Firms

Capsticks

Survey results

Survey results

 

The lowdown (in their own words...)

Why did you choose this firm over any others? 

 ''The people and the clients'; 'interesting and varied work given to trainees'; 'Wimbledon location'; 'the type of work'; 'excellence in healthcare law'; 'type of clients'; ' I enjoyed the summer vac scheme'; 'a recognised market leader in its sector'; 'good work/life balance'; the dedication and friendliness of its lawyers'' 

How does your training compare with peers' at other firms? 

 ''Trainees are allocated their own cases from the outset'; 'more interesting work'; 'better hours'; 'we are given excellent feedback'; 'a high quality of work'; 'a good deal of individual responsibility'; 'exposed to a broader range of work'; ' hours are not as terrifying here!'; 'you are not expected to stay in the office just to show your face'' 

Best thing about the firm? 

 ''People I work with'; 'interesting and varying pieces of work'; 'everyone is incredibly passionate about what they do'; 'work is really cutting edge'; 'it does feel like there's no such thing as a stupid question'; 'excellence in healthcare law'' 

Worst thing about the firm? 

 ''Some seats can tend to be a bit regulatory heavy'; 'often limited resources for dealing with a lot of work'; 'stress levels due to the sensitive and difficult nature of the clinical negligence cases'' 

Best moment? 

 ''Attending a five-day tribunal hearing which I'd done a lot of the preparation for'; 'dressing up in fancy dress and parading around the office to raise money for the firm's annual charity'; 'receiving a very nice thank you card and gift from a client after a long secondment helping their legal team'; 'appearing in front of a master at the Royal Courts of Justice - on my second day'' 

Worst moment?

 ''Thinking I had lost important original papers on a case'; 'having to work late on a Friday night'; 'the first couple of weeks of a new seat'; 'long hours spent trying to prepare a massive tribunal bundle''

The Lex 100 verdict

 The Verdict

The firm

Wimbledon-based Capsticks is one of the UK's leading healthcare law firms, handling litigation, projects, employment law, commercial and property work for healthcare bodies, from PCTs and NHS trusts to healthcare charities. It also has a leading clinical negligence department with a dedicated team of over 40 lawyers. Clients say the firm has 'excellent knowledge of the NHS' and gives 'sound advice'. 

The star performers

Clinical negligence: defendant; Employment; Healthcare; PFI.

The deals

Advising the South Central Strategic Health Authority on the fluoridation of water case; advising Wandsworth PCT on the transfer of its £93m community services business and its £15m support services business; assisted NHS London with the preparation of guidance for PCTs, GPs and hospital commissioners.

The clients

Over 300 NHS trusts, including West London Mental Health Trust, and Barts and the London NHS Trust; primary care trusts and healthcare regulatory bodies, including the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence (CHRE); the British Heart Foundation; Great Ormond Street Hospital.

The Verdict

Trainees are attracted to Capsticks for its 'excellence in healthcare law' and the fact that it not only is a 'recognised market leader in its sector' but that 'the quality of the training is very well regarded'. Indeed Capsticks is a Lex 100 Winner in an impressive six categories: job satisfaction, living up to expectations, quality of work, friendliness, social life and vacation scheme. Indeed it is the vacation scheme that wins over many aspiring trainees as 'the dedication and friendliness of its lawyers is better than at other firms'. Current trainees say that they get 'a lot more 'hands-on experience' than their City counterparts and, depending on where you sit, 'a good deal of individual responsibility, particularly in the contentious seats'. The firm is good at ensuring that trainees are 'exposed to a broader range of work' and get experience of several practice areas by having six four-month seats. Some aspects of work may be a bit 'regulatory heavy' but the firm makes up for it by also handling 'interesting and varying pieces of work, which are often of wider social interest'. There are some complaints about the long days with one trainee saying that 'fee-earners often have to work long hours but are perhaps not rewarded to the same degree as in the City'. However, for many the fact that the firm is not in the City is a big plus point. So if you are looking for a great contentious practice, a fantastic reputation for healthcare and a hands-on approach to training this could be the place for you.