Bye

Kerfuffle, I asked for rankings. You did not give any. If you are not prepared for people to comment or disagree with your opinions, then don't post. That is the point of a forum after all. I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to agree with you in order to be grateful. I pointed out a few contradictions in your post and was requesting clarification, but you did not reply. Therefore, all that is left to say is thank you for your responses and I thank everyone else for their responses.

What is wrong with you people? I have started a simple thread regarding personal opinions about prestige rankings of Universities, regardless of my personal situation. There are many such posts all over the internet and on this website I might add on similar issues and graduate prospects. It really isn't anything new or difficult to understand. Kerfuffle, read my post prior, I did point out some apparent contradictions and you haven't addressed them. I understood your posts perfectly, although I do believe you were confusing certain things, such as general prestige and LLM course quality. In my original post, I stated that leaving my personal issues aside, let people rank Universities by prestige and help others reach a decision as well as myself. After all, branding is normally the crucial factor. Only one person so far has obliged. And no, it isn't necessary to thank every person for their reply on a public internet forum! (Even though I have out of politeness).

Wizard, you make a post like that and you call me an asshole? What a retard you must be. If you don't have anything constructive to say, why are you here? It's easy acting all tough over the internet using foul and abusive language to somebody you don't even know. Get a life and stop trolling!

What a terrible discussion board. I mean, people posting to say "yawn" and others just being abusive, what's the point? It seems that you guys can't handle disagreement without getting personal. How sad.

I generally agree with the contribution above by ellibertador.

From an international perspective, however, if you're talking about prestige rankings, then I think UCL falls behind LSE. I also think it gets difficult when you try to rank QMUL, as there are other U.K. schools which I might rank ahead (for example, Edinburgh).

1. Oxbridge
2. LSE
3. UCL
4. Kings

Last, there seems to be a legitimate reason why this thread was started. GeorgeP, like me, probably believes law firms are overly prestige-conscious, and he wants to get a sense of what people think. If you've been here for any length of time, you know that virtually every question has been asked and answered somewhere on the site at some time. So, though you might think (and you might be right) that people are wasting their time, that's not an excuse for you to waste everyone's by trolling around.

Thanks P Martini. I am under the impression that law is quite elitist and prestige counts a great deal, especially in the UK. Once again, thanks for the informative post.

Since you want rankings, here are the only ones that matter, the only ones that will significantly enhance your career:

1. Oxford / Harvard
2. Cambridge/ Yale

The rest are irrelevant.

This is definitely the most recurring topic in the world of LLM prospective students. At the beginning of the year, Id really take my time to write a few words standing up for some underestimated law schools, especially some schools in Scotland. However, after reading thousands of posts and talking to countless other people about this matter, Ive come to realise one simply thing: When you say LLM in the UK, everybody knows Cambridge and Oxford! Afterwards, University of London through its most famous colleges, LSE, UCL, KCL and QM (Id put them in that order, at least considering what Ive heard from everybody to whom Ive spoken). SOAS was left out on purpose. Nevertheless, its useless to argue which one comes first between the colleges of the University of London each one will have a different opinion, sometimes trying to push the advantage to whichever colleges theyve been accepted into. Ive got the honesty to admit that LSE enjoys of greater reputation (in my country for sure and worldwide, probably) than UCL. But considering LSE kicked me in the ass a couple of weeks back and rejected my application, Im happily off to UCL in September (still awaiting Cambridge and Oxford though). Long story short, Oxbridge are at the top no doubt about it! Then comes University of London and any attempt to rank UoLs colleges will be imbued with subjectivity and my-university-is-better feelings. But please do go on with this debate, they tend to bring about heated discussions that are quite enjoyable to read and every now and then someone tries to come with some allegedly clever solution to end it all (kindda feels like Im describing myself now). All the best to you all!!!

Thanks for the reply beicon :)

Where do you stand on the training contract issue? As a domestic student who went to a poorly ranked UK University, do you think studying an LLM at a prestigious University (i.e. UCL) would help a training contract application and add prestige to my CV? Or do you think an LLM would be completely ignored by UK law firms? Thanks in advance.

By the way, I'm not looking to apply to big City firms, but more mid-sized commercial law firms.

On the training issue, given that you went to a poorly ranked UK university, anything you do surely helps. I believe that an LLM from a reputable university in the UK will definitely enhance your CV. My brother went to Columbia University (LLM) and although its in the USA and the reality there is a bit different he said his class was crowded with US students from low ranked universities trying to increase their chances at prestigious law firms (whether big or not, but with a reputable name in the market). I think the same applies to the UK. Ranks arent everything, but in the end they are the only factor that would allow anyone to judge you and your capability that wouldnt require any previous knowledge on your background and what you did or didnt do before.

I'm with Kerfuffle on this one - for the purposes of a UK training contract, at a London City firm at least, I don't think that an LLM will increase your chances if your underlying degree isn't up to scratch - whether this is fair or not is another issue. Frankly, you'd be better getting a paralegal job in one of the big firms (if you can) or going in house or to a regulatory organisation in a specialist area (OFT if you're a competition lawyer, FSA if you're interested in financial services regulation, the ICO for data protection etc etc.).

(by way of background, I qualified overseas and have been at an MC firm in London for 10 years, the other two people at the table with me (who share my view) were both senior associates at different MC firms and are now partners at a NY firm and silver circle firm respectively. They are actively involved in recruitment so I think they know what they are talking about.

In other words, no, I wouldn't necessarily spend money on an LLM if my sole purpose was to gain a UK training contract. Obviously there are lots of other reasons to do an LLM.

Thanks for your replies beicon and legalalien. Legalalien, as I mentioned previously, I am not looking for a City training contract, but more a small to mid-sized regional commercial law firm. Would your advice change in light of this, or be exactly the same? Thanks. (By the way, I got a 2:1 in my degree, which I think is a fairly good result, but it was from a poorly ranked Uni).

Hey Guys....I have been reading this thread and really like the discussion taking place.

I am a tax consultant in India and passed out from one of the top 5 law colleges in India. I have been working for the past one and a half years with one of the big fours.

Now I would like to apply for higher studies and was really interested in a new program in corporate law that has started at Oxford.

While applying for the program, I am unable to decide which college to choose and wat criteria should be adopted in choosing the college.

I want to focus on corporate law and more specifically capital markets.

Is that the joint Masters with Said? I don't think the BCL has specialisation! I have had a few friends who read the BCL and they told me choice of college does not matter as much as the BA course because teaching is centralised... I certainly don't think that choice of college will affect the concentration you wish to pursue!

Churchill - I'm not really qualified to comment on the regional firms as I have a sheltered life here in the City! Have you tried posting on legal week or traineesolicitor.co.uk?

Thanks Plethora....Yes that's the program...
Even I thought that the teaching is centralised since in their brochure they have listed the faculty which belongs to different colleges....Still I would like to chose the best available college.

Would it be possible for anyone else to help me out with this....by either letting me know the rankings or which college is generally renowned for Corporate law...

Thanks!!

Would it be possible for anyone else to help me out with this....by either letting me know the rankings or which college is generally renowned for Corporate law...

Thanks!!