Hi Allen,

You are quite right to suggest that the LLM in commercial law at Durham is fairly new and, therefore, not that well-established. The law department is small compared with other top law schools, and it has always concentrated its strength in EC law, human rights and International law. In recent years, in response to an increase in student numbers (especially undergraduates), the size of the academic staff has expanded.

Since I left Durham, however, I have noticed a conspicuous recruitment of law lecturers whose specialisms are more varied than my time - jurisprudence, IP and commercial law. The department is definitely equipped to teach nearly all the major branches of law at undergraduate and graduate levels.
I would not, therefore, worry at all about the law department's inability to impart substantive knowledge and skills to you.

If, however, your concern is related to the variety of subjects available and the stature of commercial law professors, I would suggest you look elsewhere. To my mind, KCL, UCL, Cambridge and Oxford are very good choices. The law faculties in these universities are much larger, complete with dedicated centres for commercial law and leading academics in your chosen field. If collaboration and contact with law firms are important to you, then these universities, particularly the London universities, should guide your decision making process.

Finally, I address the issue of Durham's reputation and lack of it outside the UK. I assume that you plan to practise corporate law after your LLM, and that you hope this advanced degree will buttress your chances of seeking employment with a good firm. Two remarks are pertinent. First, to rehearse the shibboleth, the law department and the university are well regarded by (not least) law firms in the UK. Many law graduates from Durham have been recruited and retained as solicitors by these firms. The department may or may not be well-established in commercial law, but in this area where substantive knowledge of the law becomes obsolete very rapidly, the employers will value your grades and evaulate the performance of past Durham graduates in their firms for evidence of an applicant's potential.

Secondly, and while this is speculative, I suppose these Durham graduates must be on the right track since some firms traditionally recruit Durham graduates; others are less inclined to do so. Recruitment partners may also evince an inherent bias for or against Durham graduates. You must obviously speak to more people and adjust your applications accordingly.

I come from a place where Durham is not only unheard of, but the university's name is frequently and egregiously mispronounced. My former pupil master wasn't even aware of this university until he met me! But having considered all the factors that are important to me before accepting the offer, I was convinced then, as I am now, that Durham will be a unique experience for me. What is important and unique to me are, of course, not objective facts. You will have to make your own informed decision.

Good luck.

Sorry to disappoint you all but this guy is obviously not who he says he is.

He doesn't even know that a bachelor's degree from Oxford or Cambridge is still a B.A., not an LL.B.

His main purpose seems to overstate the worth of Aberdeen, which is not nearly as good as he says it is.

If you want to know about English law schools, the answer is easy.

Top tier: Oxford then Cambridge
Next tier: LSE, UCL, Edinburgh, St. Andrews
Next tier: Warwick, Nottingham, Durham, Manchester, Glasgow, Bristol, KCL (probably others in this group as well but I can't think of them off the top of my head).

Sorry, that should have been English and Scottish law schools.

Joseph,
I am curious where Northumbria would fit in in your opinion.

Thats kind of you, haesd. Youve told us something, which we really cant get from the other ways, you words stimulated me and Ive made my mind to go to Durham University. Thank you very much.

Northumbria is a 3rd-tier university with a 2nd-tier law school. Law is obviously a priority there. If you are willing to sacrifice the prestige of going to an older university (and willing to live in Newcastle), you will probably learn as much at Northumbria as you would at a much better (across the board) university like Edinburgh or Birmingham.

It is certainly a long way ahead of Aberdeen.

My question is, why is everyone so focused on Oxford and Cambridge while there are so many other excellent schools in the UK? And frankly speaking, hardly anyone ever gets accepted. I've been reading different postings on here and everyone is like King's or LSE? HELLO!!! How many students can these schools accept per year? And if you are not a genius, or a straight A student, you'll never get in!

Another issue I think is worth mentioning is that for International students, London is not a great venue. It would be great to have a job there but not for studying. Especially if the student does not come from a big city. Going out to places such as Nottingham, Manchester, Cardiff...etc gives the true sense of being in the UK. The people are friendlier and it is so much easier and a lot more cheaper than London.

I think it's time that students should stop focusing on the "the well-known" schools just because everyone else thinks that they are the place to be and perhaps try to find other, just as good (if not better) schools, with a friendlier environment!

Cheers!

Sorry to disappoint you all but this guy is obviously not who he says he is.

He doesn't even know that a bachelor's degree from Oxford or Cambridge is still a B.A., not an LL.B.

His main purpose seems to overstate the worth of Aberdeen, which is not nearly as good as he says it is.

If you want to know about English law schools, the answer is easy.

Top tier: Oxford then Cambridge
Next tier: LSE, UCL, Edinburgh, St. Andrews
Next tier: Warwick, Nottingham, Durham, Manchester, Glasgow, Bristol, KCL (probably others in this group as well but I can't think of them off the top of my head).

Agreed - George Sullivan doesn't sound like he is really who he says he is. I can't imagine an HR officer from an international law firm being so forthcoming with "information" on this forum.

You got me Bill.

To be honest, my main aim was to discredit the original guy, who is obviously a fraud.

