What this seat involves
Disputes lawyers help clients resolve disagreements; with counterparties, regulators, employees, or shareholders. The route to resolution can be court litigation, arbitration (common in international commercial disputes), mediation, or a negotiated settlement before proceedings are issued at all. Most disputes settle; the skill is knowing how to build a position strong enough to make settlement possible on good terms.
This seat is structurally different from transactional seats. There is no deal to close and no signing date driving the timeline. Work moves around court deadlines and the other side's behaviour. A lot of what trainees do is analysis; reading documents, building chronologies, researching legal points; rather than producing transactional documents. Writing quality matters more here than in any other seat.
Trainee-level work this seat is built around
You may not be asked to run all of this on a vacation scheme. This section explains the kind of work trainees and junior lawyers do, so the seat and its exercises make sense in context.
Legal research memos
Looking into a discrete legal point and writing it up clearly. "What is the limitation period for a breach of warranty claim?" The memo needs to be readable by a non-specialist and structured as advice, not a literature review.
Chronology building
Reading disclosure documents and constructing a timeline of relevant events. This is foundational work for every dispute; understanding what happened and when shapes the entire legal strategy.
Document review
Reviewing large volumes of documents for relevance and privilege as part of disclosure. Requires understanding what the dispute is actually about so you can identify what matters.
Drafting assistance
Helping draft correspondence, witness statement sections, or skeleton argument points. Usually involves taking a rough structure from a senior lawyer and filling in the analytical content.
Court and hearing attendance
Attending hearings; applications, case management conferences, and sometimes trials; to observe advocacy and understand how procedural steps connect to the overall case strategy.
Bundles and filing
Compiling court bundles, preparing indices, and managing court filings. More procedural than analytical, but understanding why a bundle is structured as it is teaches you how litigation unfolds.
What you could do on a vacation scheme
Vacation scheme exercises are usually lighter than trainee work. They are designed to test research, document sense, commercial judgement and how clearly you explain unfamiliar material.
Chronology exercise
You may be given a short bundle of emails or correspondence and asked to build a chronology of what happened, what is disputed and what documents support each point.
Research note
You may be asked to research a focused procedural or legal question and give the answer first, followed by the reasoning and any uncertainty.
Merits or issues summary
You may be asked to identify the strongest and weakest points in a client’s position from a short fact pattern. The aim is to show balanced analysis rather than advocacy at all costs.
Draft correspondence comments
You may be asked to read a draft letter and suggest where the tone, facts or legal position could be clearer before it is sent to the other side.
What good looks like at this stage
Clarify the task, have a proper go before escalating, explain your thinking and return clean work. The best vacation schemers are proactive and curious without creating noise.
In disputes, the quality of your analysis matters more than your speed. A vac schemer who returns a research memo that states the answer first, explains the reasoning plainly, and flags genuine uncertainty without padding will be trusted with more. Lawyers who hedge everything to avoid being wrong become liabilities on live disputes.
Research to do before you start
- Understand the Civil Procedure Rules at a high level; the overriding objective, Part 36 offers, and the key stages of a commercial litigation claim from issue to trial.
- Know the difference between litigation and arbitration; when parties choose arbitration, why it is preferred for international disputes, and the role of institutions like the ICC and LCIA.
- Read about privilege; legal advice privilege and litigation privilege. Know what they protect and why the distinction matters when reviewing documents.
- Look at the firm's disputes practice; sector disputes, international arbitration, regulatory investigations, shareholder claims. Each has a different rhythm and client base.
- Read one recent significant commercial judgment. Understanding the facts, the legal issues, and how the court reasoned to its conclusion is better preparation than any summary.
- Understand what without prejudice communications are and why they exist. This comes up constantly and missing it has real consequences.
Questions worth asking
Is there a precedent or example you would like me to follow?
Shows you are trying to match the team's style instead of guessing the format.
How much detail would be helpful here: a short summary or a more detailed note?
Clarifies the output before you spend time producing the wrong level of detail.
At what point in a dispute do you typically start having a genuine settlement conversation with the other side; and what usually triggers it?
Shows you understand that most disputes settle and that strategy is built around that reality, not just winning at trial.
When you're advising a client whether to issue proceedings, what factors carry the most weight; the merits, the cost, or something else?
A question about commercial judgment rather than legal mechanics. The answer will be more nuanced and useful than anything in a textbook.
How has the increase in third-party litigation funding changed the kind of cases clients are willing to bring?
Topical. Litigation funding has materially changed the disputes market and shows you're tracking developments beyond procedure.
Is there a meaningful difference in the feel of international arbitration work compared to English court litigation; pace, client interaction, how you build the case?
Relevant if the firm has an arbitration practice. Shows you understand the two routes are genuinely different in how they run.