TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[arando]

Hi @arando I have linked here a thread where this topic was discussed in a lot of depth by forum members. I will also quote bellow a number of posts with useful advice to consider.

Thank you so much

 

[TCseeker101]

CRS London holding email

Same, I can’t decide whether it’s a good thing or not!

 

[saminoriya]

CRS reserve list for VS for Guildford. I hope they invite me at least to AC for TC🥹

 

[allenpopi]

Probably if they’ve asked for it. You’ll get a starter checklist that basically just refers the law firm to your P45.

hmm i see - thanks!. The issue is that i have to tick one of the three boxes on the checklist but i don't technically qualify for any of them because i have a P45.
I might just have to email and ask.

 

[anna57492]

CRS reserve list for VS for Guildford. I hope they invite me at least to AC for TC🥹

Same

 

[A worried graduate]

Successful training apps, detailed Guides on all parts of applications, case study, interview, courses on different areas of law, law firm profiles, courses on finance, M&A and more

Interesting.

Anyone on here have guidance on landing high street paralegal roles?

I’ve had a few interviews but never the offer.

 

[Andrei Radu]

Withers SVS! The firm that literally drew me to a career in law coming from an engineering background. SO excited. I must say that @Andrei Radu and his guide for interviews was key here and would encourage anyone with an interview to heed that advice.

Huge congrats @weupin2025 🥳 🥳 🥳 ! I'm glad I could be of help and so happy to see you seem to have found a perfect fit with the firm

 

[jojo23]

Email from crs gave me a mini heart attack 🤣 just for them to say we are still reviewing interviews and aim to respond next week😒

 

[Andrei Radu]

What's a good strategy to secure a VS? Two years of applying and just rejection after rejection, I've gotten past the application stage twice, I'm definitely doing something wrong.

Hi @ayiiii05 I will link here the Guide to Building a Winning Applications Strategy I have written a couple of months ago, as it describes in a lot of depth what I think led to my success after also getting rejected everywhere in the previous cycle.

 

[hfbjsdhfbhf]

what does it mean if a firm doesnt get back to you 5 weeks post AC? i've waited ages and i emailed them yesterday morning and they haven't replied. is it possible to get ghosted by a firm bc its just feels disrespectful at this point ... 😭 surely if they wanted to reject me they would've got back sooner instead of waiting so long???? i'm trying not to read into it but i honestly don't know what to do at this point

 

[Andrei Radu]

What do group exercises at AC’s tend to entail? Is it negotiation exercises as that’s all I’ve heard so far and how would they work? Secondly how is best to prepare? Any help is appreciated

Hi @mulan0 from what I have encountered so far they tend to be either based on a negotiation, a group discussion, or a presentation task.

1. Negotiations: The exercises can have different structures and team sizes depending on the firm, but I think the default one is for you to get around 30mins-1h of preparation time with your team during which you read a brief with background information and client demands, and then devise a strategy based on that (in many cases the preparation part is also assessed by the firm). Then, you normally have around 30-45 minutes to negotiate and hopefully reach an agreement with the other side.
2. Group exercises: Normally you would also have around 20 minutes to read a brief the discussion is based on, but this is done individually. Then, together with the rest of the group, you are tasked with discussing a number of options and choosing the best one. I have seen a number of exercises here around M&A and investments, with people discussing which companies would it be best to partner with/invest in.
3. Presentation tasks: This is very similar to the group discussion, with the only difference being that instead of simply reaching an agreement, you have to also make a presentation with your findings and recommendation. You would normally have a bit of extra time to prepare, as you need to allocate speaking roles and potentially practice as well.

A common issue candidates have with group exercises, irrespective of the format, is getting enough airtime to express their ideas and show off commercial awareness while also showing themselves to be team players. Since everyone knows that at the end of the day you are assessed individually and that progression is very competitive, many people will simply be looking to speak as much as possible. As such, I think it is good to think in advance of a few ways to ensure your contribution is seen without having to constantly fight over airtime. I'll link bellow a post in which I detailed some of the things that worked for me:

