Hello friends... by addressing this issue i want to say that In order to be in top 10 law schools in UK ,you will have to be among top 20 candidates from your Country... It is true that every law school/uni. has not more than 2-3 seats for a country, but it may be 5-6 in case of exceptional candidates... Your credits, class rank, your law school rank in your home country,work ex. all matters.... Whats say?

I don't really think so. As long as you get a 2nd upper, there's an excellent chance of being admitted to any uk law school with the exception of LSE, Cambridge and Oxford, which are slightly harder to get into.

But still,on the other hand there are chances that for 200 seats in a(one) top law school , around 500 students have applied.Lets say all these 500 students have the excellent grades ( 2ed upper as it is possible with international applicants from more than 100 countries) and they applied in all top 10 law schools , means there is no room for others with less grades or the fight is within these top 500 because as they have applied in all or most of the law schools, so those universities will prefer them unless some students (500) did not accept the offer till their deadlines or accept some other good university... thats why all universities put some students keep waiting to get these seats open for others.. i think this system is so complex...

curious about what "exceptional candidates" means?

I mean to say by "exceptional Candidates" is that a person passout from the best law schools from his/her country with excellent cerdentials , working in magic circle firms in UK or USA, with good publications or a lecturer with outstanding career record or someone who is working with the international organizations or top most administrative depertments in his/her country..

Let me instil with this way... Every country has atleast 20 candidates with upper second ( or first class, i believe it may be more )... and there are 150 countries.... means 150 @ 20 = 3000 candidates.. and again we have only 15 top law schools with 150 seats with an average in each school that means we have only 2250 seats in top 15 law schools...
As far as my experience is concerned that in UK most universities prefer the credentials rather your work experiance but it is not the case in USA... In order to be in US (TOP) law schools you require both (credentials and work ex.)...
The morale of the story is if you are not in top 15 law schools than dont take it negative... you are still among the best...

i want to elicit the way to apply in law schools..

1. apply in atleast 6 law schools (In UK)
2. Two should be your dream law schools
3. Next two should be like you are in 50-50% position
4. Last two must among those law schools in which you are sure to secure admission

The following information is what I've been told from an LLM graduate from Cambridge. She told this to me when I was asking her about applying to Cambridge. What she asked me first was my class rank. She said that the year that she applied, there were 4 students from our countires applied as well. All of them are from the top 2 law schools. She campared 2 applicants for me.

The first one graduated with first class honors ranked 5th.. been working at Baker&McKenzie for a 1-2 years. The second one graduated with first class honors as well, but ranked 3rd....with no work experience. They both graduated from the same class.

The first person did not received an offer from Cambridge, but the second person who ranked better got an offer.

The lady who told me this also ranked 1st in her class. Her recommendation was written by 2 professors, no employer.

Maybe...Cambridge prioritize academic credentials, I dont' know. :)

I believe, there maybe some other factors to differentiate these two people, but, it seems to me that class rank does matter somehow.

The hypothesis is excellent.

But you forget some practical truths.

1) Not all people with excellent grades go in for further studies.

2) Everyone has an idea about his/her application and know where they stand and where they should apply.

3) The difference between top and lower ranked institutions (of origin, of LLB/JD) seems opaque since there are so many people around the place who have ended up at the best colleges even though they came from obscure places (You won't consider those institutions for your masters)

4) It is very difficult to introduce the concept of averages to the whole process since there is a lot of subjectivity involved in the whole process.

5) What is an "excellent candidate" is another ambiguous question, hence, generalisations are difficult. However, it is to be seen that even those candidates who get in late or in the regular cycle are strong candidates (with reference to the institution concerned). Any one getting into Harvard/Yale/SLS/Oxbridge has got to be an excellent candidate whether gets in early or late.

I know I have gone off the track in a couple of points but the whole point is that it is difficult to make generalisations.

The following information is what I've been told from an LLM graduate from Cambridge. She told this to me when I was asking her about applying to Cambridge. What she asked me first was my class rank. She said that the year that she applied, there were 4 students from our countires applied as well. All of them are from the top 2 law schools. She campared 2 applicants for me.

The first one graduated with first class honors ranked 5th.. been working at Baker&McKenzie for a 1-2 years. The second one graduated with first class honors as well, but ranked 3rd....with no work experience. They both graduated from the same class.

The first person did not received an offer from Cambridge, but the second person who ranked better got an offer.

The lady who told me this also ranked 1st in her class. Her recommendation was written by 2 professors, no employer.

Maybe...Cambridge prioritize academic credentials, I dont' know. :)

I believe, there maybe some other factors to differentiate these two people, but, it seems to me that class rank does matter somehow.

