycle.

Ok. Luckily some are still open.

 

[Aspiringsolicitor01]

I'm applying to an open day and vac scheme where there is a question for each on the application.
Open day: Describe why a legal career at Shoosmiths appeals to you.
Vac scheme: Describe why you want to be a solicitor at Shoosmiths.

Obviously, one mentions the solicitor role, and the other is a legal role in general, but how do I differentiate between my two answers to these questions? Do I need to differentiate a lot or will these be viewed as separate applications? @Jessica Booker @Andrei Radu @Ram Sabaratnam @Amma Usman

 

[Unknowncabbage]

Hey @Unknowncabbage ,

This question is a really good one. Just as @Ram Sabaratnam had said, the length of the seat is not as important as the specific experiences you had during that seat. What I believe is additionally valuable in your case, is that in addition to the indirect shadowing experience you got, you carried out specific research tasks. The way in which I would personally leverage this in an application is to (i) highlight what the research was on, (ii) how it contributed to wider departmental efforts, (iii) what you learnt, (iv) what you enjoyed and why, (v) why you feel you are more likely to work in this firm’s finance practice, than at other firm’s. I will touch on each of these in turn by highlighting their importance. Just as a granular point, you don’t need to cover all 5 points explicitly, you just need to find a way to weave them in given the word count of most applications. Some will also require more detail than others; for example, (i) and (v) are more important than point (ii).

(i) Highlight what the research was on: Simply, this helps provide more context and sets a foundational tone for the subsequent link of demonstrated interest you are about to show.

(ii) How it contributed to wider departmental efforts: This may be a bit difficult to establish as I appreciate that confidentiality rings and all, may mean that interns are not involved in the heavy tasks. However, the research your supervisor gave you will have definitely been used by them in a wider deal/ problem they were working on. What was this? What part did the research play in bringing it all together? Any feedback you got?

(iii) What you learnt: A rather funny point and a given of course, but it stands to confirm that you understood the work of the practice area and that you understand its general intricacies/ what is expected of lawyers in this realm. It also shows you are open to learning new things - key trainee qualities.

(iv) What you enjoyed and why: Another given, but you will need to touch heavily on this and why it appealed. At the end of the day, you should be applying to firms with practice areas you are genuinely drawn to. It’s difficult to show demonstrated interest if you don’t show the excitement part.

(v) Why you feel you are more likely to work in this firm’s finance practice, than at other firm’s: As @Ram Sabaratnam mentioned, what aspect of their finance practice appeals; clients, work scope, etc. Many firm‘s have finance practices.. what is it about X’s own specifically that appeals. This is what ties all the above points together and creates a solid answer.

You also briefed a supervisor. Highlight this too. It shows you can translate written work into an actionable presentation. Overall, this helps show good communication skills. Being affluent in a written format is great, but being affluent in both written and oral scopes is an asset. This is one thing a mentor of mine once said and has stuck with me ever since.

Thank you so much Amma!

 

[SonghaivAngel]

Congratulations!! Me too, got the call at 15:23 and it still feels surreal 🥹 Looking forward to meeting you!

I'm so happy for us, looking forward to meeting you too!!!