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

And for all who are in or not in the race to be in top 15 law schools.. dont be negative because we are still among the best law schools in the world.. So if LSE,Ox,Harvard say no, we have the spirit to proud for what we have got...

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.

It should give you a chance.

You could tell us how it went by the end of the process.

Lets have one example.. that is to say there are two top students from law top schools from the same top law school with the same top possible rank.... one have started teaching and one joined magic circle firms... if you are a evaluator than who will be your first choice... that is the law school specific requirement... Oxford BCL is inclined towards acads.. they need some brilliant students to pursue LLM for further research.. it is also amply clear from the profile of oxford's students... most have opted PhD/research.... But it will not be the case for the university offering some specialist courses like LLM in tax... they prefer lawyers who are already working in this field or who intend to start their career in tax... For an example.. and it is true fact that most Asian students apply for business/general LLM in USA and UK but US graduate mostly apply for LLM in Tax when it comes to Georgetown University or NYU.. that means to be in particular university it is some more factors should be taken into consideration.. like for oxford, applicant dont much inclined due to BCL ( even it is most respectful course) , may be because of fee/grads/generality of course... however LSE has its name even in USA when it comes to courses in Commercial/banking laws... there are some more factors that lead me to say like this.. i never intend to say that LSE LLM is better than oxford BCL.. but as i said... LSE face more competition for certain courses than oxford as you apply for specialist course, in your LOR/SOP you mention the name of course, so you face more competition on that specific LLM, it is not the case for BCL in oxford... So in LSE, the best student of your country ( who have sublime work ex in Human Rights, even from UN) will not be considered for 25 seats in LLM in commercial law(because for commercial law ,law school will prefer a candidate with commercial law expertise ,not from human rights or tax), as it is too competitive... rather you have a better chance in BCL at oxford...

To be in top law schools ,just apply in as many law schools as possible... because if you are among top 5-15% with excellent profile ( publication, moots, work ex.....) , may be top 1-5% have not applied due to any reason( lets say funds, work ex ... problems) so you have strong chance.... however .. to be positive is the key......

Niceman, you have struck it right there.

I have applied and got rejections from LSE within 2 weeks and the reasoning stated by you was one of the causes. I applied for mergers, finance, insolvency, tax (corporate law) without actually having any experience in this field. Now one can imagine that with thousands of people having been rendered job-less or atleast having to work in less lucrative posts, there must have been applicants with strong work-ex having done unimaginable things at work. Even though one might have excellent grades, one is going to pale in face of such strong competition.

However, Oxbridge have more academic orientation, though it would be naive to say that they just concentrate themselves on researchers and exclude lawyers because there are only 30 seats available for MPhil at Oxford with less than half continuing for DPhil. In the case of Cambridge, there is no definite number and even lesser number of people end being given a place in PhD. So, even with them, you would have an equal chance of getting a place whether you intend to continue into academics or go into practice. However, one has to see that with Oxbridge and unlike LSE, work-ex cannot make up for bad performance in law, though it can definitely prop up an already strong profile.

Surely, for those who have research as an aim, BCL and LLM at Cam are the best options because work-ex does not matter and there is no restriction at Oxbridge on taking a module which one has not studied at Bachelor's level. Though the latter is principally true for LSE as well, however, in practice it is not always the case, since it becomes a point against you in gaining an admission.

In all cases work ex is must... like in order to be in Oxford we require not only the grades ( as it can lead us to be top in our national representative index) but it is the work ex ( not working as solicitor or lawyer, but teaching in your area of interest can lead you to be selected).. this teaching work ex rule will not apply when we apply in stanford/harvard as they required more professional lawyers, not the lecturers...

Law school will take into consideration the work ex only in case of tie between students...only when it is difficult to campare or judge the grades as all the students can be excellent... so here is the ranking for each step

1 class rank
2 law school rank
3 what uni. want for their course (lawyers or lecturers etc.) for that they will see your CV,SOP,LOR
in case if you are in.. than well.. what do you think ?

Well, I can't agree on "work-ex if grades are equal" proposition. When they say that work-ex is not required, one has to imply that what they say is what they mean.

May be in case of a tie, they take a look at one's overall scores. One candidate might have very poor marks inspite of a strong overall percentage which might go against him.

History is replete with examples where fresh pass-outs and drop-outs having no work-ex whatsoever have been offered a place at Oxbridge (I don't talk of LSE here) and the ratio would be atleast 50:50 if not more. So work-ex can't be the determining factor.

True... work is not sole factor.. law school do take freshers without work ex. .. but suppose, two 1st rank law students (from different years) from the best (same) law school, from their country have applied, in such situation who is better.. we cant say only the publication or moot participation negate another from the race... it is only the relevant work ex will give the edge to win that single seat between them..

So i believe that in top law schools it is not only your grades but there are some more factors required to win the seat (when you are facing the tough competition as most of the people have excellent grades.. like.. work ex.)
what do you suggest?

Remember, a degree of luck is also needed!

Really.... we need luck.. wish you all good luck for rest of the seats except one for me... ha ha.... :)

True... work is not sole factor.. law school do take freshers without work ex. .. but suppose, two 1st rank law students (from different years) from the best (same) law school, from their country have applied, in such situation who is better.. we cant say only the publication or moot participation negate another from the race... it is only the relevant work ex will give the edge to win that single seat between them..

Bottomline is this: If you meet the conditions/requirements that they have laid down, you have a chance.

HLS/SLS/LSE/CLS/Yale: Work-ex with strong academics.

Oxbridge: First Class with "top 10% of high rank uni/ top5% of 2nd tier/ a first or second position from 3rd tier".

I am agree with you jagsmehn.... but for all others who dont meet or less than this criterion.. Luck still plays a great role...

Looks and luck do play a role at Cambridge (they call for photos) but at Oxford, luck is left alone to fend for its name and reputation (or notority as the case may be)

US law school success index_

Yale- for uni toppers/scholars/work ex in teaching is must
( success rate- 30% because only genius applly)

Harvard_ it is only law school (in top 10) a fresher may apply... they look true professionals ... lawyers.. lecturers are rare..., for yale and harvard you have to be born brilliant since inception
( success rate-5% because everyone apply )

Penn/Northwestern and rest of law schools (among top 15)
- LSAC 'A' grade with 2 year work ex.

LLM/Kellogg- with all above you require 80K ( i am not sure about 80k $)
(success rate -45% as 80k $ factor, so you have to have all the money and brain )

............... n so on....