Common mistakes on application forms.....

[Jessica Booker]

Generally avoid using dashes in sentences - although it does work on some level, it generally reads better if you avoid them - just use a new sentence instead, especially when your sentence is particulary long or complicated.

So....

Generally avoid using dashes in sentences. Although it does work on some level, it generally reads better if you avoid them. Just use a new sentence instead, especially when your sentence is particulary long or complicated.

 

[Jessica Booker]

This is a really common error.

Make sure you keep your tense consistent. Too many people will flit between past and current tense, meaning it can be difficult for your reader to understand when what you are talking about happened (or if it is still happening).

 

[Alice G]

This is a really common error.

Make sure you keep your tense consistent. Too many people will flit between past and current tense, meaning it can be difficult for your reader to understand when what you are talking about happened (or if it is still happening).

The tense point is so important! Definitely agree. Also, seems obvious but I’ve seen a few instances of just not answering the question directly enough. Be careful when using competencies not to answer the question you hope the firm is asking. Highlight key aspects I’d a question and make sure you’re hitting it. I appreciate this is easy to do, especially when the questions posed are wordy in themselves, but it’s important to take a step back and think what it is exactly the firm is looking to hear from you and what skills they’re trying to get you to demonstrate.

I’ve done this myself and it doesn’t necessarily mean you need to discard the example you’ve chosen, it just might require a balance shift and a bit of a reframe which is what the editing process is all about.

 

[Jaysen]

Frequently, I see candidates say they find X practice area/deal/use of technology 'exciting' or 'fascinating'. This is a redundant sentence. Always try to explain why it's exciting or fascinating to you.

 

[Jaysen]

Probably the most common comment I have on an application is to ask a candidate to be more specific. To me, this is one of the best ways to stand out.

I realise it's not always clear what it means to be more specific, so let me give an example:

One candidate recently discussed the lengths a senior lawyer at a firm went to support another junior member at the firm as one of their reasons for applying (an excellent specific reason). The candidate then went on to make a brief reference to how this shows the firm's training (a generic reason).

To improve the second part, the candidate should be more specific about why it matters to them that the partner went the extra mile. Perhaps, for example, it might tell a candidate that training at the firm is treated as a firm-wide commitment, no matter how senior a lawyer may be. It could also be very important to the candidate that junior lawyers are respected as an integral part of the firm.

 

[Alice G]

Probably the most common comment I have on an application is to ask a candidate to be more specific. To me, this is one of the best ways to stand out.

I realise it's not always clear what it means to be more specific, so let me give an example:

One candidate recently discussed the lengths a senior lawyer at a firm went to support another junior member at the firm as one of their reasons for applying (an excellent specific reason). The candidate then went on to make a brief reference to how this shows the firm's training (a generic reason).

To improve the second part, the candidate should be more specific about why it matters to them that the partner went the extra mile. Perhaps, for example, it might tell a candidate that training at the firm is treated as a firm-wide commitment, no matter how senior a lawyer may be. It could also be very important to the candidate that junior lawyers are respected as an integral part of the firm.

Great examples @Jaysen! I will try to include similar examples in my future posts re, application tips!

if anyone wants examples for any of our previous comments we will try to provide them. Just tag us with an ‘@‘ and we will do our best!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Know your difference between constantly and continually.

Saying you constantly review something isn't a positive thing! Saying you continually review something is

 

[A friendly human]

quick question haha

when you're talking about a firm whose name ends in an 's' (e.g. Herbert Smith Freehills) do you write Herbert Smith Freehills' or Herbert Smith Freehills's

their site isn't of much use and i've found both being used on the internet

many thanks

 

[Tushar]

quick question haha

when you're talking about a firm whose name ends in an 's' (e.g. Herbert Smith Freehills) do you write Herbert Smith Freehills' or Herbert Smith Freehills's

their site isn't of much use and i've found both being used on the internet

many thanks

The former

 

[Daniel Boden]

quick question haha

when you're talking about a firm whose name ends in an 's' (e.g. Herbert Smith Freehills) do you write Herbert Smith Freehills' or Herbert Smith Freehills's

their site isn't of much use and i've found both being used on the internet

many thanks

I would always use Freehills' or alternatively you could just say the firm's which makes it much easier

 

[Jessica Booker]

quick question haha

when you're talking about a firm whose name ends in an 's' (e.g. Herbert Smith Freehills) do you write Herbert Smith Freehills' or Herbert Smith Freehills's

their site isn't of much use and i've found both being used on the internet

many thanks

Technically either could be right depending on the name and how you prenounce it. From the Oxford Dictionary:

With personal names that end in ‑s: add an apostrophe plus s when you would naturally pronounce an extra s if you said the word out loud … With personal names that end in ‑s but are not spoken with an extra s: just add an apostrophe after the ‑s.