• Offer to keep the time: this shows a proactive attitude while not being very demanding as to your mental focus. It also enables you to (i) avoid taking the responsibility of any required writing, which is more demanding; and (ii) naturally intervene at certain points in the discussion to mention time considerations, which is also an opportunity for you to add substantive points.
• Try to introduce structure and organization: although many candidates will want to immediately start the analysis, instead of simply throwing yourself into discussing substantive points, try to introduce a framework: what points will you discuss, in what order, how much time will you spend on each, and what relevant assessment criteria should you keep in mind when analyzing the points? This will ensure a more comprehensive overview and a more clear output.
• Focus on finding more niche/less-obvious analysis points: as you are given a brief for the group exercise task, you will normally have a bit of preparation time during which you can think what points to bring up. You will find some points that are really intuitive which you will know the others likely also thought of. Instead of focusing on those and fighting with everyone to get to express those obvious points, I would use that time (and the extra thinking time in the initial discussion phase when everyone is fighting to say the obvious points) to find relevant ideas that others may have missed. The, as the discussion is winding down on that subpart of the task, I would mention these more niche points. This will avoid making you seem competitive and also showcase ability for more nuanced analysis.
• Focus on synthesis and weighing: another similar strategy for impressive contribution which may not require too much fighting over airtime is to once again seek to contribute as the discussion on the substantive points is winding down. What you can do here is intervene to summarize what everyone has contributed, weigh their points, and then make an informed argument as to what the decision should be.

 

[Andrei Radu]

what does it mean if a firm doesnt get back to you 5 weeks post AC? i've waited for ages and i emailed them yesterday morning and they haven't replied. is it possible to get ghosted by a firm bc its just feels disrespectful at this point ... 😭 surely if they wanted to reject me they would've got back sooner instead of waiting so long???? i'm trying not to read into it but i honestly don't know what to do at this point

I completely understand your frustration here, but it is unfortunately quite hard to tell, as different firm have very different processes. In the case of Slaughter and May, although I was given prior warning as to the long response times, I also had to wait more than 6 weeks post AC. However, this was not because they did not like my performance, as I still ended up getting the offer. Some firms simply interview over a long period of time and/or take long while to make decisions.

That said, 5 weeks is indeed definitely on the more extreme side of the wait time spectrum. It may also be the case that they have placed you on a waitlist, in which case they need to see how many people accept their offers or how many people who have previously accepted drop out before they decide what to respond to you.

 

[YS391]

Just got an email saying a space is available on Lewis Silkin initial AC, but it’s on Tuesday. Anyone have insight into presentation and other elements?

Hey, how come? Did someone drop out the original AC?

 

[Laur2cj]

Hey, how come? Did someone drop out the original AC?

assume so, they said they would be back in touch by 5th March latest so it’s a little last minute

 

[Jessica Booker]

what does it mean if a firm doesnt get back to you 5 weeks post AC? i've waited ages and i emailed them yesterday morning and they haven't replied. is it possible to get ghosted by a firm bc its just feels disrespectful at this point ... 😭 surely if they wanted to reject me they would've got back sooner instead of waiting so long???? i'm trying not to read into it but i honestly don't know what to do at this point

Although I would expect a firm to respond to you much earlier than 5 weeks post AC, I would stress that candidates cannot expect an immediate response from graduate recruitment teams to emails. Realistically it can easily take a week for most emails to be responded to unless they are urgent, and unfortunately although these type of matters maybe urgent to the candidate, they are not to the firm. I would see if you get a response to your email by the end of next week, and if not, then I think you can make more of the assumption that you may have ben ghosted.

 

[LawJourney101]

How do people feel after ACs? A lot of people mention how chill and friendly their interviews were but I feel like mine were just very serious conversations. Is that an indication I couldn't build a rapport with them, or does it just depend on the personality of the partners who interview you. Would be interesting to hear other peoples' experiences.

 

[Jessica Booker]

How do people feel after ACs? A lot of people mention how chill and friendly their interviews were but I feel like mine were just very serious conversations. Is that an indication I couldn't build a rapport with them, or does it just depend on the personality of the partners who interview you. Would be interesting to hear other peoples' experiences.

This is far more likely to be an indication of the interviewers' style of interviewing or their personality, rather than anything specifically about you.

 

[Jessica Booker]

1,000 pages of posts on this thread! Its been a busy cycle this year and this thread shows it!

Thank you for everyone's contributions to this thread - it has been our busiest thread ever. Its really great to have such an active and supportive community helping each other.

