Open-book exams are not supposed to be easy if set by qualified and competent faculty. Some of the most difficult exams that I have undertaken in law school (both in India and abroad) have been open-book. However, I have never seen any paper from JGLS, so I do not know about the quality of those exams.

What is wrong with you? Katju and Kabir were a disgrace. Krishna Iyer: Awful writing and propagating his rotten communist ideology everywhere. Also made this atrocious and regressive observation:

“It may be marginally extenuatory to mention that modern Indian conditions are drifting into societal permissiveness on the carnal front promoting proneness to pornos in life, what wit libidinous 'brahmacharis', womanising public men, lascivious dating and mating by unwed students, sex explosion in celluloid and book stalls and corrupt morals reaching a new 'high' in high places.”

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/419325/

A generation of Malayali and left-wing NLU law professors glorified this guy, letting parochialism and ideology get the better of them. There were far superior judges from other states who did not receive the same attention.

Best judge: Vivian Bose. Absolute class act. Rest aren’t even 1% of him.

https://www.barandbench.com/amp/story/columns/why-cant-a-judge-also-be-a-rockstar-a-study-of-the-interesting-life-of-justice-vivian-bose

That is not the most consistent factor. QS keeps varying internationally also between Oxford or Cambridge. In the U.S. market, it remains a constant debate between Harvard and Yale. Let us, to be charitable, take OP's argument at face value to the extent of allowing that NLSIU is no. 1, and QS has gotten it wrong (because they have, frankly).

NALSAR and NUJS get students placed almost at the same places. Not sure why the latter is called only law firm centric. Most of the policy bodies in the country have got plenty of NUJS alumni (like others) and NUJS alumni certainly number the most in Indian legal academia today (considering those who are teaching or researching law in India).

I am a female non-equity Partner in a T1 law firm’s ▮▮▮ office - ▮▮▮ ▮▮▮ team. I am in a serious, now 2-year strong, relationship with a male PA, working in another team that primarily does ▮▮▮. We have not disclosed our relationship to anyone in the firm other than a few very close friends. We don’t plan on getting married any time soon and don’t want this to affect our work in any manner. My question is, while there is no express policy in our firm on this, is it advisable to disclose our relationship? Will it affect our career now or in the future as we become equity partners?

I know many many senior partners across various firms are rumored to be seeing each other (consensually), either extra-marital or after divorces. They coordinate BD trips, foreign travel, find excuses to send their spouses and children away from them - maybe even overseas, but these are easily seen through. Is this sort of thing normal? If foreign law firms or clients catch wind of this, will it be frowned upon? I know many high profile CEOs in the US have had to resign for undisclosed relationships but do such instances cover consensual relationships among peers/ partners also?

Grateful for your thoughts!

Jindal/Ashoka, I do not understand at all. But abroad, I sort of do. They see NLSIU as a stepping stone to make their lives better. So if they got educated at NLSIU, their kids must get educated in a good British or American university. At the end of the day, for such people, the abroad brand is more established (on a global scale), like it or not. This mentality is perfectly put by a quite driven and obssessed-with-success kind of kid I once met at a Mumbai international school. This chap wanted to move to UK to work in investment banking and was a bit starry-eyed about their elite schools, because the books he was reading in English literature class that were set by his exam board tended to romanticize that kind of education. This kid once said quite confidently, 'If I am being educated at [that Mumbai international school], my own child should be educated at Eton or Harrow'. Same thing.

Until we can get most alumni of NLU-type universities to see NLSIU kind of places the way the Eton/Harrow families or the American elite rich view Oxford or Cambridge, or Harvard or Yale or Georgetown, respectively, little progress can be made in this age of government funding for universities being so tight.

This depends on the company, but if you're doing a routine contracting role, it's often easier to transfer someone from, say, the India office, than to hire someone afresh.

I know at least 30 in house lawyers who have been transferred to foreign offices of their employer. But PQE~1 is unlikely, you'd need 2-3 more years, at the absolute minimum.

Here's a tip: everyone and their uncle wants these roles. One of the most reliable ways to get them is to just ask. If everyone is equally good at their work, the one who has actively expressed their interest is likely to be remembered when it comes to choosing someone.

Unlikely. In-house is a varied game of chance, and unless you have killer credentials (top tier ranked law school + demonstrable experience of managing outside counsel teams), this move is difficult. I was an SA at a tier 1 practice before applying in-house to a foreign client that I worked for for multiple years -- and still lost out to a law firm partner who wished to take a role lower in designation but one that allowed a foreign shift. Just using this example to show that these positions are hotly contested, so be prepared to spend close to a decade here or rise up and work in a tier 1 practice to enable yourself to be fairly considered for such opportunities. Best of luck

Genuine question. I've seen talk here about moving laterally to a foreign law firm / moving abroad for an in-house role, but how common is that route? Wouldn't you have to qualify in the foreign country as well and is that route generally even considered in foreign law firms / in-house?

I'm a Christite, and the placements are decent but only limited to top 10 to 20 of the batch rest of the people are securing a job through ppos through their own hard work and merit. A lot of my seniors have told me to never depend of college for placements and do your work diligently through connections or through merit

Obviously it's China.

Their economy is way bigger than ours so there's a lot more demand correspondingly.

Just Google biggest law firms in Asia and see how many Chinese law firms are on that list and how many Indian firms are there.

Some Chinese firms have 1000+ partners.

The biggest indian law firms barely have a total headcount of 1000 lol