No they don't. It's a different court structure and a different business model.

It's like owning a coffee shop where you have to sell 500 cups of coffee a day to make a profit on the volume, versus a fancy restaurant where you can serve 50 meals at higher prices and make a profit. Almost all lawyers in India (law firms, seniors, etc) run a volume business, even though the fees for individual hearings by seniors can be very high.

Top UK lawyers (The USA has a totally different model, let's not get into that) don't run a volume business - it's closer to the fancy restaurant.

It's not better or worse - just different, and depends on what you want to achieve. Also about 10% of UK barristers are KCs (seniors), whereas less than 1% of Indian advocates are (it's not a perfect comparison because Indian advocates includes lawyers who do the solicitors jobs as well, but the point there are are fewer senior advocates compared to UK KCs is valid).

Also UK courts handle far fewer cases, and there is no high-stakes admissions matters at high volume but low time requirement, so the need for that skill is non existent.

Basically if you want someone who can go in depth and know the law and your case very well and argue it, you'd wwant a UK lawyer. If you want someone with vast advocacy experience who is very quick on his feet and good at persuading judges in short hearings (especially Indian judges) and doesn't need to know the details well, you probably want an Indian senior.

Update: Sanjay Basu has now written an article slamming the TMC and accusing it of following a "pisi-bhaipo model of leadership". He has also called Suvendu Adhikary a "capable leader" who was sidelined by the TMC.

Just take a deep breath and digest that.

https://newseisamay.com/opinion/the-party-that-mistook-power-for-ideology

Don't we all know about this client and how no associate wants to do the work because it is a waste of time and completely mind numbing work. How associates who were hired to do this client's work have left saying they rather work in a tier 2 firm than do such degrading work. How 'massive' is a big overstatement as the revenue from this client would not make even 10% of a SP's target.

Partners are booking cabs from firm with double the amount to be picked up from the houses and be dropped to the court and then dropped back home!

Associates are picking up bags from office and paying for cabs and going to the office and buying water bottles for the partners to drink and then paying office boys 5000 to do the filing!

A joke?

Hi Folks, wanted a quick opinion from you all on a career choice I'm about to make. Two offers in place, one in an Fintech Inhouse(Associate) & another in a Law firm(Disputes Practice) as an assessment Intern. Considering the two options, as my long term vision is to get back to a law firm in a TMT, Fintech and gen corp practice, should I go ahead with the In-house role? As the disputes stream gives me a fear of switching towards corporate advisory would be difficult 2 years from now.

What would you choose considering BO'26 hiring is completed and I have only limited opportunities and good Fintech exposure, any updates about law firm hiring also will be much appreciated.

I worked under the partner referred to in the post. Based on my own experience, the conduct described in the post is consistent with behaviour that I personally witnessed.

On one occasion, I heard the partner refer to one of the firm’s practice area heads as “▮▮▮ ▮▮▮.” This remark was made in a professional setting and struck me as disrespectful and inappropriate.

On another occasion, the partner instructed a legal trainee to remove and discard my nameplate from my desk out of frustration. I subsequently became aware of this instruction and found it to be unprofessional.

I also witnessed the partner make remarks concerning a client’s gender or sexuality, stating that he did not know whether the individual was “he or she.” In my view, the comment was inappropriate and inconsistent with the standards of professionalism expected in the workplace.

These incidents are based on my personal observations. You may make an anonymous complaint, but based on my experience, I would not expect much to come out of it unless multiple people come forward.

Look, I don't think it's appropriate workplace behaviour to ridicule people. But at the end of the day, unless he is doing anything to you personally, for the sake your own job and career progression, it might be advisable for you to just focus on your work and let the persons who are directly being demeaned take up the matter via the appropriate channel. Because otherwise you will end up ruining your equation with a Partner and in law firms everything hinges on that.

Might be an unpopular opinion but worth considering.

If you are ever around mishraji and VC at the same time, you will understand. Mishraji is like that protocol officer who is clearing up the way for IAS sahab. Like you know when a politician comes, every chunu munu is surrounding them and creating a god like figure out of them- that’s exactly how it is for Raj. That’s what I meant.

Im curious about the life at firms like tuli, Solaris etc which deal with insurance practice especially in the disputes/litigation teams. What is the day to day like, what kind of matters are they dealing with, what are the pay scales like for A1 roles?

Coming from an in-house role I'm more exposed to MACT, Consumer, Ombudsman etc. How to go around this in the interviews?

I was literally you, a few years ago, interning at all the places, mailing 100 tier 1 partners a day. Please understand you are too young (or thats what they think you are), to intern at these places right now. It would be beneficial you wait until the fourth year to intern at corporate law firm/ litigation places, depending on your interest, Focus only on your academics and try being in the top 5 ranks always, that ALWAYS is the final criteria for hiring everywhere

Hi, if you have worked on international transaction have 3-5 years of pqe under your belt, you can strongly consider Singapore/ Japan. lot of international firms have their indian desks in SG, who look for indian cap max lawyers who have experience in international transactions. i am sure you would find lots n lots of cap max lawyers who are now working for international firms globally on linkedin.

Haha. I think it’s DLS himself or his Hr team who’s writing this. You need to be exposed for sure for the way you behave with people.

I was an intern in his office. First of all, there were 5-6 assessment interns hired by the firm and all of the people including me were graduates. They were not paying anyone at all and on top of that, ▮▮▮

So GC does the best. Then EWS (who are mostly GC) and OBC are almost tied. Then comes SC/ST. One thing that isn't clear is the split between private sector and PSU jobs. In the latter case, there could be job reservation.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CATpreparation/comments/1unvvki/uncensored_placement_by_category_at_iim_l/