Hello,

Just wondering what would be the perceived reputation order in the area of law of the universities of Edinburgh, Leicester, Warwick and Nottingham within the UK. I'm myself an EU student so it is quite difficult for me to estimate the order aside from looking at various rankings. My rough guess would be, however:
1. Edinburgh
2. Warwick
3. Nottingham
4. Leicester

Do you agree?

hi, the conventional wisdom in the UK would rank the law department at those unis as follows:

1. Nottingham (definitely)
2. Edinburgh (though many would choose Warwick ahead of Edinburgh as the former teaches English law)
3. Warwick
4. Leicester

From an American perspective, I might rank:

1. Edinburgh
2. Nottingham
3. Warwick
4. Leicester

I live in Brazil and I would say P_Martini got it right in his ranking. Even though, to be perfectly clear, most of this unis arent very famous here

My opinion:

1. Nottingham
2. Edinburgh
3. Warwick
4. Leicester

While I appreciate your question in terms of overall reputation you have missed a major point. If you are planning to study at any of them you should be more concerned with the reputation in your particular field. Example, Notthingham has a much more specialised programme in human rights but Edinburgh's general International and European law programmes are much stronger. If you are seeking and LLM, then the comment regarding the difference between English/Scots law is inconsequential.
Generally, on basic reputation, Edinburgh is typically ranked higher in worldwide prestige than the others on your list but this include all programmes, not just law. And, yes, I may be a bit biased as I did both my LLM and PhD at Edinburgh but there is a reason I chose it over Nottingham and other London universities where I was accepted on both counts.
If you are interested in ratings with regard to law and where it counts (ie: not including things such as are included in the 'good uni tables') then using the RAE is a good way to...here is an example. http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/rae/
Sorry, this one is a bit out of date but they are only published every 4 years.
Polls such as the Times Good University use an entirely different set of qualifiers ans are primarily based on the review of undergraduates, which is a completely different point of interest if you are looking to do an LLM. http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/stug/universityguide.php

Good luck.

Thank you all for your input; it was very informative.

Incidentally, what would be the convential perception in the UK if we compare the University of Nottingham's law programme to the law programmes of London colleges such as KCL and UCL. Will there be a bigger gap in the perception of reputation and quality?

lawstudent2010

Hi! To continue comparison of Nottingham and Edinburgh, in my opinion Nottingham has an edge over Edinburgh. Simply because it teaches common law among other subjects, whether Edinburgh offers Scots law, which mostly incorporates codification of law. Since you are from EU continent, it is preferable to learn common law principles in order to diversify your legal knowledge.
Apart from this point, Nottingham and Edinburgh are both reputable unis, either of them is a good choice.

Thank you all for your input; it was very informative.

Incidentally, what would be the convential perception in the UK if we compare the University of Nottingham's law programme to the law programmes of London colleges such as KCL and UCL. Will there be a bigger gap in the perception of reputation and quality?

lawstudent2010

Good Gosh,
"nottingham is usually ranked slightly above kings"

Definitely not by employers or lawyers, including magic circle firms. Notts might be ranked higher (sometimes) in the league tables but we all know that students as opposed to recruiters usually refer to the league tables when making decisions. The tables are largely ignored by employers who already have a set idea of the unis they consider best for legal studies.

These unis in terms of prestige, international and national reputation and academic strengths are Oxford and Cambridge. The London unis follow (LSE, KCL and UCL). LSE has a slight edge over Kings and UCL but there is no difference between KCL and UCL. If there is a difference, it's marginal and largely exisits in the mind of people who rely on league tables (students). The recruiters for selection purposes do not distinguish between the two. I have spoken to lawyers at magic circle firms and top 100 firms, including my brother who is a senior associate at Clifford Chance. (He obtained his LLB from KCL as well)

The reality of the situation is the employers see no difference between KCL and UCL. Furthermore, see no " significant" difference between said colleges and LSE.

The recuriters will not attach preference to KCL graduates over UCL graduates and vice versa because they are essentially placed within the same category. In the mind of the employer, there is no better/worse when comparing the two colleges.

The London unis (LSE, KCL, UCL) with the exception of Oxbridge are the best for law and have a strong relationship with the city law firms. Notts, Durham and QMUL (solid law departments) rank after the London unis. Bristol is top too (Id pick Bristol over Notts and QMUL)

Sunnylady has put it right.
I just want to add a couple of things.
First, from international perspective King's LLM is highly recognized and adds much value. Whereas, when you mention Nottingham, people start scratching their heads. I'm not saying it's not good, it's just the good reputation of Nottingham uni is mostly whithin the borders of the UK, I guess.
Second, KCL law is well-established, it's one of the oldest law departments in England, dating from 1830's. Whereas, Nottingham got it independent uni status only in 1940's.

fair arguments, but as with any ranking, these opinions are all subjective. it's impossible to prove any claim that 'employers' all rank kings above notts. i'm sure some will, others perhaps not. it's not as though employers have a secret black book with rankings that all rank kings above notts. in any case, they're both great unis, and you won't go wrong attending either..

Summerfield, Becon & P_ Martini,
In your opinion, would it be actually right to say that an LLM from Edinburgh, Warwick, Nottingham or Leicester will have the same value and recognition in Brazil, US, Russia and other countries as an LLM from any little known and low ranked British university?

lawstudent2010

I am not one of the 3 people you are asking but my answer would be?:
Edinburgh - definite no
Other ones - possibly if you are talking to a lay man.Obviously people who work in law/finance will know the difference. I would say Warwick will have an edge as far as finance firms are concerned (have a very good reputation in economics, not dissimilar to Chicago in the USA. Basically, LSE is very theoretical and wordy, Warwick is more numbers). Notingham might be better for law for some people...The other one will not ring a bell

Alumni and students of Kings seem to get remarkably defensive about their university. While it's an excellent institution, it's not on the same level as UCL or LSE for law. In terms of ranking lists, if you take out the "inflating" factors of student satisfaction and prospects, and focused on entry standards and research quality, then Nottingham would still be ranked a better law school than Kings. The RAE rankings are a good measure of the faculty's postgraduate offerings and they only serve to compound the notion that Nottingham is the better law school.

Panthro,
once again, it is rather immature to be obsessive about different rankings.
Concerning LLM programmes, it is hard to compare Nottingham and King's, at least for me. I'm interested in financial law. Well, no such specialization in Notts. Most americans value LLM tax, well, no such thing in Notts. the list goes on.
King's LLM offers almost 100 different modules, while Notts around 50.
King's financial law teaches an oxonian, former partner at a top law firm. He is like a star in the field of financial law, author of a very respected textbook on this subject, and his reputation in this field is beyond comprehension.
So, you know, all this adds up for King's to be at the top of my list.
Nottingham is good and reputable in it's own way, but King's offers LLM that is simply better.

Summerfield, Becon & P_ Martini,
In your opinion, would it be actually right to say that an LLM from Edinburgh, Warwick, Nottingham or Leicester will have the same value and recognition in Brazil, US, Russia and other countries as an LLM from any little known and low ranked British university?

lawstudent2010

I really don't appreciate being called immature for daring to have a different opinion to you. I'm not obsessive about rankings, I treat them with a certain degree of contempt if truth be told, but I think entry standards and research ratings are quite indicative. Your view of King's is based on your interpretation of quality rather than reputation. The thread is not to discuss the intricacies of every LLM on offer but to give a general ranking of the 4 universities that were listed - which, I might add, did not include Kings.

I don't question your reasoning, and I respect Kings as one of the best law schools. In truth, my post was more in response to the other person whose tone was actually rather arrogant. That said, I don't think you can state that Kings offer LLMs that are objectively better than Nottingham's, when a person's criteria for selecting a course can be different to your own and equally valid. Some do not select a course based on the reputation of one academic, especially those people who choose more general LLM programmes.

Summerfield, Becon & P_ Martini,
In your opinion, would it be actually right to say that an LLM from Edinburgh, Warwick, Nottingham or Leicester will have the same value and recognition in Brazil, US, Russia and other countries as an LLM from any little known and low ranked British university?

lawstudent2010

Panthro,
I didn't want to hurt your feelings. I just called the pastime of a one who gives too much attention to the rankings rather immature or unreasonable.
Concerning your arguments, they are mostly Ad hominem. I mean, all you just say is: you can't do this, don't say that. I presented some valid reasons why I think King's LLM is percieved better than Notts by myself. I hope these reasons someone will find useful in figuring out where to get an LLM.
But, not going into much details, I think that most people will disagree with you regarding the discussed topic.