In an interview, how would you answer 'why law?' differently to 'why commercial law?' ?
I personally think it's the same
If the Q specifically says why law, I’d outline broadly why law appeals to me and then I’d segue into ‘why commercial law’ maybe 30 seconds afterwards.
Not entirely - someone saying “I want to be a lawyer because I want to help people” will make sense when interviewing at a high street firm but will probably lead to some head scratches at a big corporate firm. They’re related in that working in law requires certain skills and involves processes which will interest you, but “why commercial law” specifically speaks to why you’re interested in pursuing law at the corporate/commercial level.
Hi all,
I know this question was a little while back, but I thought I would just give my two cents:
I think the distinction is
very important. Although broadly they are related, I think it is very important that you tailor your "why law?" answer to the commercial world, rather than, for example, family law or even human rights/environmental law.
Personally I would also advise using it as a rhetorical device (i.e., challenging yourself by following up on your answer with, well why not X law?), might well be useful. It will mean that your justification for choosing to train at a commercial firm is sufficiently specific and precise.
Putting in time to prepare for being able to justify why
not X, in addition to just why X is also a very good idea. In one of my interviews, I was asked "why law?", and was then challenged when the Partner asked, well why not consulting? This nearly stumped me at the time.
I also found
this thread which might be a useful!