I know this has been debated over and over, but since I'm still in doubt, I'd imagine some of you out there might be too. I'm a lawyer from Brazil, interested in Corporate/Capital Markets Law. In my country, from what I've heard, KCL appears to be a little more known. To contradict me, a fellow Brazilian has posted last year that UCL has a better reputation here. I don't know. People I've talked to seem to not be aware of many schools other than LSE.

KCL seems to have more courses related to capital markets, though UCL appears stronger in Corporate. Regarding reputation, from what I've heard, UCL enjoys a better one in the UK, while KCL is more reputable abroad. I don't know if this is pertaining to law only. And I don't know how things are in the particular fields of Corporate and Capital Markets. Anyway, to sum up, I'd like to invite all to join the discussion and give their opinions over who has the better programme in terms of facilities, faculty, courses and reputation. I can honestly say that, holding unconditional offers from both, I have no idea which I will choose to enroll in.

UCL and LSE usually hold the same spot in rankings. After these comes KCL. Just like you I also hold offers from both schools and am taking up UCL.

Yeah, it's what I usually hear as well. I'm leaning towards UCL, though I've heard that King's is stronger in financial law and competition law. I think that, at the end of the day, reputation matters a lot.

I am in the same position. I am a US lawyer. Does anyone know which school has a better reputation in the US? I am leaning towards UCL.

I don't know in the US, but overall UCL has a better reputation. Moreover, it offers some great looking comparative US/UK courses, you should look into that.

UCL>>KINGS

I am US IP atty choosing Kings IP LLM out of Kings, UCL, QMUL mainly because I am a US/UK citizen and, besides liking the school very much, I got a feel that Kings has a braoder international reputation.