🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is 20th June.

👉 Read Becca's announcement post here
📝 Apply directly here

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 193575" data-attributes="member: 36777">No, I think that will be fine. Generally speaking, I am of the opinion that the 'fit' element of a deal/case (how well it aligns with your motivations/points you are trying to illustrate about the firm) is more important than the recency consideration. Regardless, work done in the past three years I think would be considered by most recruiters to count as 'recent'. Only when you go back further, such as 5 or 6 years, does it start to become a problem. Beyond this, just generally for your research purposes, I would say not to rely only on the firm's website when looking into deals or cases. Some sites are better than others, but I don't know any one that provides an exhaustive list. Firms merely look to showcase the expertise they deem to be most relevant from a client perspective. For your research purposes, especially if you have a specific type of matter in mind, I would go beyond that and see what I can find on a general Internet search, but also on the firm's LinkedIn profile and on The Lawyer and Law.com.</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom