Recently joined a well-know T1 firm @ A0 ▮▮▮. One of the ▮Ps frequently comments on my WhatsApp status updates in a fairly casual manner. Sometimes I post political content, at times she agrees but occasionally gets into debates. Is it a good sign or a red flag? She is known to be very sociable in office.

Ambedkar>Gandhi + NehruPatel>Gandhi + Nehru

Bose>Gandhi + Nehru

Rajaji>Gandhi + Nehru

Tagore>Gandhi + Nehru

Gokhale>Gandhi + Nehru

SP Mukherjee>Gandhi + Nehru

And Raja Rammohan Roy probably greater than all the above combined.

Yet, ▮▮▮ gets to be Father of the Nation and have his face on all currency notes, while Edwina’s special friend gets every special institution named after him and his family members. 🙄

That’s very incorrect. They have a very specialised structured finance and debt capital markets practice. Lots of cross border work, private credit fund work and exposure to T1 international banking and finance teams. Several associates have transitioned to Singapore and London law firms after working with them.

In a statement, Labour for Trans Rights said: “The Supreme Court’s decision is hugely disappointing, and a result of ceaseless lobbying from a well-funded anti-trans network with links to the global far-Right.

“We will continue to fight against all attempts to strip trans people of their rights, and will use all levers within the Labour Party to make trans voices heard.

Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman has given her reaction to the ruling.

She says: “This is a deeply concerning ruling for human rights and a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in our society.

“It could remove important protections and will leave many trans people and their loved ones deeply anxious and worried about how their lives will be affected and about what will come next.

“Trans people just want to be able to live their lives like any of us, without the fear of prejudice or violence, but today they have been badly let down."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgq9ejql39t

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/16/supreme-court-rule-trans-women/

Obviously I'd do the same! Please stop being disingenuous. We all know this question is not asked in good faith - you yourself are envious because you couldn't do that, so please bugger off.

PS: And for a lawyer, you are remarkably cavalier with your terminology! Anyone with half a brain (and trust me, many British do not have half a brain, but even they!) would know that there is a difference between "trainee solicitor" and "associate"!

Not sure there is any T-1 Partner who will do this. But to answer your question - colonialism - living abroad seems far better than living in India for many upper-mid class Indians. All the great politicians, businessmen and philanthropists who preach about the virtues of India send their kids abroad for education.

They might ask you about the discrepency in your transcript dates when you submit your transcript with your application. Plus, you can't stop whoever is writing your reference letters from telling them (though I hope nobody would do something dickish like that) (and this assumes that a prof (or multiple profs, as the case may be, depending on how many references the uni you are applying to require) would be willing to put their names on the line for a student who had failed multiple undergraduate exams). If your failure was due to extenuating personal circumstances, you should explain these in your SoP and to your profs at your current uni, too.

Even if we leave aside the question of admission, especially considering the favourable policy of your university, there's still the question of actually doing the master's. Would personally advise against it in your case. If you are struggling academically at undergrad itself, you are likely to struggle even more at the postgraduate level, too. Common sense. Advanced modules, tougher academic load etc. And failing in the UK can have some real shit consequences for your life. They are not at all forgiving in their transcript issuing policies, so if you fail a module there, it will follow you around forever. Their unis tend to have a policy where they will allow you to resit a failed exam, but they will cap the marks in the module to the minimum pass mark of the university regulations - 50% in some places, perhaps 40% in some others. I have been to a UK uni myself, so I know this from reading their regulations. What that means is that even if you do well in the resit assessment, they will input your marks on your transcript as 50% (assuming, for the sake of argument, that that's the minimum pass mark of whichever uni you get into). Something like that will destroy your life forever, even if you do get admitted - have seen the consequences of such a thing in the case of a friend of mine.

Obviously, they won't react so harshly if you have extenuating circumstances (something like illness, death in the family etc). In such a case, they will make you take the exam at the next available opportunity and count it as a 'first sit' (i.e., they won't cap your marks to the minimum pass). But that could still make things hard for you because of visa time limits.

Just basing this on what I see. In general, it’s easier for women to get married in India than men, because of the historically skewed sex ratio in India. But I see so many women lawyers in their late 30s and early 40s who never married and will very likely be single lifelong. Many of these women are pretty successful, having reached partner and general counsel level, or having a good income from litigation. I wonder if the number of similar women in professions like IT, banking, medicine, etc are much lower?

If my assumption is right, then why is it so? Is it because guys don’t want to marry lawyers? Or because these girls are very picky?

