do yall have no sense of history? clat only started in 2008. before that students who came into nlus were mostly wealthy connected well schooled children of rich and influential people. of course their accent and diction was more "polished". that does not mean they were better lawyers. none of this is surprising.

Moving forward, English will become secondary. The field of law is getting disrupted by the rapid adoption of science and technology. Delivery of justice will depend on inputs from science and technology. Once an act is proven scientifically, lawyers can argue in any language, with any accent and diction. We are moving towards an era of forensic justice.

Therefore, the next generation will not be the ones who speak/argue well, but the ones who embrace science and tech and know how to leverage them.

If money is no issue....LSE for sure. Do really well there - make sure you get a TC at a top Magic Circle/ US firm in London. Try to then qualify in a Disputes/ Arbitration team where you practice for 2-3 years after which you return to India and directly join a top seniors chambers. I know this is all a big IF and contingent on you doing well at LSE, but if you are successful - with credentials like this, and the fact that money is not an issue - coming back directly to a top senior's chambers will not be an issue.

Another reason why the TC is also brilliant is because you may seem to think you are sure you want to litigate, but you will get an option to try out other practice areas as well (such as mainstream corp, banking, anti-trust, etc.) - and you may realise you enjoy that more and decide you want to do that instead long term.

Sorry to break it to you, but they were never coming. I work with a London MC and way back when the BCI first announced "liberalisation" with its vague amendments, most firms took a call to not setup a dedicated office in India because there was simply no commercial incentive to do so. In any case we cannot compete with Indian rates that go at pennies to the pound.

IB and strategy consulting have far too many variables. In an MBA, you're a sum total of your profile in the sense that you compete with people who have experience, people who have a different undergrad and people who have completely different skills. In a law firm, you're competing with people who are only from law school. So, atleast you know what it takes and what profile they look for.

As a senior associate in Trilegal, let me tell you one thing - this very presumed 15% YOY doesn’t happen. It varies on your performance and also the performance of your team - you can very well just get a lakh in increment. I have seen kids who were great as interns, leave (or forced to leave) within a year of joining due to lack of performance. So why don’t you tone down the sass and be humble and pray to god your career doesn’t end up like that. Feel free to take a dig at me if that helps you sleep at night.

The ED had gone to the High Court, alleging that Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had walked out with a laptop, phone and multiple documents from the house of Pratik Jain, the chief of I-PAC and their offices, during raids by the Enforcement Directorate.

The Trinamool Congress filed a counter-petition, alleging that the central agency has seized documents on the party's strategy and ideology -- a claim the ED has denied.

"The ED is bullying. They have stormed. They have searched," TMC Counsel Menaka Guruswamy told the single-judge bench of Justice Suvra Ghosh today, to which ED counsel SV Raju said, "No need for drama".

"We are not on caveat. We are not party in the SC case... In this matter, I want to make three points. One -- we are not party in the Supreme Court. Two -- data belonging to a political party was searched. We want our political data saved. Political data forms political ideology. Political jurisprudence is under question today. Three -- We respectfully request our political data be returned," Guruswamy said.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/trinamool-probe-agency-petitions-over-i-pac-dismissed-over-to-top-court-10748834

Rare example of a senior counsel invoking jurisprudential theories in court. The term “political jurisprudence” is used by modern legal theorists and means as as follows:

Political jurisprudence is a field of legal theory that views law as inseparable from politics, analyzing how governmental authority is formed and maintained, and understanding legal decisions as part of a political process where judges act as political actors influenced by societal forces to institutionalize political preferences

. It examines the fundamental relationship between law and the political (the way authority is imagined and established) rather than just politics (day-to-day governance), focusing on concepts like the State, sovereignty, and freedom, often tracing its roots to thinkers like Hobbes, Rousseau, and Schmitt.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/6A485F44A1B9DBB95B2A92FA8AAE39E3/S2071832223000445a.pdf/the-political-jurisprudence-of-paul-w-kahn.pdf

Cerebral arguments by a cerebral lawyer. ♥️ The bar benefits by having NLSIU-Oxford toppers and hopefully this is the future direction of advocacy in India. 👌

What you are doing right now—pausing, observing patterns, and trusting your discomfort—is not overthinking. It is professional judgment developing in real time.

