TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2026-27

[TJ360]

anyone have insights into mills and Reeves video questions -especially the timed one - is it motivational, sj or competency? And also Mayer brown - any insight would be helpful. I am happy to share about Hogan Lovells, Macfarlanes stage 2, Freshfields, HSFK, Latham and Watkins test.

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

that you so much that is super helpful! were u then asked ab where those ODs were in interviews?

Hi, no I personally wasn't asked about any of them in interviews but I'm sure others have been!

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

Hi, would appreciate anyone's thoughts on this.

I am a recent non-law graduate (2026) from a Russell Group uni. Completed a vac scheme this summer (not quite magic circle / US but not far off), but didn't manage to convert it. I graduated with a first, however the further back you go, my grades slip a little (averaged 70-74% in last 2 years vs 63% in 1st year).

I'm really keen to apply to Freshfields, but now that they've changed their requirements for the SVS, I happen to be eligible for both the SVS and DTC route. As far as I can tell, the assessment criteria for both is similar (form, online assessment + AC). Is there a recommendation as to which I should apply for? It seems the DTC is a much more condensed application with fewer hurdles to fall at, yet I presume they'll probably expect a higher standard of commercial awareness? Meanwhile, I'm guessing that taking the SVS route would put me alongside current students, meaning more emphasis may be placed on grades throughout university, which may not be ideal for me...

As far as I can tell it seems Freshfields have a pretty even split of DTC vs SVS within their trainee cohort, so right now don't really feel like I'm being pushed either way on a purely strategic front. Not really sure what to think tbh; would appreciate anyone's insights as to which route they'd go!

Hi! I think you are being far too hard on yourself. Your grades are far better than mine and honestly probably better than most people I know personally who got a TC. Furthermore, you have a phenomenal experience by having a VS already, alongside of course the skills and qualities that got you that VS in the first place. As such, I really don't think you're disadvantaged in any way!

As such, I would apply depending on your preference and requirements. Some firms require extended legal experience (not sure what it is for Freshfields, potentially 1 VS would satisfy this). Furthermore, me personally, I couldn't imaging going DTC as I think culture fit is very important. However, I also understand taking 3 weeks off is not feasible for most grads. Consequently, I would just go over the pros and cons and should what is best for you.

Wishing you luck! (but I'm sure you won't need it )

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

Hi @Antoni Trochimowicz, I found your example of your work experience entry really helpful. I was wondering if you'd be able to post an example of an entry about an open day (or all the open days you did if you bunched them together in one entry). I think I've written about the substantive work experiences well, but am finding open days slightly harder to talk about. Thank you!

Hi, I'm glad you found it helpful

Unfortunately, I always found it difficult to write about insight days too. I would share my experience but I don't think it's strong in any particular sense. As such, I wouldn't want to send people down the wrong path. I'm sorry !!

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

Hey, thanks for your response!

Would you still recommend the same for rolling apps? I am planning to Hogan Lovells, and the deadline is first week of October. I plan to follow what you said for apps that are no rolling and at later dates.

Hey, good question.

If it is particularly relevant, I guess you can include it as by the time you move onto the interview stage you would have substantive experience to talk about. However, I would be careful to not overstate your responsibilities as you won't be 1000% certain on each task you will be doing. Furthermore, talking generally etc. can weaken your overall work experience. This is a calculated risk you'd have to take if the experience is genuinely relevant to the extent that you believe it could increase your chances.

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

Hi! I had a question about how law firms are likely to view my grades, particularly firms that place a lot of emphasis on academics.

I graduated from a top-3 UK university with a First, despite fairly severe mitigating circumstances throughout my undergraduate degree. My first-year average was 65; I did receive one 2:2 that year, but it was not counted towards my average because the university used a best-of-four system. In second year, I averaged 65, with one First, two 63s and one 2:2. In third year, I averaged 69, with five Firsts. My overall undergraduate average was 67.

I then completed the PGDL and averaged 81%, with no mitigating circumstances during that course.

For firms that are particularly focused on academics, would you say my grades should generally be fine given that I graduated with a First and an overall average of 67, alongside the mitigating circumstances, clear upward trajectory and 81% PGDL result?

I also received an assessment centre invitation from Ropes & Gray, which I understand places quite a lot of weight on academics, so I’m not sure how concerned I should realistically be about this.

@Antoni Trochimowicz

Hi, major congratulations on both securing those results and also the AC!

I think your grades are absolutely great. I would say they should be enough for the grade-heavy firms, albeit some do prefer firsts on average (Slaughter and May, Sullivan & Cromwell), though even for those a 67 should be fine (I had a 69 average then 67 average and Slaughters didn't mind, and S&C invited me to final stage interview).

However, for some other firms, like Linklaters, a strict 2:1 requirement across all modules is enforced. This is where I would emphasise your Mitigating Circumstances. Following that, you should hopefully be fine!