Historically, the place where JGLS students have sex is behind the helipad, literally on the grass. Been happening for years and years, ever since the first batch. But the experience is totally yuk: you are lying naked on the grass and at risk of insect bites. And what if a dog shat or peed there??🤮

So it’s perfectly understandable if students want to have sex in a safe and hygienic place. It’s not just more convenient but also more responsible.

Those giving moral lectures really need to get a life. We are talking about consenting adults living in the 21st century. Both parents and the admin should promote safe sex: allow intimacy in hostels, sell condoms in the campus shop, have sexual health counselling etc..

Context: Harvard is a private university but also receives public funding. They refused to cancel DEI policies and crack down on pro-Palestine faculty and students as demanded by Trump.

But Trump’s beef is mainly with the humanities faculty, so STEM people can say it’s unfair to make them collateral damage.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/trump-escalates-harvard-row-threatens-to-tax-it-as-a-political-entity-8171568#pfrom=home-ndtv_topscroll

Hey everyone,

I am a first year student of 3 year llb, I want to go for corporate but as I am a first gen and having have chosen law as second option, I have no prior knowledge of law. Can folks of LI help me out.

1) I have done 1 corp internship (T3) but I don't know how get more internship. How can I get more corporate internship specifically in T1 or T2?

2) how can I improve my Corporate knowledge which I see people here have?

3) lastly, how can I secure job in T1 corporate firm?

Pls. Answer only if you want to help, don't troll.

Thankyou

https://www-barandbench-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.barandbench.com/amp/story/apprentice-lawyer/first-year-mnlu-nagpur-women-students-struggle-at-off-campus-hostel?amp_js_v=0.1&amp_gsa=1#webview=1&cap=swipe

There’s no need to say more

While the necessity to justify one's salary is a part of any law firm, a partner with a big book may just keep another with the firm, for servicing the clients, even if they do not bring in work. Although this set up usually means that the non-client-bringing partner is only good for the knowledge and skills they possess, which may be replaced by another resource.

Hey guys so I graduated in 2024. I was preparing for judiciary for about a year and now the sc is planning to impose the 3 year practice rule. So which means I gotta find a job. The thing is I have 0 connections. And I didn't intern much at law school. I'm from mumbai. What should I do?

You know as well as anyone that that's a disingenuous argument and a low blow. You have already achieved success in life, and been admitted to the judiciary. Do your job, a PhD at this stage ain't gonna help you all that much. Once you're done working in the judiciary, you can do a PhD if you like.

Certain health issues prevented me from giving my best in CLAT and SLAT.

I may get a tier 3 at best, and I currently have Symbi Nagpur in my hands. I was also considering NMIMS through their entrance test.

How good is the college for law? Any idea about their placements and the college life in general?

I’m curious about this as well, especially given the completely different team and setup. What’s the pay scale like? Is the culture similar to the Delhi office, or more of a mix between Trilegal and CAM, considering the two partners who moved are ex-Tri and ex-CAM? How are the partners and senior associates to work with? Is the work environment healthy, or does it lean toxic?

I want to share my experience working at a so-called pan India law firm with ▮▮▮ offices. I joined one of the branches with high expectations, despite a modest salary hike, as I was promised a review in three months. However, after waiting seven months, I received only a 10% increase.

Things took a turn when I was transferred to another city as "in-charge," but with a salary on par with a Tier 3 firm. My responsibilities quickly grew to include billing, client acquisition, liaising with police stations, and working with local advocates – far beyond my original role.

The partners were unfortunately of little help. They lacked legal knowledge, provided no guidance, and were disconnected from the day-to-day work. Instead of focusing on firm growth, I was under constant pressure to secure clients, go to different police stations, and liaise with them to handle bail matters. I was regularly humiliated in calls, with accusations that I wasn’t doing enough.

On top of this, the partners would often make personal and sexually colored remarks, brushing them off as "jokes." Further, when I asked for the partners to visit our branch, I was told to arrange client meetings myself, with no further support. The firm also had a habit of delaying salaries, withholding expenses, and stalling reimbursements for months.

After enduring this for over 2.5 years, I resigned, even though I had no job lined up. I’ve been interviewing since but haven’t yet found a firm that feels like a better fit.

My advice to anyone considering joining a firm like this: Please, do your due diligence. Conduct proper background checks, speak with former employees, and understand the culture before you commit. These firms are like leeches – they will suck your blood and leave you with nothing.