A few points that may help you frame this:

1. Context matters, but patterns matter more.
In law firms, weekend calls, informal check-ins, or social invitations can exist on a wide spectrum—from genuinely work-related to clearly inappropriate. Any single incident can often be explained away. When multiple anecdotes from unrelated sources point in the same direction, it is reasonable to treat that as data, not gossip.
2. Discomfort is not an accusation.
You are not required to label someone’s conduct as misconduct to decide it is not a work environment you want. Many juniors struggle because they believe they must prove wrongdoing to justify discomfort. You don’t. Professional boundaries are allowed to be personal boundaries.
3. Yes, the profession has normalized boundary-blurring—especially around powerful individuals.
This is changing, but unevenly. Historically, success and seniority have often insulated people from scrutiny. That does not make the behaviour acceptable; it only explains why it persists. Being aware of this dynamic early is an advantage, not cynicism.
4. Background research should absolutely go beyond reputation and deal lists.
Culture is learned informally—through alumni, former interns, junior associates who’ve left quietly, and patterns of attrition. None of this requires mudslinging. You are simply assessing risk, the same way firms assess candidates.
5. You don’t need to “wait for proof.”
Early career moves are not court judgments. If something feels off and the firm does not offer strong institutional safeguards (clear HR processes, multiple reporting channels, visible accountability), it is rational to reconsider long-term plans.
6. One internship does not define your career trajectory.
Making a switch early because you listened to your instincts is far less damaging than staying somewhere that teaches you to suppress them.

Finally, a practical note: keep interactions professional, documented, and within work channels. Not because you expect trouble—but because clarity protects everyone.

You’re asking the right questions at the right stage. That, in itself, suggests you’ll build a career intentionally rather than by inertia.

Wishing you clarity and confidence as you decide.

People or lawyers who have swtiched from law firms to in-house, what was your pay, at what PQE did you make the switch, how is life after switching. I know pay parity will be there as compared to law firm salaries, but is it worth switching after 2 year of t1 law, will the pay

Neither GC nor Infra space is rocket science. People who crib about costs and output in projects, never have negotiated a a 25 year LNG contract or a long term green ammonia contract or say a project development suite of contracts, all of which, individually, pay more than a run of the mill M&A transaction. Each practice does come with its own set of issues and nuances. But people saying that Project lawyers are only good at diligence, seem to know neither projects nor diligence. Somebody who has been doing regulatory litigation diligence pieces will take a dump and wipe his ass twice with the corporate chapter - CCDs, NCDs, Equity Instruments, terms, coupon, redemption, previous issuances and sale. Close your eyes and throw a pebble in Lower Parel, you will hit a GC/M&A so called specialist lawyer, who will look at the transaction advisor and the tax advisor to decide if your acquisition will have locked box structure and copy the same set of representation or warranty and the process for third party claims. My advice would be not to transition, M&A lawyers are dime a dozen. Rather do better in projects, you can always get a pompous self important prickly M&A lackey to do your documentation and act like a client's manservant,

Hey, could you suggest what teams in a law firms are best suited and are more open for taking lawyers with in-house experience in MNCs.

Somebody suggest me to apply to openings in the general corporate team. But I was Wondering if there are any others which can be well suited.

Yes I'm speaking from experience. Your T1 experience in most cases does not transfer. Even SAs and PAs start again as freshers. There are other pathways too, like developing a niche skillset (privacy, fintech, crypto, legal tech working with big names) and interviewing. But this is as hard if not harder than doing a degree and recruiting. Anyway whether US or UK for law jobs there is no direct way to find a vacancy unless you have inside information. You need to network like your life depended on it and know there is no guarantee your efforts will pay off.

-> UK's economy has been struggling so there are less jobs, and a lot of competition from students all over the world to do 4 year traineeship and be paralegals.

-> US has the jobs and the economy but there are too many barriers to entry.

If you're looking for a way out an MBA has plenty of finance, M&A and strategy options but this also comes with a grind as the market is very competitive. But at least you can find people willing to interview.

Here are real numbers FWIW:

- I get £10.9k in-hand (8pqe, magic circle).
- Spouse earns £2k (unless your spouse is also a lawyer/tech professional, in my experience it is difficult to find high paying roles in most other industries in the UK).

Main outgoings:

- £2.4k rent

- £2k child school (includes fees and afterschool club (i.e. childcare from 3-6pm))

- £1k in non-discretionary costs (council tax, gorceries, utilities)

- £400 for house help (once/week cook + cleaner)

- £800 for the car (EMI, insurance, fuel, parking)

- £1-1.5k in discretionary spending

- £1k for travel (normalised and covers annual holidays, weekend getaways + trip to India)

How to make lasting amd meaningful connections in an internship especially with the associates.

Interning at this chamber where they're all sweet and extremely helpful but i feel like approaching or talking about anything other than the allotted work would be overstepping and I don't wanna pester them, however would love to make meaningful and lasting connections.

Simply because no judge or minister is involved in the entry of foreign law firms, it's all in the hands of the BCI. Corporate attorneys are relevant to nobody except the cigarette vendors below their buildings, so there is no power concentration. Law firm EPs/MPs have less clout in the echelons of power than the average office boy. Money will perhaps sway the lobby guard at the Camellias but no one else.

I'll be honest, you will most definitely face consequences if you are going against even a potential candidate (regardless if they are independent or party supported) who's contesting elections. Your best bet would be to anonymously send that info to his opposition or secret enemies, if he has any.

GDP fudged; skilled graduates migrating anywhere and everywhere; only 38% recruitment at IITs; falling foreign investment; licence raj; outdated labour laws...

https://x.com/TheDeshBhakt/status/2010963337635643704/photo/1