Wishing you the best

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

@Antoni Trochimowicz hey!! for your work exp section (btw thank u sm for sending that) i noticed u gave an overivew of the company - should i be doing this evenif its a BB IB name/law firm name that would be recognisable?

I'm glad you found it helpful !

No, no need, if it's any city-based company that is a household name I would say it's fine to omit it. I did personally give a quick overview for a leading chambers I did a Mini at, but that was purely to demonstrate the work it did as commercial solicitor recruitment may not be aware. However, if it is any company in a related commercial field (Freshfields, PwC, McKinsey, Goldman Sachs, KKR etc.) you're fine !

 

[Antoni Trochimowicz]

Hi does anyone have any suggestions on how to approach this question and what the firm may be looking for in an answer? Any help would be appreciated!

Is there any specific question you would like answered at the interview and, unless obvious, why do you want it addressed?
@Antoni Trochimowicz

Wow I have never heard that question before, it's quite unique.

As such, I don't have personal experience in answering it. But, if I was to give my take:

I think the primary thing the firm is looking for is your research into the firm. You definitely shouldn't ask anything that could feasibly be answered through the internet. I would try to find a specific fact or point about the firm that genuinely interests you. This could be about a practice of the firm, or about its strategy in regards to specific aspect. Your answer should reflect this interest, picking out a unique stance on this and asking the firm what its plan is or how it operates.

Then for the second part of the question, this is where you demonstrate your aforementioned interest. You can say how it was sparked and how you researched it etc.

Hopefully this helps !

 

[antoforero]

Hi does anyone have any suggestions on how to approach this question and what the firm may be looking for in an answer? Any help would be appreciated!

Is there any specific question you would like answered at the interview and, unless obvious, why do you want it addressed?
@Antoni Trochimowicz

Hi! I have had this question asked during interviews rather than in an application but I think the same thinking applies.

I viewed it as an opportunity to demonstrate interest in the firm by focusing on the why! The reason why you want a certain question addressed can demonstrate how a strength, opportunity, or practice area at the firm is important to you! Aside from finding a thoughtful question that goes beyond something you can find in a google search, I think you can focus on further demonstrating how you've identified something in the firm you want to learn more about because it is important to you! And use the question to get the interviewer's perspective rather than information you can find online.

 

[antoforero]

Not to be suspicious of firms…. BUT are the questions about hobbies really about our hobbies/personality, or are they trying to see how they relate to the skills we’ll need as trainees?

Also, is there such a thing as a generic skill for those “What skills do you think are important as a trainee?” questions? I put commercial awareness as one, but I’m convincing myself Grad Rec will think that’s expected? But then so are communication, organisation and time management?

You can tell a deadline is looming when I start second-guessing my complete answers.

Hi! I felt very similarly when applying to firms for the first time, wondering if there was a 'right answer' or something they were particularly looking for me to showcase. However, I realised in an interview for a US firm that it was actually a great opportunity for me to guide the questions and the story I was trying to convey! As it's some of the few personal details interviewers get about you beforehand, it is a great jumping-off point they will often bring up. I really used it as an opportunity to describe why I liked certain hobbies and how they had shaped aspects of my personality.

For instance: I danced ballet for manyyy years and really spoke about moments that taught me to be coachable and persistent. I used their general question about something I had mentioned in the application to describe those skills and then tie it into how I believed they would be particularly important at the firm given their training system.

For skills also think about things associates would look for in people they want to help develop and work alongside with rather than the key bits grad rec typically looks for. I've mentioned these above but being coachable, learning from your mistakes, having a really positive attitude, curiosity, problem solving, even knowing how to read a room!

 

[antoforero]

are there any firms that don't have vac schemes and ONLY recruit from direct TCs for second years and above - like clifford chance, irwin mitchell etc.?

Hi! I'm not sure I've seen a list of firms that exclusively recruit through direct TC applications, but I remember finding this TCLA breakdown really useful. It categorises firms based on how much they recruit through vacation schemes vs direct TC applications, so it should give you a good starting point for identifying firms with a significant direct TC intake. It's from the 2024–25 cycle, but I still found it useful for the most recent cycle!

Thread 'Where firms recruit from (Vacation Scheme vs Direct TC applications) 2024-2025'

Oct 11, 2024

Hi folks!

To help you develop a well-rounded application strategy, we’ve put together the following thread highlighting where firms typically recruit from—whether it's through vacation schemes or direct training contract routes. We've organised firms into four categories:

1. Firms which recruit a significant portion of their trainees through the direct training contract route
2. Firms that recruit primarily through vacation schemes, but have a healthy direct trainee intake
3. Firms that recruit from vacation schemes in the first instance
4. Firms that recruit only through their...

