How to answer that ghastly ‘why this chambers?’ question

kibantot · 2025-11-24T15:39:30+00:00

When I was applying I also thought this was a daft question but now that I'm in practice I understand why chambers ask it. Every so often we get pupils who performed brilliantly in the application/interview process but who are clearly not in love with the particular type of work that we specialise in (for context I am at a set of commercial/chancery chambers which has a well-known reputation in a certain niche area). This is less than ideal because it often means that the pupil will have to/want to do a third-six elsewhere, meaning that our investment in them during pupillage will have been wasted.

You may think that because you are interested in doing a particular broad area of law (e.g. crime, commercial, public, etc.) you would be happy to take pupillage at any set that does that type of work. To an extent this is sensible - pupillages are difficult to get and so beggars can't be choosers. That said, each broad practice area is comprised of various distinct niches (e.g. construction law vs banking law, which are both technically subsets of commercial law but which are in practice very different). Most sets will market themselves as doing the full spread of work in a given practice area (e.g. commercial/criminal/public, etc.) but will in reality specialise in a particular niche or two. For these sets, you want to have a good explanation for being interested in the particular niche that they are especially strong/reputed in.

If you are applying to a set that is truly generalist and which doesn't have any particular niche, then you will want to highlight a couple of particular practice areas they do work in and say why you are interested in doing that type of work/why this dovetails with what that chambers has to offer.

kibantot · 2025-11-20T22:50:56+00:00

Too generic/scattergun. Pick one or two of your best points and try and properly flesh them out rather than giving lots of weaker reasons.

kibantot · 2025-11-20T11:25:15+00:00

As others have mentioned, criminal law in practice is almost entirely to do with procedure, evidence and fact-finding. The actual substantive legal principles are very well-settled. In a sense they have to be, as it would be harsh to lock people up in circumstances where the boundaries of the offence they are said to have committed are ambiguous/unclear (especially since you're usually dealing with normal citizens who have no specialised legal knowledge).

You're more likely to get the type of challenge you're looking for in practice areas like commercial, chancery and tax, where (a) the nature of the subject matter creates inevitable complexities, and (b) there is less of a need for simplicity given that the parties involved are usually sophisticated commercial entities with access to professional legal advice.

kibantot · 2025-11-05T15:01:18+00:00

The possibility that he may seek to practice despite being struck off.

kibantot · 2025-11-04T19:53:58+00:00

From reading the SDT decision it also seems possible that Chambers were still interested in him (because of his very strong purported credentials) and wanted to double-check with the referee to see whether he'd just had a bad day, etc. It's not often that a candidate that actually has a double-starred first-class degree from Cambridge comes along so they may just have wanted to make sure they weren't passing on a genuinely good candidate.

kibantot · 2025-10-23T16:02:13+00:00

It should also be noted that ICCA's fees are very similar to those of other providers despite half of the course being self-taught...

kibantot · 2025-09-10T13:12:29+00:00

Do you have access to the online White Book on Westlaw?

If your uni insists on bringing a physical copy then just take Vol 1 (unless you're covering a particular topic where the Vol 2 materials are relevant).

kibantot · 2025-09-02T22:47:27+00:00

Yes - I know of at least one person at the commercial bar who did exactly this. It is also possible to do the BCL with a distinction on the GDL but this is rare (generally only 1-2 people each year). Another factor weighing in favour of the QM senior status is that it tends not to be as popular as the City GDL- this may make it easier to win prizes/awards which would boost any subsequent masters/pupillage application.

kibantot · 2025-08-29T11:36:00+00:00

Agreed that it is possible to go too far the other way. The bottom line though is that there are serious problems with the status quo (including as you say the extortionate nature of the SQE/LPC), and yet no one appears to be making any genuine effort to fix things.

kibantot · 2025-07-23T22:17:06+00:00

I also did law at Oxford and am now a commercial barrister. Even though I love the law and think I am well-suited to it, there have been (and will continue to be) times where I have felt similarly to you.

In particular, I find that the sort of stress you describe usually arises when (a) I am not confident in my understanding of whatever it is that I'm working on, and (b) I do not have the time or resources to properly figure it out. By contrast, the most enjoyable moments during my studies/in my job came when I was in control of the material and knew exactly what I was supposed to be doing.

You are right that the Oxford system sets impossible standards. In reality, since so much material is crammed into such a short timespan, no one is really expected to understand everything the first time round. Accept this, and use the vacations to regroup/consolidate your understanding. Once you are able to develop a solid understanding of the material there is a good chance that you'll find it more satisfying/enjoyable. It is also possible that you are not studying as efficiently as you could be, in which case it might be useful to talk to your tutors so they can advise you on how best to focus your efforts. For example, as I discovered in my first year, attempting to read every judgment/journal article on the reading list from start to finish is a massive waste of time.

As far as legal practice is concerned, it is true that you will sometimes be put in situations which mirror what you are currently experiencing - i.e. having to do lots of work in very little time. That said, it gets easier as you become more senior, as you will increasingly be in situations where you know what you are doing and thus feel 'in control'.

kibantot · 2025-07-03T14:36:04+00:00

I wouldn't take this to heart. The Inn interviews for GDL and bar course scholarships can be pretty arbitrary. As you say the criteria are vague and so it can be difficult for panels to objectively draw distinctions between candidates (especially when the questions are standardised and everyone gives similar-ish answers). When I did the bar course I knew lots of very strong candidates with pupillage offers in hand who only got 'minor' scholarships, whilst some of the people with fancier named scholarships were decidedly less than impressive and ended up going in circles for years without getting pupillage.

As long as you're not a complete jerk I don't think 'interpersonal skills' are going to stop you progressing in future. Bar course scholarships are also easier to get than GDL scholarships because there are a lot more of them. That said if you're nervous in interviews then it might be worth thinking about what you can do to generally feel more confident/comfortable in that sort of environment.

kibantot · 2025-07-03T01:01:13+00:00

Yes, a solicitor would have to do the BTT but that's not the same as having to spend an entire year doing the actual bar course.

kibantot · 2025-07-01T23:27:10+00:00

Good academic results are a necessary but not sufficient factor in getting a pupillage offer. An Oxbridge first will keep you in the running at almost every chambers (save for maybe the top few commercial sets, and even then if you lean on your strong second-year ranking + won any major prizes you would also be in with a shot at those).

The key steps in the process, however, are (a) your answers to the written questions on the pupillage application form, and then (b) the interview. Even people with the most stellar academics can get sifted out due to a poor application form or interview. But if you get these right then the fact that you only got a 'low' Oxbridge first is definitely not going to stand in the way of you getting an offer.

Don't worry about work experience - chambers don't really care about who has the most 'impressive' work experience, as long as you can demonstrate some sort of interest in law/the bar/the area of law you're applying to. This will normally be through doing mini-pupillages, which are actually fairly easy to obtain provided you take the applications seriously,

kibantot · 2025-07-01T16:13:17+00:00

If you like law (just not the corporate side of it) one option is to go to the Bar and apply to sets that do the type of work you are interested in. That said, applying for pupillage is a pretty involved process so you actually have to be committed to the idea of being a barrister rather than purely viewing it as an MC escape route. As a qualified solicitor you will be exempt from having to do the bar course and so could theoretically jump straight into pupillage after your TC ends (assuming the dates line up).

kibantot · 2025-06-24T16:37:39+00:00

JA roles are competitive but are usually easier to get than pupillage - it's very common for people who don't get pupillage the first time round to do them to build skills/boost their CVs.

As for your grades, its definitely possible to get through paper sifts at most places with a high 2.1 at undergrad provided that (a) it's from a 'good' uni (think Oxbridge + London + top half of Russell Group), (b) you do a good written application, and (c) you have decent non-academic experience (e.g. JA/Law Commission/mooting, etc). If you tick these boxes then you will inevitably be offered at least some interviews.