But I was wrong about St. Andrews. In an attempt to push my argument against "George" too far, I went beyond the bounds of my own knowledge.

My original point still stands, however. "George" is obviously not who he tells us he is. My concern was really that a lot of people come to this board for advice and guidance and someone who apparently has an ulterior motive is selling them horseshit and potentially leading them to make the wrong decision.

In reality, I have noticed that employers often have personal favourites among universities rather than relying heavily on league tables.

What are UK Magic Circle and US law firms' views on LLM from Manchester? In comparison with the usual London and other UK universities?

I am a non-EU international, and would like to appear more marketable in UK or US with an LLM, combined with personal interest in International Business/Corporate law. Any advice?

"I come from Canada where I graduated from McGill (Montreal). I did my LLM at LSE then a MBA at the university of Durham to be more specific."

- Hello?! An HR guy with two postgraduate degrees?

"in order to give more accurate informations I will describe the methodology and aswer to your questions."

- Not the most literate HR guy either is he?

Which is of course because he is, as Joseph1 so eloquently observed, selling horseshit. Don't listen to this moron. Even if there is some sense (see Bill's post) within all that rubbish, he doesn't deserve the time of day.

(Scarlet - I haven't heard much about the Law fac at Manchester, its LLM or its ppl. Which is undoubtedly due to my ignorance and the fact I am pretty London based. But the thing is, the same may well be true for many other people as well (outside academic circles and northern firms of course). Even if there are loads of good people there, if you want to appear more marketable, it won't count a jot if the employer doesn't know of the programme at Manchester. So while it makes for a pernicious cycle, my opinion is that for career purposes at least it's safer to stick to the usual unis.)

Please answer, why would a recruiter hate those who have LLM or BCL in human rights when they apply to a corporate firm? What is the unofficial word on the street or consensus amongst the corporate lawyers concerning the other respective field of the law? Do they regard human rights/criminal lawyers as inferior or with a 'do-gooders' mentality?

Besides this. What is the reason for holding these rankings with a law firm. As you said in a reply, an attorney with 10 years of experience is likely, at first sight, not to need an LLM in order to market themselves successfully to a firm such as yours. That experience counts for more than merely a degree. Is it not therefore logical to say that it is the quality of the candidate that ought to found recruitment criteria? For example, would a candidate achieving a 1st class LLB from a lower tier university fair better than a 2:1 or 2nd class degree candidate from a top tier university?
or for that matter would not a candidate from a lower tier university fair better with more experience than a top tier candidate with less experience?

The bottom line i suppose is, is are firms using a broad brush to categorise candidates as a simpler means of filtering through applications knowing full well and accepting that they may be allowing a few exceptional candidates to slip through their nets?

If so, is it not possible for low tier university candidates to make an impression by filling their CV's with experience and top grades to compete with their top tier comrades?

Is this not a form of institutional discrimination? that selection is not a merit based process but a process by which the top legal community all come from the same place?

Such institutional discrimination is a hot topic in the legal community and it is therefore surprising that a recruiter has not been briefed on surpressing the firms discriminatory hiring practises. That said it is not difficult to believe that firms operate in this manner despite their mantra's of merit based selection processes. I suppose it is understandable to a degree but is wholly inappropriate for law firms to effectivley blacklist candidates on account of their institutional background.

I suppose coming from a US/UK law firm in central london doesnt narrow things down completely but i should think about discussing the informal as well as the formal selection criteria for your firm. Whatever be the case and i know some posts in here are not convinced of the sincerity of your post and i myself have reason to believe that many of the posts in here are not genuine, if what you say is true, those of us here should be greatful at having had the opportunity to see behind the frosted glass of recruitment mentality in the legal business. take care hope to hear from you all soon.

Nice post, westlaw786.

Those two questions you pointed are important to me too, so I will be also looking forward to hearing his answer...

This is an ancient thread, (2005) but it's good to see it revived ;-) I enjoyed it very much the first time round! Maybe it'll bring back the original poster too, but unlikely.

Hi - if you apply to a commercial law firm with an LLM in human rights, they will question why you are applying to them and not the ICC or UN. If you compete with other candidates who have an LLM in commercial law for this commerial law job, then, you will probably be disadvantaged.

It is not a question of superiority. It is like doing an LLM in Tax Law and then looking for a job with the Dept of Public Prosecutions or ICC.

An LLM will no doubt give an edge. However, with so much competition for the commercial firms, an LLM in commercial law is safer.

Having said all this, if you want to do an LLM in Human Rights, go for it! That would be an amazing learning experience. However, note, when you apply for that commercial law job, the other candidate might have a commercial law LLM.

My 2 cents anyway. Best wishes with whatever you do.

Cheers~

I did my graduation in Law from India. I got an offer from the university of edinburgh to do LL.M in Innovation Technology and Law( not distant education). Do you think it is a good choice. wat r the job prospects. Kindly respond.
thanks

Hey, ashpavi.
Check your account.
P.M on the way!

Hi ashpavi, One of my friend is studying some where there. Will let u know in one or two days