Everyone has lots of opinions on good teaching until they teach. What is the incentive for someone who can earn a corporate salary to come and teach for peanuts and disrespect at an Indian law school? It's not as if law firm partners value teaching at a high ranked school the way UK or US partners do. The alternative is practitioners who frequently neither know theory well nor how to teach. They certainly don't know how to tailor a class to different capacities and goals.

So yes good teachers do use examples to get their point through. But they cannot also make cocktails and be trapeze artists. They do what they do. A smart student learns it and then uses it later while being taught more applied law.

That's the point. Everyone here who is arguing that application based law can only be taught outside the university needs to understand that most of the courses in law can be taught in classroom blending and connecting theories with real life applications. That's what good teachers are supposed to do. It also gets students involved in the subjects more easily and helps them retain the understanding and knowledge.

Other people have spoken re. the difficulties of your argument around 'practical law'. Also, you should know that there is an argument to say that the NLS administration's views on some of these extracurricular activities aren't entirely wrong.

On negotiation competitions, I'd massively disagree with them. They can be dead useful.

However, regarding journals, this is a rediculous thing we have imported from American legal culture. Student law reviews aren't producing anything earth-shaking. You aren't, by submitting your work to them, going through the sort of peer review that you'd be going through if you were submitting to a Current Legal Problems, a Law Quarterly Review, a Cambridge Law Journal or an Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. You wouldn't be producing anything groundbreaking because... well... you are an undergraduate law student, and the overwhelming majority of undergraduate law students (in all countries) aren't the next Granville Austin, Sir Arthur Goodhart, A.V. Dicey or Sir Ivor Jennings. And you know what? It's not just your VC who believes this to be true. One of your most well-known alums, Tarunab Khaitan, has also criticized this business of student law journals heavily when interviewed by LAOT - look it up. His advice on what you could do instead would, in my view, be much more helpful, than if you ran after these things (after all, look where he is in his career right now!).

Hi, I'm a final year student from a Tier 1.5 NLU. I have an avid interest in litigation and wish to practice in Delhi. Are there any tips from other seniors here, who have pursued a similar course of action? I plan on joining the chamber of a senior counsel for 1-2 years, would that be optimal? Please suggest tips and possible avenues, as our admin/placement cell is quite useless for litigation...

Hi guys, so I have family in the US who can sponsor work visas for me well as many times as I want until it gets accepted, I just wanted to know if there are any LLM's which you can get 100% scholarship with good grades from a decent university.

idm a LLM from a lower rank University in the US as well but it needs to be fully funded scholarship, do smaller UNI's provide that as My grades and CV will not get me that in the top Uni's and I cannot afford the high fee.

It shows that you have absolutely no idea of this subfield and that you dont even know what eugenics means. Eugenics refers to using observations (often racist) to “improve” the quality of life of a person.

What you’re looking for is “scientific racism”. You should have read my sources. Pubmed, science. Genetic studies helps to identify risk factors for groups of people, for eg Dawoodi Bohras have unique cancer mutation on one of their snps.

Genes help us to understand where did out ancestors came from. They also, very clearly show that because of 2000+ year of endogamy , most indian groups have become distinct genetically. So pretty please tell me wheres racism here.

Or is the lawyer brain so argumentative that you’ll defend your bad take till the end of time? [i too am a lawyer].

Open your horizons apart from law. Read the Reich book that I posted above .

1. They're smarter than Gen X/Gen Y because of more access to information (Agree/Disagree)

2. They're more liberal and tolerant than Gen X/Gen Y because the world has evolved (Agree/Disagree)

3. They're more focused and hard working than Gen X/Gen Y because of more competition and career awareness (Agree/Disagree)

4. They're more fashionable than Gen X/Gen Y because of social media awareness (Agree/Disagree)

5. They're just the same as Gen X/Gen Y in every way (Agree/Disagree)

Request law profs to take this poll only!

Nothing to be confused about, allow me to clarify. The resolution passed by the Collegium clearly states "average net professional income of Rs. 709.69 lakhs for the last five years....". Please specifically note the usage of the word "average" here. Therefore, the last 5 years have essentially been the sample size, and after deducting all expenses, he has on average made Rs. 7.09 crores per year. This is a fact, and cannot be disputed.

In fact, since this Rs. 7.09 crores per year is based on an average across 5 years, in all likelihood he has actually made north of Rs. 7.09 crores these last couple of years at least.

Totally confused. Someone says 7cr is total net for last 5 years (so average net of 1.48 per year) and someone else says it is average net for last 5 years (so total net of 35 cr). Bit of a spread in those two positions! I suppose the truth, as always, is somewhere in between?