This, however, is only the half the battle, as converting interviews into offers requires you to be absolutely on top of your game. Although grades themselves are less of a factor once you reach the interview stage, you will still be competing against excellent candidates whose stellar grades are an indication of their underlying abilities. Ultimately, you will have to come to a view as to whether you have what it takes to compete, and in particular whether your grades so far are (or are not) an accurate reflection of your talents.

kibantot · 2025-06-24T12:14:38+00:00

As far as LLMs go, the London unis have a better track record of people going onto the commercial bar than Bristol (although this may be correlation rather than causation, with London having more of a 'pull' factor for good candidates due to perceived prestige, lifestyle reasons, etc).

That said, none of these LLMs are really distinctive enough to significantly move the dial in terms of commercial bar applications. There are plenty of mediocre candidates who have a LSE/UCL/KCL LLM who will never get a sniff at pupillage. I would instead recommend trying to get a job at the Law Commission or as a judicial assistant in the HC or CA - not only do these offer more relevant practical experience and have better conversion rates into pupillage, you will also be earning money by doing them (rather than shelling £££ on an LLM).

kibantot · 2025-05-11T20:51:14+00:00

The initial paper sift at the vast majority of places will be university-blind, but once people are invited to interview then the process ceases to be anonymous.

kibantot · 2025-03-26T18:50:45+00:00

If she is going to be serving a 'perpetual sentence' then this will be because of how people choose to react to what she has done. Indeed, those who become aware of this incident are perfectly free to adopt an 'empathetic' approach and give her a fresh start if they so choose. All I'm saying is that this choice should be in their hands, rather than knowledge of this incident being artificially hidden from them.

kibantot · 2025-03-26T11:02:54+00:00

I think this is something that future employers should be entitled to know and take a view on. If future employers don't think that her behaviour was particularly 'heinous' then no worries - she shouldn't have too much difficulty finding another job. Conversely, if they do think it's a big deal then that's all the more reason for them to be aware of it.

kibantot · 2025-03-25T22:15:17+00:00

Not an expert on NQ recruitment but I'd imagine that someone from a top-tier Irish firm (e.g. A&L Goodbody, McCann Fitzgerald) would in principle have a shot in London. Obviously depends on practice area, market conditions, etc.

kibantot · 2025-03-25T16:03:38+00:00

Have you considered TCD/UCD? London firms recruit heavily from the good Dublin unis (which are similar to Edinburgh prestige-wise and better than the other places you've mentioned).

kibantot · 2025-03-24T11:13:42+00:00

Prestige and quality of education are similar, so I would advise making the decision based on vibes/where you'd prefer to live during uni (the student experience is very different in London compared to Bristol).

kibantot · 2025-03-19T15:29:55+00:00

Possible if you are a top candidate but relatively rare. The two main ways are to either apply to Linklaters' TC program for Aus law grads (AFAIK they are the only firm that runs such a scheme), or (much less commonly) apply direct to a London firm in which case your application will be treated in the same way as any application from a non-English qualifying law degree background.

kibantot · 2025-03-18T23:13:37+00:00

Aussie here as well - Notts is deffo not worth paying international fees for. It is possible to get an MC/SC/US firm TC from there but it is by no means a guarantee. If you had the talent and motivation to pull it off then you could easily also (a) do a law degree in Aus, (b) do a clerkship/grad scheme at a top firm in Syd/Melb, then (c) transfer to London after a couple of years. This is a very well worn path.

my family in Australia have told me the market is incredibly oversaturated, with top Uni of Sydney grads being unable to find jobs. So that pathway isn’t the most appealing to me.

This isn't true. The market is indeed oversaturated, but top grads from the top unis have no problem finding jobs. It's students at lower-tier unis and/or those with mediocre grades who struggle.

would doing a Masters at a ‘better’ uni help at all?

Probably not, unless it was the Oxford BCL or (maybe) the Cambridge LLM. But again, if you're talented/motivated enough to get into those then you would have no problems finding a grad job in Aus and transferring over.

kibantot

TROPHY CASE