 

[Chris Brown]

I must say that @Andrei Radu and his guide for interviews was key here and would encourage anyone with an interview to heed that advice.

I second this completely! Thank you @Andrei Radu for being the TCLA forum GOAT!!! 🐐🐐

Both his interview guide and forum posts were key in my success (gaining VS offers from both Paul, Weiss and Willkie)! I genuinely would not have found myself to be in this position without them!! I bookmarked and studied them rigorously lmao. 🥲🥲

The posts on the forum that @Andrei Radu made in relation to the competitors of both Paul, Weiss and Willkie, their position in the City of London, and the distinction between debt and equity financing (private equity), were all significantly useful for me. I have quoted them below: 👇
​

Thank you again for the kind words Chris😄!! For the question about Paul, Weiss' position in the City, I would describe it as a middle-to-large office with a full service offering tailored for PE clients and a strategic focus on high end mandates. While its English law practice is very new, you can definitely argue this will not be an impediment for delivering the highest quality of legal services on the most complex matters. Firstly, Paul, Weiss has poached some of the most renowned practitioners in most of its practice areas - leaders in their fields such as Neel Sachdev in leveraged finance and Nicole Kar in antitrust. Secondly, Paul, Weiss' expansion was quite unique in that it poached many ready-made teams of partners and associates. Thus, many of its lawyers will know how to seamlessly work together from day one. Even for those that had not worked in the same teams before, integration is likely to have been a lot easier than normally would have been the case. The legal press reported that the majority had a background at either Kirkland or Linklaters, which means that they will have both been trained in the same style and will have likely known each other and had working relations.

For the second question, I would firstly comment that the more relevant competitors of Paul, Weiss' would be US and not UK firms. This is both because of Paul, Weiss' focus on PE, in which the US firms tend to dominate, and simply because the clients the firm is hoping to represent are US-based PE firms who need advice and services on deals/matters with English law elements. Among the US competitors, because on Paul, Weiss' high-end focus, those will mostly be the firms in the V10 and (to a somewhat lower extent) the V20. The Vault rankings are of course not an objective ranking of expertise, but I would argue they are a rough indicator to the "band" of prestige a US firms places into, especially in relation to high-end transactional matters. The lower down the list you go, the greater the likelihood that you won't often find that particular firm advising on the highest value mandates.

Now within the V20, different firms will have different practice area strengths. and will target different client bases. To identify the most important competitors, you want to identify the firms that Paul, Weiss' will most often find themselves pitching against when trying to win a mandate. Thus, the ones you want to pick are those whose core client base consists of PE clients. Since Skadden's central focus is on corporate M& and its core client base consists of multinational corporations, I would not name them among Paul, Weiss' greatest competitors. Normally I would have made a similar comment on Davis Polk, as its focus is on capital markets and the most important clients are investment banks like JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley. However, after its recent expansion in London I would say the firm is now getting closer to an equal split of M&A/PE practitioners and capital markets ones. More importantly, Davis Polk's London office has previously advised Apollo on a number of mandates, and Apollo is the one key client that Paul, Weiss has a very strong relationship to in the US; and which it now aims to also represent on as many London matters as possible.

Nonetheless, looking at both US rankings and UK practice area focus and client base, the firms I would consider to be Paul, Weiss' foremost competitors are: Kirkland, Latham, Simpson Thatcher, and Weil.

The basic distinction is that with debt financing a company will borrow money from a lender and will in return make a promise to return the initial borrowed sum + an agreed upon interest. With equity financing, the company gets money from an investor but never has to pay the investor back in return. Instead, in exchange for the money the investor gets equity in the company, which is just another term for shares in the company/a percentage of the ownership of the company. Equity financing always takes place when a private company goes public, in that the company issues shares to the public through an IPO and in exchange gets capital which can be used for further growth. However, equity company can also be used by a private company in a private transaction, when existing shareholders agree to sell a part of their shares or issue new shares to a particular investor/group of investors.