Yes,I believe you are true... i think top law schools consider some parameter to select us in the following manner:

Rule 1_ they select few applicants from your country (2-6) based on such a elimination process ( if you are not qualify any of the steps you are out)

First)
Your class rank with your marks in your country (if you are not, than you will not be considered for next step)

Second
Than law school rank ( if you are not in top 10 law schools, than you will not be considered)

Third
It is the elimination round among the candidates from your country i.e. only top 4-5 will go for next step.. i believe in UK it is your rank matters with your law school rank in your country...
In case of tie..
A
Your work ex will be considered,

B
Than your publications ( any international exposure will be preferred with respect of your publications and work ex.)

during this process a national rank will be given to you ( for each candidate of that country)... and subsequently you will be out when some better candidate comes from your country ( I think here luck comes into the picture, if you applied early for early review and that person with better grade from your region applied late, in such case as you have applied earlier and than such university will have to give you the offer letter first, because they have not seen the application of the late applicant with excellent grades, so dont be late),
Note- Most of the top law schools do consider the previous records of old applicants ,if your credentials match (at Par)with those, you will get a offer letter from that law school in early review programme, if you dont qualify- a rejection letter or in case if you are slightly close, you will be deferred till deadline)

Next step is elimination round after deadline (for earlier review or for final deadline) it is a international elimination round in which you will be considered on the basis of the available seats,geographic representation and many factor...
i consider it as follows:

Lets say there are only 100 seats

No. 1- you are out if you are not at the top in your country( as there are only 100 seats and there are more than 100 countries)
N0.2- to be no1 , you get lucky as i said, your profile matched with the previous record of old selected student and you have made an offer as you applied earlier (i.e. you are the best student from the best law school in your country, and recently passed and applied early, you are in due to early review decisions but another applicant from your country, who is passout with the same rank in class from the same top ranked school having 2 years work ex with United Nations(exceptional), will not be lucky.

No. 3- if you reject the offer or did not reply on time due to any reason, another person from your country might get a chance if he apply late or he has been deferred during early review program...


.............................


i will continue on this topic later on... i request some candid and valuable suggestions from all like Patricia_w and jagsmehn who can put some light on this discussion and refine our discussion to reach at the conclusion... Th

You have done a great job.

But the criteria of top 10 schools is not always right because there are so many examples to the contrary. Safer bet is to limit it to upto tier 3, whatever that means (top 30 for US/UK, top 15/20 something for others).

And then for countries like India and China, I know about so many people who have come from obscure places and have made it. Plus rankings aren't available for colleges/ universities in all countries.

By so far i observed that it is true for the Law Schools in UK only... As in order to be in top law schools in USA, in most of the cases, you require both, excellent grades and work ex... i think,jagsmehn has made a valid point and i am in favour of it... But i believe it is possible only when you have applied in USA and some rare cases in UK among top law schools..

The formula proposed by nicemanin is good for Cambridge.

What about Oxford? They have Written Work and CV. Many people have reported recieving rejections from LSE/Cambridge and Ivy league and still obtaining an offer from Oxford.

I guess there, it would be somewhat like this:

1) Your marks. All with less than a first get eliminated.

2) Your rank. All not within top 5% get eliminated.

3) Your written work. All who don't meet the qualitative criteria face elimination.

4) The References. All with poor references get eliminated.

At this stage you have a pool of 500-600 to choose from.

1) All with Firsts and good ranks from best institutions of thier concerned countries are in.

2) Statement of Purpose and CV. Those with coherent CVs and SOPs showing sustained interest and great promise are in.

3) Luck. For the rest, it is too obscure and only God knows what comes in to play.


Niceman, whats your take here?

By so far i observed that it is true for the Law Schools in UK only... As in order to be in top law schools in USA, in most of the cases, you require both, excellent grades and work ex... i think,jagsmehn has made a valid point and i am in favour of it... But i believe it is possible only when you have applied in USA and some rare cases in UK among top law schools..

Well, I would add that there are some people who have done some unique things (not work-ex) in thier life apart from obtaining good scores and ranks. It is for these people who hold promise for exceptional futures that top universities open thier doors.

So, apart from what nicemanin has formulated and what I have opined for Oxford, one has to make allowance for motivated people who have various other credentials to thier name.

Now i want to focus on the issue regarding "excellent work ex" lets say there are again 200 candidates from top 200 law firms from UK,USA,EU,Asia... How will the University judge that you are the best as most of the candidates are coming from magic circle law firms from their respective country... May be my top 20 student theory will apply here but it can not be the sole cretaria... means they do evalaute your credits... here comes another rule_

that say, this is university specific criterian_

as for Yale- they require only those people who have some teaching background

Harvard- liberal to take students irrespective of thier work ex.
and
Queen Mary( not clear but it is appearent from the student profiles) that they do take some experienced lawyers and lecturers,
For NYU- they prefer lawyers.. means if you have average grades but good work ex as lawyer.. than you are in..
n so and..
and please i have not mentioned exceptions in it... Whats say?

jagsmehn.. you are right.. here comes the exceptions of all..
1) who are workinh in UN or any international organisations
2) who have contributed their life for humanity like for NGO, pro bono work
I am sure that it is the paramount factor beyond any grade or work ex. as for certain universities, what the student will give/contribute to the society after LLM ,is most important ( like in Yale) factor... thats why uni. require your SOP and CV , to see your prospects..

I am thankful to you jagsmehn.. you have done a nice job..

What you say is true.

But the question would be how they compare the candidates.

What weightage they give to a particular point and how they chose one thing over the other. This is something very obscure and probably can't be made clearer.

I guess, even then, getting the basics right and putting in some glitter here and there would make a pie too irresistable for the concerned people.