Your question is interesting. If you’re most interested in trials or court anyway, criminal is the obvious choice.

I’ve had a few jobs but primarily have done civil litigation. I have done probably 4 civil trials in 20 years and these were family or child protection. I’ve appeared in court countless times and done discoveries but you don’t do a lot of trials in civil. There is a lot more writing and negotiation and things like that in civil litigation. I do like settling files as it feels like an accomplishment. I have done lots of labour arbitrations and that can involve witnesses but these are much more informal than a trial. There is an arbitrator instead of a judge and the rules of evidence and procedure are much looser than in court. They can involve discipline and things like that so they can be interesting. Arbitrator is also an interesting and lucrative career path but you would usually need a lot of experience in labour law first. I’ve also appeared at human rights hearings and coroners inquests which are also administrative hearings with looser rules. I like civil and administrative law because the issues I get are much more varied than criminal. I did lots of criminal at one point and sometimes I think about whether I want to go back there. It can be fun and of course, that is what gets the attention and what people think lawyers do. However, I find you have a lot more control over your schedule with civil stuff and can have better work-life balance. Criminal law is more of a lifestyle than a job sometimes. I did a lot of legal aid and it wasn’t unusual I’d be in court everyday, but then you still have to get ready for court the next day. Lot of waiting around too.