To look in more detail at debt financing, the main two methods to obtain it are loans (normally taken from a bank) and bonds (which can be issued to any investors). The difference is that loans normally have to be repaid on a monthly period (the borrower pays a proportional part of the total borrowed sum + interest) while with bonds, the issuer (ie the company that borrowed the money) only has to make the interest payments on a regular basis - the initial borrowed sum (or "the principal") is paid all at once at the end of the agreed upon repayment period (the "maturity date"). While there are a number of other differences that are relevant in assessing the pros/cons of using loans or bonds, for the sake of comparison with equity financing I will look at only advantages and disadvantages that equally apply to both. It should be noted however that in PE generally and for buyouts in particular PE firms normally use highly leveraged loans. Essentially, to minimize the amount of investor capital spent on any transaction (and thus to maximize the total number of profitable transactions a given fund can enter into), a PE firm will normally finance around 75-80% of the cost of a buyout by getting a loan from a bank and then offering as security the assets of the target company itself.

Now, to list some of the main advantages of debt financing I can think of:

• Allows the company (and the controlling PE firm) to keep compete control of the target company. This is particularly important for the PE firm to be able to implement its growth/efficiency improvement plans and its desired exit strategy.
• Allows the PE firm to keep all the dividends and profits from selling the company later on.
• It is often makes for a simpler and more standard negotiation process both for the financing deal and for the actual buyout. For an industry like PE where deals tend to be very fast paced and where targets normally have a number of suitors, this is also a benefit that should not be understated.
• Interest payments are tax-deductible.

Whereas the main advantages of equity financing are:

• It does not add any financial burdens on the target company. This means it should have more capital which can go towards investments in growth rather than repayment of debt. It also decreases risks of insolvency.
• It often means working with institutional investors or huge corporates with significant resources and expertise, which can make them invaluable partners for growing a business. A very successful example of such a relationship is that between Open AI and Microsoft.

Hi @Chris Brown and @legal18 I would describe Willkie in London as a middle-sized office of a top US firm specializing in a number of transactional (particularly PE and insurance work) and contentious practices (particularly competition litigation and white collar crime). If we look at competitors at a firm-wide level, the most similar types of firms I would identify would be the likes of Milbank, Cleary, and Gibson Dunn. Looking at the firm's wider strategy, we can see Willkie has grown rapidly in London with a focus on servicing its PE client base but also seeking to have a well-rounded and well-hedged practice; and thus, expanded to other areas when the opportunity arose. Within PE, while it does not have quite as strong of a reputation as a Kirkland, Latham or Simpson Thatcher, this is mainly due to the difference in size of practice - in 2024, I know they had the smallest number of practitioners of all firms in the same Chambers band ranking. As such, I would classify them as a having a smaller but premium PE offering, similar to that of Paul, Weiss, Gibson Dunn, and Ropes & Gray, who I would deem to be their primary competitors in this space.

As for your second question, I would firstly advise you not to worry. As you might know, Willkie has a reputation for being a US firm with a great culture, and I think this is one of the cases where this is not simply a result of effective marketing. My interview experience was one of the best ones I had, as I felt constantly encouraged by the partners and felt they really wanted to see me succeed. Having gotten to speak to both recruitment partners more during the vacation scheme, I further confirmed my impression that they are some of the kindest people I had come across in a law firm context. As such, try not to feel too nervous about the fact that you are speaking to a someone who is so much more senior than you - they will do their best to make you feel at ease in that regard.

My main tips for preparation are ones that are applicable to many other interviews: firstly, know your answers to the usual motivational/competency questions really well and try to add as much insights and analysis to them as you can. Secondly, brush up on your commercial awareness, and aim to particularly improve your understanding of the key practices/sectors the firm operates in. Thirdly, when in difficulty, take a little time to think and then given your best guess and/or externalize your thought process - this is the approach that led to some of the highest praise I have received in an interview context.

Best of luck !

 

[trainee4u]

Aspiring Solicitors hitting everyone in their database with "apply to sky" this morning?

Ok, so I did.

Didn't know anything about them, lol. Asked Grok, honestly it's pretty reasonable research tool!? It gave me this SC judgment on Sky's trademarks. https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2021_0181_judgment_updated_3_Dec2024_eaf8c576ea.pdf And also this https://www.telegraph.co.uk/busines...bill-hundreds-of-millions-advertising-fiasco/

The latter seemed a bit more "commercial", whereas the former is maybe a bit more legal, idk (the question was 200 words on a commercial news story)? So I went for the advertising error, anyway.

Probably will get a rejection first thing Monday.

But was at least somewhat interesting to learn a little about how TV advertising works and the existence of AdSmart. So.....