TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2021-22 (#1)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lastseasonwonder

Legendary Member
Premium Member
Dec 21, 2019
642
432
Hey all,

I wasn't sure where to post this Q so I thought I would here. The following is a WG inferences style question, and it is bothering me indeed - usually I agree with the answer when I am wrong, read the reasoning (if provided) and understood that reasoning. The question:

Passage: 'A psychologist was approached by an alarmed mother who complained that her daughter had been bullied when a child threw a fist-full of leaves in her face. Asked if her daughter was upset, the mother answered: "No, she just brushed the leaves off and told me they were having fun". The psychologist emphasised the need to draw a distinction between behaviour that is harmless, behaviour that is rude, and behaviour that is characteristic of bullying, and concluded this was not a case of bullying.'

Inference: The mother and the daughter interpreted the same incident in different ways.

I want to see what you guys think: (1) true (2) probably true (3) insufficient data (4) probably false (5) false
 

OB

Legendary Member
2020 Community Winner
Junior Lawyer
  • Feb 10, 2020
    802
    2,395
    Hey all,

    I wasn't sure where to post this Q so I thought I would here. The following is a WG inferences style question, and it is bothering me indeed - usually I agree with the answer when I am wrong, read the reasoning (if provided) and understood that reasoning. The question:

    Passage: 'A psychologist was approached by an alarmed mother who complained that her daughter had been bullied when a child threw a fist-full of leaves in her face. Asked if her daughter was upset, the mother answered: "No, she just brushed the leaves off and told me they were having fun". The psychologist emphasised the need to draw a distinction between behaviour that is harmless, behaviour that is rude, and behaviour that is characteristic of bullying, and concluded this was not a case of bullying.'

    Inference: The mother and the daughter interpreted the same incident in different ways.

    I want to see what you guys think: (1) true (2) probably true (3) insufficient data (4) probably false (5) false
    Probably true? We don’t know for certain that the child wasn’t just trying to make her mum feel better about it so not definitely true?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Lastseasonwonder

    MizM

    Star Member
    Nov 8, 2020
    39
    166
    Hey all,

    I wasn't sure where to post this Q so I thought I would here. The following is a WG inferences style question, and it is bothering me indeed - usually I agree with the answer when I am wrong, read the reasoning (if provided) and understood that reasoning. The question:

    Passage: 'A psychologist was approached by an alarmed mother who complained that her daughter had been bullied when a child threw a fist-full of leaves in her face. Asked if her daughter was upset, the mother answered: "No, she just brushed the leaves off and told me they were having fun". The psychologist emphasised the need to draw a distinction between behaviour that is harmless, behaviour that is rude, and behaviour that is characteristic of bullying, and concluded this was not a case of bullying.'

    Inference: The mother and the daughter interpreted the same incident in different ways.

    I want to see what you guys think: (1) true (2) probably true (3) insufficient data (4) probably false (5) false
    Very interesting. I am torn between probably true and insufficient data. At first I am tempted to go for probably true because the mother said the daughter was fine with it. But we do not actually know the daughter's true interpretation of the incident, only what she told the mother. Therefore, I would go for insufficient data.
     
    Reactions: John Travoni

    hopefullawyer101

    Legendary Member
    Feb 25, 2021
    125
    198
    Personally, if you have any indication on the subject matter, I would try and find reports of deals on the FT or similar legal/financial news outlets and see if it talks about the challenges faced by the deal and try to put things in a commercial context, since imho a case study is probably about 40% knowledge 60% commercial sense. If you don't know what the case study will be on you can look at things like m&as or contracts - m&as, financing, etc, you can actually get a good idea of the issues they would want you to be picking out and covering by seeing what terms are involved in standard/precedent contracts (e.g. what exactly do the indemnities cover - warranties relating to what? Etc.)
    Do you have any recommendation of where to look for legal detail. FT is obviously good for overview!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BeGrateful.101

    Kablahc

    Legendary Member
    Future Trainee
    Forum Winner
  • Aug 31, 2020
    242
    829
    Do you have any recommendation of where to look for legal detail. FT is obviously good for overview!
    The Lawyer/Law360 if you have a subscription - these are also lots of other free sites you might be able to find on Google that would cover this stuff. Also never discount the usefulness of law firm websites and law firm self published resources e.g. A&O publishing a news article on a deal one of its teams did! Also investopedia might have details if the deal concerns a specific financial thing and was very impactful on the industry.

    As for contracts just Google 'sample M&A financing contract template' or similar and a whole bunch should come up!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Jaysen

    OB

    Legendary Member
    2020 Community Winner
    Junior Lawyer
  • Feb 10, 2020
    802
    2,395
    Mine came through on friday! Was it really delayed for you? I got my email on friday at 4.54pm, and my portal only updated at that time, but it says I got rejected on 5 october?
    I just logged in and it says I was rejected on the 6th, even though my email came through last night at about 6pm. Even though I'm pretty sure the portal didn't actually say rejected then as I was periodically checking it. Very odd!
     
    • Like
    • 🤝
    Reactions: M777 and John Travoni
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    About Us

    The Corporate Law Academy (TCLA) was founded in 2018 because we wanted to improve the legal journey. We wanted more transparency and better training. We wanted to form a community of aspiring lawyers who care about becoming the best version of themselves.

    Newsletter

    Discover the most relevant business news, access our law firm analysis, and receive our best advice for aspiring lawyers.