Vacation Scheme Student Review

I spent two weeks in the Projects and Construction team on the 2026 vacation placement, with two supervisors who gave me a steady stream of live work rather than exercises. Day one was a starter guide to the standard forms (NEC, JCT and FIDIC), and from there almost everything was on real matters. In week one I built a table of every reference to the works requirement in a PPP contract for a major transport project, compared the old and new versions of that contract clause by clause, checked a client's approval tables on a supply contract for a nuclear new-build against the underlying agreement, and reviewed a clean NEC draft against the agreed positions. Week two shifted towards research and judgement: a case note on a recent Construction Act payment decision, product liability research for a projects client, a parent company guarantee letter on a rail project that went up to a partner, and a know-how pack on the proposed roads RAB model. I also sat in on a live client meeting with an overseas offshore wind supplier. Around the desk work there were partner talks, a session with the firm's competition economists, and netball on the first Monday. The placement ended with a ten-minute presentation to my supervisors reflecting on what I had learned and where I had added value.

Very good, and most of it came through conversation rather than presentations. I made a point of meeting people across teams, and over coffees with lawyers in Competition, Environment and Planning, Construction Disputes, Nuclear and Business Development I got a much clearer picture of how a big firm actually works: how secondments and tender panels operate, why pro bono work rebuilding Ukraine sits inside a business development strategy, and why one partner thinks Canada could be the firm's next office. The most useful conversation was about panels and winning work. I had not appreciated how much of a partner's time goes into pitching, or that being on a client's panel is something you compete for and then keep earning. A talk about the Heineken relationship brought that to life, showing how a client account is built and looked after over years, and I found out that there is a specific programme junior lawyers can get onto that focuses on cultivating those business relationships, which is exactly the side of the job that appeals to me. On roles, the trainees were open about seat allocation and qualification, and the sheer range of what sat inside one projects team, from FIDIC contracts in the Maldives to tort research for an NHS supplier, showed how much scope there is to specialise.

Yes, and the biggest one was learning to work with uncertainty rather than around it. Reviewing the contract approval tables on the nuclear project, I found inconsistencies but was not sure which of them mattered, and instead of quietly noting them I put together a short list separating what I was confident about from what I was not and took it to my supervisor. Some of it went to the client. That habit, of raising something early and being clear about how sure you are, is one I have kept. The statutory books work developed my drafting: preparing a proposed register of members and the accompanying witness statements taught me how much precision a document needs before a partner can sign it off, and how to take a mark-up as information rather than criticism. Sitting in on the negotiation with the Chinese wind supplier sharpened my listening, because the interesting part was the gap between what the client feared and what the other side was actually asking for. Beyond the legal tasks, the presentation improved how I structure an argument for a commercial audience, and the conversations about panels and pitching gave me a much better sense of how to talk about a client's business rather than just their legal problem. Coming from a Classics degree, the week also confirmed that close reading transfers directly, but that in practice it has to be done faster and with a clearer view of what the client needs from the answer.

Open, collaborative and much less hierarchical than I expected from a firm of that size. My supervisors gave real feedback on real work, and a partner took the time to review a letter I had drafted rather than passing it down the line. People across the firm said yes to a coffee without hesitation, and those conversations, with a competition lawyer describing a North Sea project blocked on national security grounds, or a projects lawyer explaining how she asks clients about child labour in solar supply chains, were where I got the strongest sense of the place. Netball on the first Monday was a good marker of the culture: I contributed almost nothing on court but it did a lot for feeling part of the team. There is a strong international and pro bono thread running through the work, from the Maldives to Ukraine, and people were candid about the harder things, including the gap between what a commercial director wants and what the lawyers have to protect. The atmosphere was busy but not frantic, and the overall impression was of a firm confident about where it is going and happy to explain why to someone two weeks in.

A great deal, and more as it went on. The first few days were a steep climb, since I arrived not knowing a JCT from a FIDIC and spent week one learning to speak construction, but the work was real and the feedback was quick, so the learning curve felt like progress rather than pressure. What I enjoyed most was the variety inside a single team: a contract comparison one day, a case note the next, then product liability research I never expected to find in a projects group, which turned out to be the most fun task of the fortnight. The client meeting with an overseas supplier was a highlight because it showed the commercial reality behind the drafting, with a commercial director openly weighing legal risk against what the business wanted. The people made the difference, though. Everyone I asked for a coffee said yes, my supervisors gave honest feedback and let me act on it, and by the second week I felt like a junior member of the team rather than a visitor. I finished the two weeks with a training contract offer, a much clearer idea of the kind of lawyer I want to be, and the sense that I would happily have stayed on.

Yes

Be yourself. The firm is warm and unstuffy and the people interviewing you are the people you would sit next to, so confidence goes a long way but arrogance does not; the ones who did well on my scheme were quietly sure of themselves and openly eager to learn.
Understand the business, not just the practice areas. Be able to explain why eight UK offices matter for winning projects work, or why the recent international openings followed existing clients. Pick one or two sectors that interest you, such as first-of-a-kind energy or infrastructure, and be ready to say why they are legally interesting rather than just topical. Have a genuine view on legal technology too; interviewers care less about whether you can name products than whether you have thought about the gap between buying a tool and getting lawyers to use it.
On the scheme, ask for feedback early and visibly act on it. Say yes to every coffee and ask people in other teams what they actually do all day. Flag something that looks wrong in a document, but ask how far your judgement is meant to go, because sometimes it is the client's document and your job is to populate it, not rewrite it.
And take notes, every day. You will be asked to reflect at the end, and it is much easier to say which task taught you which skill if you wrote it down at the time.