Im in my first year at an NLU. I got royally screwed over by my teammates in my uni internal moot rounds. As a result I had to drop out last minute and couldnt participate even though I'd done my research. Now i see everyone around me so into moots and I feel so sad. I really want to do moots, and good ones too!! Maybe get a fighting chance at the really nice international ones. But i feel like since I didnt start in 1st year, my chances are way lesser than anyone else to ever get selected for the great moots. If there's anyone here who started mooting in their 2nd year and still was able to develop their skills in mooting and achieve as a mooter, do let me know. Thank you

This is BIG because Sibal is President of the SCBA and one of the top 5 senior counsels, so his word counts for a law lot. Not to mention former Law Minster and very likely again Law Minister or AG, as INDIA Alliance are arguably favourites to win in 2029.

Only Pratibha Singh and Shwetasree Majumder are women judges from law firms AFAIK, but Shwetasree is really symbolic of the NLU generation. Will there be more like her? CAM, SAM, AZB etc partners???

https://www.barandbench.com/news/kapil-sibal-urges-collegium-appoint-women-lawyers-law-firms-judges

https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/sibal-urges-cji-chandrachud-to-appoint-more-women-in-higher-judiciary-124083001181_1.html

Excellent points, but also utterly impractical. How will this actually work?

Collegium: We would like Mr. Karia to practice for some time, and he can then become a judge after 3 years

Mr. Karia: Yes, cool. So I just go and get some clients of my own and start arguing as a senior?

Collegium: Yes, we were going to directly appoint you, but some guy on Legally India wrote this brilliant comment about how you should imbibe the ethos of the bar first.

Mr. Karia: Oh wow, what a comment. So I become a judge in 2027, right?

Collegium: Yeah, we will make a recommendation and the collegium in 2027 will decide.

Mr. Karia: So, the 2027 collegium will surely recommend me once I give it all up and start my practice, right?

Collegium: We cant formally put it in writing, of course, but it's a done deal.

Mr. Karia: OK, so I'm going on your word, right? I won't get screwed over?

Collegium: Our word is our bond. We will leave a note for the 2027 Collegium.

Mr. Karia: Wow, thank you. This is reassuring.

Collegium: lol

Mr. Karia: lol

There’s a very simple and pragmatic reason why I don’t see Oxbridge and other top tier foreign universities opening campuses in India. As you will see from the articles below, there are demands for caste reservation in foreign universities. Way back in 2009, when the idea of foreign university campuses was first mooted, then Education minister Kapil Sibal said that there must be such reservation.

https://www.cnbctv18.com/education/ugc-rules-on-foreign-university-campuses-in-india-raise-more-questions-than-answers-15612201.htm/amp

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/quota-in-foreign-universities-too/articleshow/4782584.cms

Currently, Rahul Gandhi’s aggressive and opportunistic rhetoric on caste reservation could subsequently lead to demands for 50% reservation in foreign university campuses. Targeting low-profile universities like Southampton might not bring much mileage to the opposition , but targeting a high-profile university like Oxbridge certainly will. Thus, top foreign universities will wisely keep away and the dream of being taught by professors at these universities will only be fulfilled for rich, elite Indians who go abroad and study at the parents campuses (like Sibal and RaGa).

I graduated from a private university and gave 2 years for my UPSC prep, this year i missed the prelim cutoff. Now, I'm looking to start my career in corporate law. Which one of the tier 2/3 firms will be better for applying and which would actually give me a chance.

Please do help me out.

Hey,

I'm a T-3 NLU student and I was doing fine up until recently. I'm a first-gen with no contacts, and I'm having a career scare. I've completed an internship at a T-1 law firm and it didn't go well and sort of stunted my confidence. Prior to this, I was doing well at my T-2 internships, extra-curriculars and even academically. However since the internship, nothing has gone right. I've been rejected from all the internships I've applied to, and it's naturally disheartening. I also feel like I've hit a slump academically and I'm unable to study because I'm worried about my career.

I'm a 4th year student and it's getting real-er by the minute. I don't want to believe that I've squandered my "one opportunity" after the T-1, but it's slowly starting to feel like it.

What do I do? Where do I apply? Genuine suggestions for places to apply would be appreciated. Also any career guidance or aspect to focus on would be great.

Ik the post was made 6 months ago, but sharing this for anyone debating about this in the future.

Christ gives you an advantage of interning throughout the year and bagging something by yourself. Both have mixed crowds. While JGLS does have slightly better placements, you can’t depend on college placements in this field anymore. JGLS does have great faculty and if you can afford, it can be a close call between them. People do hate on Christ because of the crazy attendance requirements (75% strict). Otherwise, go for Christ, moot and intern throughout law school (or until a ppo comes through).

Do a lot of moots and debates. Go for a lot of internships. Gain work experience and write research papers in the area of practice of your choice and otherwise.

Focus on your assignments in college, make them plag free and get them published.

These are the things that actually matter in the long run. Grades should be good, but making you a “batch topper” is only good for academics not your career.

Law is a field that requires you to be informative, agile and practical and yes very confident too. That’s how you’ll survive.

They are not providing the existing course outlines for people to really understand how they may pitch in. On the contrary, they are asking people to upload modules which they will review and then decide where to fit it in. That's not something good academics or even professionals are going to be very enthusiastic about.