• Ram Sabaratnam
• Replies: 17
• Forum: Applications

• 
• 
• 

 

[antoforero]

Hi everyone! I’d really appreciate some advice on applying to certain firms.

I have quite a lot of tech-related experience, including a growth role at an AI financial wellbeing start-up, a vacation scheme in a firm’s Corporate Technology department, and I’m now pursuing an LLM in Law, Technology & Innovation. Naturally, I’ve been thinking about leaning into this in my applications.

I’ve found this relatively easy with a firm like Orrick, where technology, innovation and emerging companies are clearly central to the firm’s work. However, I’m less sure how to approach a firm like Gibson Dunn.

My understanding is that Gibson Dunn is much broader, with a particularly strong focus on areas such as M&A, private equity and complex disputes, rather than being defined by particular sectors. That said, the firm does regularly work with technology companies and has a strong Technology Transactions practice.

Would it be misguided to make my interest in Gibson Dunn’s work with technology clients part of my “Why Gibson Dunn?” answer, given my own background? Or should I focus more heavily on the firm’s broader M&A/PE offering and use my tech experience as an additional point of connection rather than the main reason for applying?

I’m conscious of wanting to show a genuine connection to the firm without trying to make it into something it isn’t. Any advice would be really helpful!!

Hi! I had a similar dilemma last cycle as I was quite interested in tax and quickly found that most large global firms that I was interested in did not have a particular focus on that area despite having quite strong practices. What I did was explain what in their tax practices I liked.

For instance, I pointed to the fact that some tax practices had their own clients rather than just being advisory to other practice areas, the opportunity to work on international tax client matters, and whether firms offered tax seats to trainees. I think those things gave me a genuine connection with the practice at the firm that was not affected by it being a smaller area. But I didn't stop there! I actively acknowledged that the firm was broader and why I appreciated that, as it gave me the opportunity to shift into a new area if I found that tax was not my final calling.

I thought of it as an initial connection -> into deeper research -> ending in broader motivation.

Also I found during the vac scheme that associates and partners remembered me by that unique interest and I used it to start conversations and ask about their own practices, so definitely don't shy away from sharing your interest in tech!!

 

[antoforero]

Hi Danny, you're on the right track, definitely the right way to go about it. There are a multitude of aspects that benefit you in a small trainee cohort, one of the reasons I pursued US firms.

Some of the ones that come to mind immediately:

• Greater Responsibility early on
  • On a given M&A transaction in a US firm, you may have a partner, two associates and a trainee for instance.
  • This is in comparison to firms with larger cohorts having multiple trainees (& associates) on any given matter.
  • As a result, some of the more complex 'trainee work' you'd be given is actually primarily handled by Associates, whereas you may get stuck on the slightly more administrative-leaning tasks. (in any US firm, you'd still be doing administrative tasks but you have a greater chance to put yourself out there and do more).
  • Of course this is a generalisation, I've been at MC firms which give fantastic exposure to their juniors and by no means am I saying this is a hard rule.
• More of a individualised experience/training
  • With less trainees, your experience can be more easily tailored.
  • Training may be less formal, but conversely that means it can be done specifically for you when you need help with some things.
  • In contrast, if a firm has a large group of trainees, simply for administrative purposes, it would be easier to generalise a training curriculum.
• Closer contact to senior personnel
  • While distant partners can occur at any firm, this can often be harder in a firm that has a smaller cohort.
  • This is because, as mentioned before, their operations and deal teams are much leaner.
  • As such, you have closer contact to experts in the field, allowing you to learn more directly from the source.

These are the main reasons that come to mind that could be mentioned professionally in an application. I'm sure there are plenty of others, but hope that helps !

If I can add one thing, which I think is a slightly less thought of benefit, is the opportunity to build much closer relationships with your fellow trainees.

I think a firm's culture is defined at all levels, but particularly strong relationships between people who trained together can really flow through the firm. If trainees know each other well, genuinely enjoy working together and are comfortable asking each other for help, that can create a much more collaborative environment beyond just your intake.

I’ve sometimes heard the argument that smaller cohorts can mean more competition because there are fewer spaces, but I actually found the opposite on my vac scheme of around 20 people. In a very large cohort, there can inevitably be more of a numbers game, whereas when you have the opportunity to properly get to know everyone, it can feel much more like you're helping each other through the process rather than competing.

This will depend on the individual firm and its culture, but I think the quality of relationships within a small cohort is something worth looking into when researching firms!

 

[e.jy336]

Anyone think there’s any point in submitting a Gibson Dunn application now? Noted it’s rolling but quite late in.

I applied last night and got the test today

 

[Elena Gilbert]

Have people heard back from Macfarlanes post stage 2 online assessment for the winter vacation scheme?

 

[NM23x]

has anyone got the gibson dunn on hold email after assessment?