We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
one week hopefully last week of december - again during court vacation
We're a B2B SaaS company based in London, around 28 employees, profitable, and planning to raise our first institutional round sometime early next year.
Over the last few weeks we've spoken to a few law firms and company formation consultants. Almost everyone recommends a different structure.
One firm is pushing ADGM because investors supposedly prefer English Common Law.
Another says DIFC is the obvious choice.
A third keeps insisting DMCC is enough unless we're a fintech.
Honestly, it's becoming difficult to separate genuine advice from what's simply easier for them to sell.
A few questions I'm hoping someone with recent experience can answer:
- Did you flip the parent company before fundraising or afterwards?
- Was opening the UAE bank account more difficult than incorporation itself?
- After ESR was removed, what has actually changed from a compliance perspective?
- Are investors genuinely asking for ADGM/DIFC or is that mostly consultant marketing?
- Looking back, would you choose the same jurisdiction again?
We'd rather spend more upfront if it avoids problems later with investors, banking or governance.
Would really appreciate hearing from founders, lawyers or anyone who's completed this during the last year or two.
Politicians preferring to be the CMs in their states, rather than being a Union minister.
Bureaucrats (IAS officers) preferring to become Chief Secretaries in the cadre states, rather than becoming a Secretary in a Central Ministry.
Also, remember that NLU, as a Team India analogy, is incorrect because NLUs are state universities. They don't represent India.
Moreover, isn’t it LI policy not to name people?
1. DO NOT do a PhD if you have no interest in academia. If you do not want to be a professor. If you do not want to teach. If you do not want admin work. Do not do a PhD. A PhD is only for academia.
2. "I love research" so a LLB will suffice. A PhD is not just about research, you'll be made to teach and do admin work as well. If you love research join a think tank or research centre. A LLB and LLM is more than enough. You need more publications and not more degrees.
3. If you think a PhD will get you more money or prestige, no it won't. Better to work at a law firm and you'll be earning more than what a PhD scholar and later on gets.
4. Some people are giving competitive exams and are afraid of not having a plan B, so they choose a PhD. They end up committing to neither. Better to litigate instead. A PhD is 3-5 years. 5 years of court experience is a million times better as a plan B than 5 years researching a single topic with minimum wage or none at all.
5. If after all of this you still feel a PhD is something you want to do, there are only 3 options. 1. Abroad. 2. Top 5 NLUs (nothing below that) 3. IITs/IIMs (you can easily do a socio-legal research, a corporate research or even tech research there).
6. Do NOT do a PhD from a private University. Doesn't matter if it's Jindal, symbiosis, Nirma, Bennett, UPES, christ, MAHE etc. A Private university is the last place to do a PhD from. Yes some may provide stipend, some may provide concession, but all of those are smokes and mirrors. They will make you do TA duties for 6-8 hours a day. They will treat you like a slave. They will literally pass your PhD in a mediocre manner just to increase their numbers for NAAC and NIRF. Once you graduate you will find yourself unemployed. Why ? Because "private University PhDs are brought with money." That's what I've heard everywhere.
7. Recap. Do not do a PhD to waste time. It's not a plan B. Instead be brave and litigate for those 5 years. Do NOT do a PhD as another degree. Do NOT do a PhD if you don't want to teach and do admin work. Do NOT do a PhD if you don't care about your students and give them mediocre learning. Do NOT do a PhD from private universities, no matter the brand. Do NOT do a PhD from a private universities just cause of stipend, you're selling your reputation for peanuts.
All the best. Love from an Assistant Professor who's seeing mindless, clueless and time wasters increase in Phd programmes.
This link on reddit might help. I have on epf my answers there.
A: Legally India.
Usually, it is limited to your CV, so be thorough with that. All the best.
Rohatgi never made that statement to mock Siddharth Dave but to prove himself. Dave made an observation about Rohatgi's spent energy in just two matters, and this is when Rohatgi counters, saying that I am used to doing 15 cases, not 2. The last bit of the statement regarding 2 hearings was never intended towards Dave. However, Dave also ended up clarifying that 'I am also used to doing 15 matters' - which is a true fact. So, in my view, nothing more than two seniors trying to get the upper hand over each other without mocking each other.
It is for this very reason that many of our brightest minds either move abroad or gravitate towards transactional practice. Even the transactions space is mostly led by Nepos, although comparatively receptive to capability and talent.
The litigation landscape in Delhi and the Supreme Court is rife with nepotism, patronage and mandates that circulate within close-knit, elite circles.
The exceptions simply make the rule.
MG, AK, GSanks, KN, ST and DK are some of the biggest beneficiaries of the status quo, and I worry because we take the likes of KN and GSanks more seriously than we ought to. I can back this claim with receipts.
More seriously - if you're interested in research and policy, then an LLM is definitely a good investment. Suggest that you get 2-3 years work experience and then go for it. A postgrad qualification from a good university will open doors to places like Meta/Google/Mozilla etc who have previously hired policy and legal officers from India
Newslaundry - https://youtu.be/2W4qzys526Q
Let’s have this discussion.
A retaliatory military campaign aimed at dismantling Hamas and hunting down those responsible for October 7 is not, in itself, genocide. Words have meanings, and genocide has a legal definition…not one that changes with the political temperature of the day. To make that charge credibly, you’d need compelling evidence that genocidal acts are inseparable from official state policy and intent…not a collage of inflammatory soundbites from politicians or the inevitable cranks every democracy seems to produce.
Yes, Israel has its share of right-wing zealots. Some have suffered unimaginable personal loss and have responded with reprehensible rhetoric. Condemn them by all means. But confusing loose, ugly rhetoric with binding state policy is either intellectually sloppy or deliberately dishonest.
The more absurd spectacle is the lazy comparison with Nazi Germany. It is historically illiterate, morally disproportionate, and analytically bankrupt. Comparing a democracy fighting a war..however imperfectly..to a regime that industrialized extermination is not serious analysis; it’s political theatre masquerading as moral clarity.
And if the threshold for accusing Israel of genocide is the deliberate targeting of civilians combined with rhetoric about destroying an enemy, then intellectual consistency demands the same scrutiny of Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which have openly embraced the destruction of Israel and deliberately targeted civilians. Principles are only principles if they apply universally. Otherwise, they’re just politics dressed up as morality.
Niti Dixit - S&R Manmeet Singh / Amita Gupta Katragadda / Soumya Dasgupta - CAM
VPS - AZB
Shankh / Tine - Trilegal
Just keep looking, you will find open minded folks willing to absorb this switch and whatever presumed disadvantages may come with it.
The work culture/ seniors in most places are outright toxic, its fine if you reached your breaking point, at least you are resilient enough to still be looking for another job. And its okay to learn from your experiences. The recruiters like to pretend like these factors dont exist in the job market but they very much do.
Life is all about trial and error. So it’s fine, don’t let them get to you.