Rating universities in terms of prestige is not an exact science. Each top institution is probably able to pull out statistics to support its claims that its degrees are highly valued. Sometimes it's as useful to trust your own opinion of which university is most prestigious.

My own strategy was to apply to the two universities I'd really want to study at, namely Durham and UCL, then apply to a couple of others of a similar standard and a couple more which were good but slightly lower in terms of prestige as an "insurance" if I didn't get the offers I wanted. I feel I've been lucky in that I've got at least one of my first choice unis.

The financial perspective is useful, especially as the firms that deal in that area are the very big ones. My own background is in branding and IT so I want to work in the mid-tier but it's good to hear what the perceptions are of someone who has worked in an industry served by the very top law firms.

I am sorry but this is a load of rubbish.

There are too many institutions today to talk about "prestige". The so called "prestige" might be associated with Oxford and Cambridge thats all. Apart from the golden triangle (Ox, Cam and some London colleges) which might carry some snobbery and pretentious crap, the rest of the schools remain in the same tier. Durham, Bristol, then Nottingham, Manchester are going to be treated in exactly the same level from a recruitment perspective.

Every big, medium or whatever size firm target these schools. They all go law fairs there and have very good links with these Russel group Universities (Durham is not a russel group go figure). Even Sheffield with all due respect, places very well all over the country.

Unfortunately it isn't rubbish. Rightly or wrongly HR in law firms in the UK categorise universities with much of it being based on prestige. There may be slight variances from firm to firm but that simply reflects the intangible nature of "prestige".

You may not wish to acknowledge it but I've been told as much by a partner in the Magic Circle, another in a top 15 firm, even a partner in a small boutique firm.

I was talking to another partner at a work-related social on Friday evening and in conversation we got talking about my plans. When he asked where I was considering doing my LLM, and I told him where I was heading, his reaction was "wow". He said people have exactly the same reaction to him because of where he studied his LLM.

In a country where notions of class still exist it's a little naive to think that in one of its oldest and most respected professions firms do not still harbour prejudices regarding academic institutions.

....but this is becoming a major digression from the purpose of this thread.

The fact that there are categories of Universities is not new.

I am qualifying in 2011 and to be honest once you qualify its irrelevant where you go to school. But if you say that you go to the US say to Berkeley that would be different.

Most city firms do hire from x y z University its a fact. That is however changing. You see more graduates with degrees from non conventional backgrounds and schools that get the same positions in the city as a graduate from Cambridge.

Once you qualify that changes, unless you want to break into a particular area of the law or work as a professor etc.

I do still think from my experience in the city that a Bristol or Nottingham graduate is in the same par with Durham even with KCL. What does that mean? All of them very good.

Well yeah, Bristol and Nottingham are hardly basket-cases both generally and in terms of their law schools.

I wish you were right Whereto...I thought the same about 13 years ago when I graduated with the 1st in finance from a decent but not top 10 unis. Had 2 internships arranged by the uni with good references....I had all top A level equivalent grades so could have gotten anywhere but I was still relatively new to the UK so thought that it was your subjects and grades that mattered, not the school name...Well, not only I could not get a job, I could not even get an interview...And I sent 200 or so application forms....Eventually I got invited to one major American bank where people mocked me saying that they do not consider people with my academic experience for their junior analysts position :-) Junior analyst is the lowest thing in the pecking order....Well, luckily because of one of my pieces of research I got noticed and got a scholarship from a top 5 school where I did my MSc in Finance. Not a month has passed since I started the MSc course (hence, my knowledge did not dramatically improve) I managed to secure 2 job offers plus was in the final round for 2 more jobs. Roll forward another 10 years and I became a reasonably senior person (for my age) and the leader of the a particular investment market ....for the same American bank that considered me not good enough for their analyst position....Hence, guys - and I see that there are a lot of hard-working students on this site, otherwise I would not have bothered writing. - do not make the same mistake as I made, go for the best name you can get...Otherwise, it will take you years to catch up salary wise and title wise...

Wheretogo mentioned Bristol and Nottingham, both of which are very strong universities with good law schools. Both would rank higher than other good universities such as, say, Newcastle or Sheffield.

It's quite obvious that prestige shouldn't be the only factor in choosing a university. Birmingham has a great law school but I looked at their LLMs and found they didn't offer modules in IP etc which I really wanted to cover. You also have to remember that you're going to live as a student at that university for a year, and your happiness may affect your capacity to concentrate on your studies.

That said, when you identify universities that you feel you would fit into and are confident that the courses on offer match your interests, it stands to reason that you should apply to the very best one that you think you have a chance of getting into because, at the end of the day, the bit of paper you leave with can have a major impact upon your future prospects.

The partner in the firm I paralegal for has been helping me select universities to apply to. He said any of the top 20-30 would be good. Yet he did name a handful of very top universities that would be particularly beneficial when it came to adding value to my CV.

At the end of the day, unless you're doing it purely for a love of the subject then you have to treat it as an exercise in personal branding and the better the institution, the stronger the application you have. Not necessarily how it should be when universities are meant to be centrally regulated but it's a fact.

I am of the view of Private Equity. I agree.

It happened to me too and I am overseas. I know that there are some schools that are a bigger corporate hitter in the city such as KCL, UCL, LSE and so forth.

On wanting to study the LLM I am looking at strong schools as well. I do believe that a qualified lawyers' position is different than for example a graduate or a paralegal. Once qualified and with LLM from say Durham or Bristol I don't think the chances will be hindered because of the name. I do think that if you go to the US more doors will open even more for an English qualified lawyer.

For Phantro: I do hope the LLM helps you but as far as I am aware if you get a good 2.1 from a solid university you are flying.

In any case if you go to Durham you can always tell me how good the course is!