A frank guide for law students who are serious about international arbitration
Most law students who say they want a career in international arbitration do not want it enough to do anything about it. They attend the talk, they add the interest to their CV, they send a dozen identical emails to firms they found on a ranking website, and then they wait. Nothing happens. They are surprised.
This piece is not for them.
It is for the student who has decided privately, without applause that this field is what they are building toward, and who wants to know what that actually requires. Not the comfortable version. The real one.
Stop treating law school as the qualification. Start treating it as the platform.
Law school gives you a degree. The degree gets you into the room. What you do once you are in the room is entirely determined by what you built before you arrived.
The students who stand out when they apply to serious arbitration practices are not the ones with the highest grades. Grades are the floor. Everyone serious has them. What separates the applications that get read from the ones that get filed is evidence of a person who has been engaged with the field not interested in it, engaged with it. There is a difference, and experienced practitioners can see it in thirty seconds.
Use law school as a platform. Build on it deliberately. Everything that follows is how.
Moot. And when you moot, treat it as your first hearing.
International mooting competitions are the single most underused resource available to law students globally. Not because students do not participate, many do. Because most of them participate as a CV exercise rather than as training.
The student who treats a moot as hearing preparation, who studies the procedural rules, who reads the institutional framework behind the problem, who prepares cross-examination with the discipline of a practitioner, who learns to read a panel and adjust in real time, that student arrives at their first real arbitration already knowing things that junior associates spend years learning on the job.
The skills that win in a hearing are not the ones you learn from a textbook. They are learned by standing in front of people who will push back, by making an argument that falls apart under questioning and understanding why, by being told, clearly, without kindness that your structure was weak or your answer was evasive. Find those environments. Seek that feedback. The students who are afraid of it will never be dangerous in a hearing room.
Write something that takes a real position. Once. Before you graduate.
The volume of student legal writing that says nothing is extraordinary. Case notes that summarise without analysing. Articles that describe a development without telling you what the author thinks about it. Essays that arrive at a conclusion so hedged it could have been written by anyone about anything.
Write one piece that commits to an argument. That says: this is what I think, this is why, and this is where I think the conventional view is wrong. It does not need to be long. It does not need to be published in a leading journal. It needs to be honest and it needs to be argued.
That piece will do more for how practitioners perceive you than a dozen safe publications. The arbitration world is small. It has a long memory for people who said something worth remembering. It has an equally long memory for people who never did.
Learn a language that opens a corridor, not just a country.
International arbitration operates across jurisdictions, legal cultures, and languages simultaneously. The practitioners who move between those cultures with fluency not just linguistically but commercially and legally operate at a different level from those who do not.
A second language, developed to working proficiency, is not a soft skill. It is a structural advantage that compounds over a career. French opens continental Europe and significant portions of African arbitration. Spanish opens Latin America and a growing body of investment treaty practice in jurisdictions that matter. Arabic opens the Gulf and a corridor of commercial arbitration expanding faster than most practitioners outside the region understand. Mandarin opens a volume of infrastructure and construction disputes that dwarfs most other practice areas.
The window to develop real language proficiency is widest when you are a student. It narrows sharply once practice starts. If you have the capacity to do this, do it now. Not to the level of conversation. To the level of a legal document.
Know one industry with depth before you qualify.
Arbitration disputes live inside industries. Construction. Energy. Pharmaceuticals. Shipping. Technology licensing. Private equity. Each of these sectors has its own logic, its own vocabulary, and its own version of what a dispute actually means to the people inside it.
The lawyers who perform at the highest level in those disputes are not just legally competent. They understand what the facts actually mean, not what the pleadings say about them. That understanding is not faked in front of an experienced tribunal. It is either present or it is not.
Pick one sector while you are a student. Read its trade press. Understand its commercial logic. Learn what drives the disputes that arise from it. When you sit with an expert witness in a moot or an internship, ask questions that go beyond the legal issue. This knowledge will sit quietly for years. Then one day it will become the thing that changes a case.
Approach internships as a practitioner, not as a student.
Most internship applications fail before they are read because they are identical. Same structure, same language, same declared interest in international arbitration, same list of moots and journals. The people reading them have seen thousands. They are not looking for enthusiasm. They are looking for evidence.
Before you apply anywhere, understand what that firm or chambers actually does. Read what their practitioners have written. Understand the matters they have worked on. Know which institutional rules they operate under and have an informed view on them. When you contact someone, contact them about something specific, a case development, a procedural question, something real. That approach is rarer than it should be. It is noticed when it appears.
And when you get the internship: do not wait to be useful. Identify what needs doing, do it to a standard that does not require correction, and ask the questions that demonstrate you are thinking about the problem rather than the task. The students who get remembered are not the most eager. They are the most precise.
Understand that reputation begins before qualification.
The arbitration community is smaller than it appears and more interconnected than outsiders realise. Practitioners know each other across jurisdictions. A student who engages seriously, who asks a real question after a panel, who writes something worth discussing, who participates in a moot with visible commitment is noticed. That noticing travels.
Reputation is not built after success. It is built in the years before success arrives, through the quality of your thinking and the consistency of your engagement. The students who arrive at qualification already known for something, a piece, a moot performance, a perspective, do not start from zero. They start from somewhere. That advantage is invisible from outside and decisive from inside.
Nobody will tell you to start building it now. Most of your peers will not. That is precisely why you should.
The lawyers who will define international arbitration in twenty years are in law school right now.
Some of them are doing the work described in this piece. Most are not. The gap between those two groups is not talent or connections or the name of the university on their degree. It is the decision made quietly, without ceremony, in the absence of any external reward to take the field seriously before anyone is asking them to.
That decision is available to you right now. What you do with it is the only thing that matters.
Allow notifications
