Ask A Graduate Recruiter Anything!

[Jessica Booker]

When applying for first-year schemes is it better to wait until you have started university? Especially with those who ask for a university grade/module percentages or do those not matter for first-year schemes?

A lot of people won’t have grades for first year when the programmes are even run. It doesn’t mean you need to rush into applying though, especially if you feel you will build out your application in the next few months.

 

[pobploy]

I am reapplying to a firm after I was rejected due to a WG test but the firm said my application on its own was successful. Should I approach the new application with the previous application as a draft 1 base or should I restart from scratch? Do graduate recruiters compare our application with the previous submissions?

 

[Jessica Booker]

I am reapplying to a firm after I was rejected due to a WG test but the firm said my application on its own was successful. Should I approach the new application with the previous application as a draft 1 base or should I restart from scratch? Do graduate recruiters compare our application with the previous submissions?

Are you applying in the same cycle?

 

[pobploy]

Are you applying in the same cycle?

I applied for the TC in april so I think it would be a different cycle (to the current October one), but I am emailing the graduate recruitment team to re-check this.

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Hello @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. During my time at university, I have done a year long distance learning diploma in Commercial laws and it was pretty rigorous. I have also participated in a Contract Drafting competition wherein I was ranked 12 out of 140 participants. My question to you is, does the threshold of legal knowledge expected from an applicant go up because of participating in the kind of things that I have done? How much detail can they really get into whilst asking me questions about the distance learning diploma and the Contract Drafting contest?

Thanks.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hello @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. During my time at university, I have done a year long distance learning diploma in Commercial laws and it was pretty rigorous. I have also participated in a Contract Drafting competition wherein I was ranked 12 out of 140 participants. My question to you is, does the threshold of legal knowledge expected from an applicant go up because of participating in the kind of things that I have done? How much detail can they really get into whilst asking me questions about the distance learning diploma and the Contract Drafting contest?

Thanks.

No - there would not be this expectation.

You can go into as much detail as you think is relevant to the specifics of the question being asked.

 

[bananak]

@Jessica Booker

Hi Jessica,

Hope you're well!

I have a question about the SQE route to qualification. I am currently undertaking the SQE 1 Programme and have noticed that several firms indicated that they will start implementing the SQE route from 2023/24 onwards. Do you have any information on whether that means that if successful on their vac schemes and upon receiving a TC offer, I wouldn't be able to start until 2023/24 then? I have two SQE exams coming up, one now and one during Spring 2022.

I appreciate your help!

 

[Jessica Booker]

@Jessica Booker

Hi Jessica,

Hope you're well!

I have a question about the SQE route to qualification. I am currently undertaking the SQE 1 Programme and have noticed that several firms indicated that they will start implementing the SQE route from 2023/24 onwards. Do you have any information on whether that means that if successful on their vac schemes and upon receiving a TC offer, I wouldn't be able to start until 2023/24 then? I have two SQE exams coming up, one now and one during Spring 2022.

I appreciate your help!

The SQE won’t really determine this - it will just be whether the firm has opportunities to start earlier. However, as firms continue to recruit 2-3 years in advance, it’s likely that the earliest start your TC until 2023/24, whether it was the SQE or not. You could try and seek out firms recruiting earlier intakes, but they maybe recruiting them on the old LPC model.

 

[bananak]

The SQE won’t really determine this - it will just be whether the firm has opportunities to start earlier. However, as firms continue to recruit 2-3 years in advance, it’s likely that the earliest start your TC until 2023/24, whether it was the SQE or not. You could try and seek out firms recruiting earlier intakes, but they maybe recruiting them on the old LPC model.

Thank you so much!

 

[k.k]

Hi @Jessica Booker, just a quick query for a legal CV.
Can I insert a job accepted but not yet started in work experience / would a role with a LegalTech startup be considered legal work experience or general work experience? Thanks!

 

[Lisa Lowe]

Hi Jess!

I'm currently doing the LPC and have been given the option to complete a case study to obtain the full LPC MSc, my firm strongly recommend we complete the case study to obtain the full award, but have said it is optional. Do you think long-term this would make a difference - do recruiters care if you've done the LPC or LPC MSc?

I'd rather not complete it and take advantage of the additional time I would have off.

Any insights would be appreciated!

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Hello, @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. Correct me if I'm wrong but, when Indian lawyers who have a few years of PQE apply to London MC firms as lateral hires, they have to go through the same process that a future trainee from India goes through minus the 2 year training contract? I mean the exams that the lateral hires take are the same, right? (The PGDL, SQE 1&2 and the City Consortium if they're applying to one of the consortium firms)


Thanks

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hello, @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. Correct me if I'm wrong but, when Indian lawyers who have a few years of PQE apply to London MC firms as lateral hires, they have to go through the same process that a future trainee from India goes through minus the 2 year training contract? I mean the exams that the lateral hires take are the same, right? (The PGDL, SQE 1&2 and the City Consortium if they're applying to one of the consortium firms)


Thanks

They could just take the SQE assessments (exams). They don’t need to take any courses nor complete a two year period of qualifying work experience. The big question would be why a Indian qualified lawyer with three years experience needed to go through a SQE training contract process.