I try to look at how the firm writes it although this isn't always easy. Another way is to look at how it is written in the Chambers Student Guide.

Otherwise, as Daniel has suggested, using "the firm's" would be a lot more concise anyway. Or you could obviously shorten to HSF's

 

[Jaysen]

For anyone that is applying to HSF, I'll just flag that 8/10 applications I see mention the strength of the firm's corporate AND disputes department. This isn't a wrong reason to use, but to stand out, try to be very specific as to why this is important to you (rather than making a general statement as to how this will make you well rounded).

 

[Jessica Booker]

For anyone that is applying to HSF, I'll just flag that 8/10 applications I see mention the strength of the firm's corporate AND disputes department. This isn't a wrong reason to use, but to stand out, try to be very specific as to why this is important to you (rather than making a general statement as to how this will make you well rounded).

This isn't just a HSF thing either - I am seeing lots of applications that just focus on the departments being world-class/highly ranked. I get that makes a department more appealing, but you need to tell me why you are interested in the subject matter.

Its a bit like saying you want to watch Liverpool play football, but yet you aren't telling me why you want to watch football. Why don't you want to watch cricket, basketball or atheletics instead? Are you even interested in sport at all?

 

[Alice G]

Another broad point to raise- try to avoid description. I’ve seen an application recently which was very strong indeed except for one aspect. The candidate did a brilliant job of really explaining to the reader why they want to be a commercial lawyer but, when evidencing an element of this response, they described to me what a lawyer had done whilst they were on work experience without explaining why that was significant or how this linked back to them and their interests. It’s good to show you understand the work and you’ve undertaken positions in law firms but remember, this is all about you. Don’t just describe the work and call it ‘interesting’ say why that work interests you and do a bit of a self analysis by asking ‘so what?’ constantly when you write your motivations and reasoning.
To test if something is merely descriptive, read the passage of your work and think ‘is this giving the reader an insight into me and my motivations?’ ‘Is this comment really adding value and substance to what I want to convey?’ When you look at your work with these questions these descriptive passages will become clearer.

 

[A friendly human]

The former

I would always use Freehills' or alternatively you could just say the firm's which makes it much easier

Technically either could be right depending on the name and how you prenounce it. From the Oxford Dictionary:

With personal names that end in ‑s: add an apostrophe plus s when you would naturally pronounce an extra s if you said the word out loud … With personal names that end in ‑s but are not spoken with an extra s: just add an apostrophe after the ‑s.

I try to look at how the firm writes it although this isn't always easy. Another way is to look at how it is written in the Chambers Student Guide.

Otherwise, as Daniel has suggested, using "the firm's" would be a lot more concise anyway. Or you could obviously shorten to HSF's

I think I'll use Herbert Smith Freehills'

chambers student uses 'HSF's' or 'Herbies' or 'Herbert Smith's'

 

[Jessica Booker]

Old fashioned phrases like "thus"

 

[Jessica Booker]

ESG has clearly become a popular topic for commercial questions.

ESG is a massive subject within itself. If you are going to talk about ESG, focus on a specific story/strand within it and go into more specifics of that. Your answer will then be more unique and will stand out

 

[Jaysen]

I'm also frequently seeing discussions of the case between LVMH and Tiffany. There's no problem in mentioning it as a topic/legal case to discuss (e.g. for Mishcon's application), but I would encourage you to have an opinion, rather than simply restating the facts of the case.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Filler unnecessary phrases:

"I was tasked with reviewing...."

is much better written as

"I reviewed"

 

[Paul - Shearman & Sterling]

Just to chip in here - there's also no need to tell a law firm how many offices it has, or when it was established. I see this regularly as the introduction to an open-text question.