You earn so much lui to pay expensive firm?

I second this!

Maybe u not enough

As crass as the above quote is, I agree with the sentiment. Studying law locally (NUS or SMU) provides the best ROI for Singaporeans whose undergrad education is subsidized.

For the price of slightly above a generic FASS or Biz degree, you can get a pretty good starting salary. You won't make bank but outcomes are decent. You can also pivot to other industries if law practice isn't for you.

If you're rich, money is obv not a problem. But if you have to borrow 200k to reach the same outcomes as an NUS grad by studying in Australia, that is not a wise path.

Open your eyes and read the original statement.

Winners of the Chief Justice Prize for Best Graduating Student:
2021 - KHL (JLC)
2020 - JW (JLC)
2019 - JF (JLC)
2018 - SCC (CC M&A)
2017 - RO (JLC)

I know of at least 2 guys in NUS and both of them are Dean's Listers

It is it seems. THe best students in Australia go to these two schools so the competition will be stiffer compared to local unis - judging by the sheer intake sizes they have.

It is, yes. It is clearer now that the main concern should be the competition against the number of students in Aus schools compared to NUS/SMU/SUSS in order to do well.

If he can't compete against such a small pool of people in SG, it creates doubt if he can do well in the best institutions in Aus competing against a bigger cohort.

Undoubtedly, the schools there treat this like a business. As a lender, outcomes is very important.

No one has ever detailed anything bad apart from making sweeping statements.

Tbh 200k is v little these days. If you work at intl firm sometimes you get more than that as bonus.



u can go for nus or smu, that’s the most Budget option.

The work environment is toxic passing off as "friendly", the few good assocs you manage to get have left or are in the process of doing so (if you're in baker disputes you know which ones I'm referring to), there are many top liti students who reject baker consistently for b4 disputes team to the point where your TCs are usually not first-round picks.

You don't even make an iota of sense. How does baker disputes even pass off as friendly and be toxic. Nd even if assocs come n go the partners have been there for a long time and they r good but you conveniently ignore that. Telling that you are posting as a junior disgruntled associate.

Again another sweeping childish statement.

And what the heck is a top liti student

Really lame. Friendly also get accused of being toxic.

As a current student in the midst of the TC application window, it seems like most, if not all, of the DLers have chosen not to train at Baker. The main issue is that their marginally higher starting pay isn't attractive enough to compensate for the fact that they are nowhere near the best, especially for disputes. How to have confidence in their training when they are a Band 4 department for both domestic litigation and international arbitration? The $3K advantage over R&T, Drew or WP isn't worth it, unless you need money quickly. The DLers would rather slog it out at those B4 firms in the short run and then transfer to a MC or WS firm, or apply to CC/JLC if they are particularly outstanding.

As a current student in the midst of the TC application window, it seems like most, if not all, of the DLers have chosen not to train at Baker. The main issue is that their marginally higher starting pay isn't attractive enough to compensate for the fact that they are nowhere near the best, especially for disputes. How to have confidence in their training when they are a Band 4 department for both domestic litigation and international arbitration? The $3K advantage over R&T, Drew or WP isn't worth it, unless you need money quickly. The DLers would rather slog it out at those B4 firms in the short run and then transfer to a MC or WS firm, or apply to CC/JLC if they are particularly outstanding.

This is misleading and grossly unfair. You can't just take rankings as a whole and skew them to your foregone conclusion. The facts are that nandakumar ponniya team in baker for construction disputes and celeste ang team in employment disputes in baker are band 1 or 2.

You are truly disgusting

how about the others

As mentioned in other posts they have a new patner who has brought in alot of restructuring latter's all high profile

who is this patner

You are free to disagree. I am stating an opinion that I believe to be prevalent amongst my batchmates. You can confirm this for yourself by asking W from HR how many DLers declined to train at your disputes team. I myself interned at Baker and decided not to go there.

If you prefer to cherry pick on teams, there are other more renowned and higher-ranked teams for construction disputes: Andrea Yeap SC and Ng Kim Beng at R&T; Christopher Chuah and Tay Peng Cheng at WP; Mohan Pilay at PM MPillay; Eugene Tan from Clyde.

The same applies for employment: Murali Pillai SC and Jonathan Yuen at R&T; Kelvin Tan at Drew; Sanjiv Rajan at A&G.

No matter how you flip the coin, the consistent conclusion is that you are better off (1) training at one of the B4s and then making partner or lateralling into a 'real' international firm or (2) training at a 'real' international firm or enrolling into the JLC programme.

You are free to disagree. I am stating an opinion that I believe to be prevalent amongst my batchmates. You can confirm this for yourself by asking W from HR how many DLers declined to train at your disputes team. I myself interned at Baker and decided not to go there. Even the representative from Baker's disputes team was on the defensive during the practice group Q&A session.

If you prefer to cherry pick on teams and ignore the overall rankings, there are other more renowned and higher-ranked teams for construction disputes: Andrea Yeap SC and Ng Kim Beng at R&T; Christopher Chuah and Tay Peng Cheng at WP; Mohan Pilay at PM MPillay; Eugene Tan from Clyde.

The same applies for employment: Murali Pillai SC and Jonathan Yuen at R&T; Kelvin Tan at Drew; Sanjiv Rajan at A&G.

No matter how you flip the coin, the consistent conclusion is that you are better off (1) training at one of the B4s and then making partner or lateralling into a 'real' international firm or (2) training at a 'real' international firm or enrolling into the JLC programme. The other firms also offer far more opportunities to work with top lawyers handling other kinds of commercial disputes.

interesting - heard a few rejected baker disputes recently for better prospects

You mean Weena Soh from HR?

Who is the defensive disputes representative?

Why toxic? Can pls elaborate?

Only restructuring?

Amongst others if that's what you are fishing for. Yes he's that great.

Who is great?

What is he or she great for? Have you worked with him or her directly?

great meh, i do not think so lel

To be fair I don't know the new partner. But wasn't he just an SA from HSF who came to Baker because they offered him partnership immediately and he didn't want to wait for HSF to offer?

How much "high value" restructuring deals could he be bringing as an SA level from another (admittedly vastly better) firm?

u ppl very bad sia. i dun believe HSF is vastly better. are there other deals brought over from HSF by this patner?

Thought he went inhouse from hsf then had a gap then baker rather than hsf straight to baker.

And u have?

inhouse where? then where the deals come from, not hsf?

Emmanuel Chua? Ok what. High flyer now I heard.

Local principal is the equivalent of junior junior partner right? What's the difference from senior associate at HSF then?

not equity ah

Earmarked la so many deals