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Hello, @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. I was just curious about what people really say when they tell the interviewer that they are interested in working on "big deals." I'm interested in big deals too but only because these deals make headlines and I'd love to tell my family/friends that I was a part of this FT front page deal and I'd find that aspect fulfilling, but I think that'd be too naive a point to make in the interviews. Also, even IB people can work on the same deals and so this wouldn't be specific enough to commercial law. Should I not make the "big deals" point at all, because other than justifying it with cliches like "complex", "intellectually stimulating", I really don't think I can do a good job with this point.

Thanks.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hello, @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. I was just curious about what people really say when they tell the interviewer that they are interested in working on "big deals." I'm interested in big deals too but only because these deals make headlines and I'd love to tell my family/friends that I was a part of this FT front page deal and I'd find that aspect fulfilling, but I think that'd be too naive a point to make in the interviews. Also, even IB people can work on the same deals and so this wouldn't be specific enough to commercial law. Should I not make the "big deals" point at all, because other than justifying it with cliches like "complex", "intellectually stimulating", I really don't think I can do a good job with this point.

Thanks.

Whatever your answer it just need to be genuine - there is little point saying stuff for the sake of it, as you are unlikely to get very far when probed on your answers.

You have to remember as a lawyer you often cannot talk about the deals you are working on though - there will be times where you can’t talk to friends and family about what you are working on, so if that is your only motivation for wanting to work on these matters, I think you need to think what else might interest you.

Also the novelty will wear off after a while - not only will you get bored of talking about what you are working on (when you can talk about it) but other people will get bored of listening to it too. It’s not as glamorous/exciting as it sounds a lot of the time.

Finally, a lot of the work you do won’t be on the front pages. It will happen from time to time, but it won’t be as often as you expect.

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Whatever your answer it just need to be genuine - there is little point saying stuff for the sake of it, as you are unlikely to get very far when probed on your answers.

You have to remember as a lawyer you often cannot talk about the deals you are working on though - there will be times where you can’t talk to friends and family about what you are working on, so if that is your only motivation for wanting to work on these matters, I think you need to think what else might interest you.

Also the novelty will wear off after a while - not only will you get bored of talking about what you are working on (when you can talk about it) but other people will get bored of listening to it too. It’s not as glamorous/exciting as it sounds a lot of the time.

Finally, a lot of the work you do won’t be on the front pages. It will happen from time to time, but it won’t be as often as you expect.

I admit that I don't really have any other justification for working on big deals but I feel that these firms pride themselves on being at the forefront of dealmaking, and rightfully so. If I completely omit the big deals, would that be a turn-off?

 

[Jessica Booker]

I admit that I don't really have any other justification for working on big deals but I feel that these firms pride themselves on being at the forefront of dealmaking, and rightfully so. If I completely omit the big deals, would that be a turn-off?

Then there would be a big question as to why you are interested in the work the firm does.

There are nuances to the benefits of working on big deals though that may be linked to what you are saying - a lot of people cite the prestige and pride on working on such matters and explain why they think they will be driven to do the work even when the work itself it dull and your pulling an all-nighter to get that dull work done.

You have to get into the detail of what is going to motivate you though - this is why too many people go into law and very quickly work out it isn’t for them

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Hello @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. My question is regarding the case study exercise, just generally speaking, how much would you say that the candidate needs to know stuff like TUPE regulations, Force Majeure clauses, Break clauses etc. I know that there is no expectation of any legal knowledge but I'm sure the partners will like it if we are able to talk about these regulations and clauses in order to remedy the problematic areas for our fictitious clients in the case study scenario. Could you please clarify this? I mean if the people who make these points get brownie points, then the statement that legal knowledge isn't required, doesn't make any sense at all.

Thanks.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hello @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. My question is regarding the case study exercise, just generally speaking, how much would you say that the candidate needs to know stuff like TUPE regulations, Force Majeure clauses, Break clauses etc. I know that there is no expectation of any legal knowledge but I'm sure the partners will like it if we are able to talk about these regulations and clauses in order to remedy the problematic areas for our fictitious clients in the case study scenario. Could you please clarify this? I mean if the people who make these points get brownie points, then the statement that legal knowledge isn't required, doesn't make any sense at all.

Thanks.

At most all you’d need to know is that they existed. You wouldn’t need any legal knowledge to know how to use them.

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Hello @Jessica Booker hope you are doing well. How many pointers do you think should suffice for the question "What do you think is the role of a trainee?" Also, the role has great variation from doing DD to representing the firm at Employer Presentations for different universities, so what is it that we should talk about in our answer to the question? I'm obviously aware that legal work is going to make up 99.9% of the role but should we still talk about these extra-curriculars that we get to do as a trainee?

Thanks