lookingaround

The thing that hurts international applicants is typically having to do degree conversion (which means every university will see it differently even before you account for them being cGPA/L2/B2/various drops, and unfamiliarity with what the marks mean). You have a standard 4.x grade; the only difference you'll have in the process is an extra $25-$50 on the application fee. (Paying tuition, now that's gonna be harder, but that's a whole other issue).

For people who want to work in Toronto, Windsor is 4 hours away from Toronto, which makes running over for networking events, interviews, or anything else a full day task (minimum 8 hours total travel time). This makes location a factor. Osgoode is in the same city, and has a station on the direct transit line to downtown. On your broader point, I can't imagine why you would voluntarily apply to Ryerson (an unknown factor) over Osgoode (a very well known, and positive factor) if you have the grades to confidently predict the outcome, but with your LSAT I'd suggest applying to multiple schools in order to boost your chances of admission.

There are none. UK universities offer the LLB, and teach British law. If you want a Canadian-based option with a JD, you'd need to study in Canada. Which, if you have an A average and want to work in Canada, is the obvious thing to do anyway.

You... honestly must have googled very strangely f you searched for UK university application deadlines, and the UCAS (only way to apply) application deadlines page wasn't on page 1 of results. https://www.ucas.com/undergraduate/applying-university/ucas-undergraduate-when-apply Whether or not you can transfer depends on the school you're interested in; their websites will tell if you if non-Canadian law schools are eligible or not (and if they are eligible, students who haven't taken first year courses in Canadian constitutional and criminal law are very unlikely to be the first of the transfer line, as you'd need to take up a space in the first year classes).

Answers for that could vary wildly depending on an important factor you left out: Are you a Canadian who went to Britain to do an LLB after your first undergrad? Are you British seeking to come to Canada? Are you Canadian who went to Britain to do your first degree in law? Those factors would imply various different issues for you, such as work permits, age/maturity, level of education, etc. Best case scenario you're in the same position as the other applicants, just in another country, in which case you'd apply as normal and might need to persuade them that not having done Canadian constitutional etc issues wouldn't be a problem on your return (which would probably involve some serious looking at what kind of things NCA would involve). If you're just (from the perspective of the employer) a random Brit who wants to work in Canada, that's a whole other set of issues. It's going to be harder, for sure. How much harder depends largely on the bit you left out.

I don't disagree with the general gist of the post, but just to expand some/qualify this point - there are multiple reasons why small cities and rural areas might struggle to recruit, but one of them is undoubtedly a fear of being taken advantage of. I've worked in a small city location before when other posts were advertised, and a number of applicants came in who had a wealth of experience in much larger, or far away locations. The question that all of them triggered was 'Why do they want to come here?'. This often triggered preliminary screening interviews, and some of them could give good reasons, some of them just raised more concerns. You definitely don't have to have grown up in a specific small city to have any chance of employment there - but if you're looking to move into a smaller location, you probably want to have a good answer planned for 'Why us?'. That genuinely can be as straightforward as 'I've lived in big cities, they're exhausting, I want to move for lifestyle reasons, I'm ready to settle down' - a lot of the time that by itself would be perfectly adequate. But if it looks like you're running away from something, or you don't want to be there you just want 'a-job-any-job-ooh-look-that's-a-job', or you'll be there at most three years before you're leaving to go back to Real Cities with your newfound experience... that's just a waste of everyone's time. I'm thinking some of Diplock's general attitude of (to paraphrase) 'We want people who want to do criminal defence, but treating it as a last ditch option which you're demeaning yourself to suggest you take is a good way to get rejected'. The same applies in rural areas So, for sure, think about moving to new places you'd like to live in, but don't just spray applications on the basis "You're a small city with one lawyer, I will bestow upon you my gracious presence in exchange for money".

As you say - You need to research those things. Nobody can tell you "the LLM at University 1 is taught by Professor x who supports you this much, teaches you in this way, and therefore you should do it. If you went to University 2 you'd be taught by Professor y who teaches in this way and supports you this little". Part of doing an LLM is finding a supervisor whose interests mesh with yours, working with them. Which program you want to do will take into account factors like professor availability, geographic location, school specialties. You have a lot of research to do - which is appropriate as an LLM is a research degree.

This is answered on the FAQ page: http://law.robsonhall.com/student-resources/admissions/faq/

Wow, that's a shame! Injected some fun into it & still tested reasoning abilities. I do wonder if the claimant knows what the rest of the LSAT is like though, if they're describing it as "I'll pass", since that suggests a fundamental unfamiliarity with the scoring system.

You should never go into an LSAT thinking you're going to cancel. There's a $ cost attached, you took time to go do the test. If you're not ready then postponing is one thing, but sitting down in the exam hall figuring that you're going to cancel afterwards is utterly pointless as it has all the downsides with no potential benefit. All that said, you have no idea how you did, and you won't ever find out if you cancel. If you want to go to Alberta then cancelling would likely be the beneficial outcome (as they average test results). Otherwise, getting your score report would at least allow you to extract some data from the investment you've already made.

No non-disclosed tests are accessible. If they were, they wouldn't be non-disclosed.

Gonna go out on a limb & guess specific technical questions like argument attire vary substantially depending on jurisdiction. (The response you've gotten may be from someone who happens to know you're in Ontario, but you don't say that, or anywhere in the question)

If your mistakes are simple technical errors, then you just need to be familiar with the test format (especially with the new on computer system), and slow down and be methodical. Can prepare some using the tools at https://www.lsac.org/lsat/lsat-prep/how-prepare-digital-lsat It doesn't matter if you get the right answer if you then select and submit the wrong one - that's purely on your diligence

Just picking another answer isn't going to help you. Try writing out, by hand, beside each and every answer why one of them is right and four of them are wrong. This act of explanation will force you to internalize the logic.

Large firms may offer a wide range of general services. Individual lawyers in those situations will often be hyper-specialized, and know everything there is to know about one very specific section of that area. This level of expertise is a way to justify high bills - you have someone in the office who lives and breathes that particular clause. If you want to be a 'well-rounded lawyer', you'd be more likely to be at the other end of the spectrum, where a sole practicioner in a small city might help people with a variety of legal problems, not knowing the details to the exactitude of the specialist, but being competent in several different areas, such as family/property/wills. Family is certainly not an area that is limited - it's one of the ones you can be confident will exist in every community across the country. Now, whether there's enough work in that to sustain a practice is another question (see: general practice). I can't imagine, although have never bothered to research so could be completely up the wall on this, that there are many large firms doing OCI recruits with substantial family practices. This seems a good time to mention, it doesn't seem clear what type of work you want to be doing. Governments and large firms hire through the On Campus Interview process, and a lot of careers officer time is spent on them, and they're certainly often a way to pay off debt quickly, but they're only one part of legal employment. Do you want to work in a glass tower in a major city? If so, that will necessarily limit your scope to that sort of employer. If you don't, OCIs could be a much smaller part of your world.