U.K. LLB vs. Low Tier Canadian JD

[whereverjustice 4976]

2 hours ago, CleanHands said:

Columbia grads are smart enough to take a punt on, but not Stanford grads?

I mean, yes, of course Stanford should be in that category too. But once you're practicing, law school and legal education starts to vanish in the rear view mirror really quickly. If I wasn't a weirdly persistent user of this forum, I probably wouldn't know what "HYS" is, or that Stanford is highly-ranked. No one I know went to Stanford; I don't read research output from Stanford; Stanford's status has just never been something I needed to know, during my career.

And if you accept that, it should be easy to understand why I'd be (and actually am!) similarly clueless about UCL or Strathclyde or Dundee.

[SadJaysFan 54]

2 hours ago, CleanHands said:

Columbia grads are smart enough to take a punt on, but not Stanford grads?

Just saying the schools that the recruiter I talked to named off the top of their head. I'm sure Stanford would open some doors.

[Ryn 2793]

Oh one of these threads. I'll mostly sit this one out, but I wanted to add that it greatly irks me to see people shit on Lakehead, Brock, Ryerson, etc., as undergrad institutions, as though there is no way to get a quality undergraduate education at one these schools because they're just so plebian.

That position is not even based in reality. Lakehead, for example, is one of the top 10 undergrad-focused universities in Canada. It also consistently gets accolades for its undergraduate research.

I went to a small university and received a challenging and exceptional education. Had I gone to U of T or whatever other "prestigious" (according to OP) university, would it have been better? Maybe in some ways, but certainly it would have been worse in others. I knew all my profs personally, had small classes, and received a lot of quality teaching time. I know that isn't really as possible in universities where, for example, your first year Econ course has 1,000+ people in it. So it fit well with what I wanted. I'm sure other people would thrive just as well at U of T in other ways. But to assume that my education was somehow worse than someone who went to a "prestigious" university is just ridiculous.

I get that when it comes to graduate research/education, there are understandably very clear tiers. While my alma mater can compete in some programs, it certainly can't hold up to the juggernauts. But that's an entirely different thing than what we're talking about here.

[hmyo 279]

ironically, there's "tiers" to Oxford law! Look - you too can attend OXFORD [Brookes] Law with "2.2 GPA from a 4-year honours degree" (https://www.brookes.ac.uk/international/your-country/canada/)

 

Must be rigorous. 

[timeisticking 37]

I agree with the sentiments expressed here. If you received offers from Canadian law schools, it's better to accept it instead of choosing a UK law school, even if it is TRU or UNB. Employers will almost always choose the JD student that studied at a Canadian law school over the foreign-trained graduate. In fact, many job postings looking for articling students explicitly state they are only accepting applications from Canadian law graduates. 

As someone who went through the NCA process, I can tell you that you will be at a disadvantage right from the start. Here are some things you will be missing out on:

1. Finishing the academic year later than your Canadian counterparts, which makes it difficult to find positions as a summer student.
2. Limited access to the OCI process, which means losing out on opportunities to work at Big Law and other major Bay Street firms (if that is what you are interested in).
3. Lack of opportunities to try out different practice areas. You won't be able to try out any clinical or intensive programs that JD students can partake in.
4. If you decide to choose the LPP route, you will be competing with locally-trained graduates and other foreign-trained graduates. Many of these foreign-trained graduates are generally experienced with years of legal practice in their own country. They are likely to get hired for the coveted positions. Some are even unable to get a position and are forced to search for one on their own.

It is financially demanding to be self-funding your studies abroad. Depending on where you live, the UK can be extremely expensive. You also have to take into account of all the additional expenses and living costs on top of your tuition fees. The tuition fees increase at an exponential rate and can fluctuate substantially due to the volatile exchange rate. 

On top of that, you need to remember that NCA policies change on a continuous basis. What might be current now may not be the same in the next few years when you graduate. 

Edited February 14 by timeisticking

[Targetstar 2]

Ignore the people here if you have a legal background.  Have a network to tap into.   Have a drive to succeed. And would like to have a degree that will be recognized in 5 nations once obtaining. NCA accreditation. 

Some people here have shown they are successful 'even' by going the UK route.  

The cost is similar. (2 year degree).  You learn from a place where common law originated.  You learn different doctrines (depending on school) in various jurisdictions (including Canada) along with the corresponding case law.

Depending on your marks, you can apply to Osgoode, U of T, or BC to obtain an LLM ( 1year course) to get your 'Canadian' law components.  Simply.  Way more options.  Or get the required components at a Canadian law school. 

Lastly, there are a lot of people that go the NCA route and get articling positions.  Just anedotal from the people I know. 

You have to question people who have graduated 15 years ago, and who have nothing else better to do, than try and kill a person's law dream.

A person is going to succeed or fail on their own regardless of where they learn law.

I am certain that I can go toe to toe with any Canadian trained lawyer and I currently do not have a Canadian law degree.  Oh wait, I have gone toe to toe with Canadian trained lawyers and have been successful (Written decisions).

As I said before, if you have a dog of a case, a degree from U of T, Harvard, or Oxford is most likely wouldn't get you very far.

 

 

[msk2012 645]

32 minutes ago, Targetstar said:

Ignore the people here if you have a legal background.  Have a network to tap into.   Have a drive to succeed. And would like to have a degree that will be recognized in 5 nations once obtaining. NCA accreditation. 

Some people here have shown they are successful 'even' by going the UK route.  

The cost is similar. (2 year degree).  You learn from a place where common law originated.  You learn different doctrines (depending on school) in various jurisdictions (including Canada) along with the corresponding case law.

Depending on your marks, you can apply to Osgoode, U of T, or BC to obtain an LLM ( 1year course) to get your 'Canadian' law components.  Simply.  Way more options.  Or get the required components at a Canadian law school. 

Lastly, there are a lot of people that go the NCA route and get articling positions.  Just anedotal from the people I know. 

You have to question people who have graduated 15 years ago, and who have nothing else better to do, than try and kill a person's law dream.

A person is going to succeed or fail on their own regardless of where they learn law.

I am certain that I can go toe to toe with any Canadian trained lawyer and I currently do not have a Canadian law degree.  Oh wait, I have gone toe to toe with Canadian trained lawyers and have been successful (Written decisions).

As I said before, if you have a dog of a case, a degree from U of T, Harvard, or Oxford is most likely wouldn't get you very far.

My takeaway from this post is that the licensing process needs to include a writing exercise of some sort.

[Deadpool 1932]

1 hour ago, Targetstar said:

Ignore the people here if you have a legal background.  Have a network to tap into.   Have a drive to succeed. And would like to have a degree that will be recognized in 5 nations once obtaining. NCA accreditation. 

Some people here have shown they are successful 'even' by going the UK route.  

The cost is similar. (2 year degree).  You learn from a place where common law originated.  You learn different doctrines (depending on school) in various jurisdictions (including Canada) along with the corresponding case law.

Depending on your marks, you can apply to Osgoode, U of T, or BC to obtain an LLM ( 1year course) to get your 'Canadian' law components.  Simply.  Way more options.  Or get the required components at a Canadian law school. 

Lastly, there are a lot of people that go the NCA route and get articling positions.  Just anedotal from the people I know. 

You have to question people who have graduated 15 years ago, and who have nothing else better to do, than try and kill a person's law dream.

A person is going to succeed or fail on their own regardless of where they learn law.

I am certain that I can go toe to toe with any Canadian trained lawyer and I currently do not have a Canadian law degree.  Oh wait, I have gone toe to toe with Canadian trained lawyers and have been successful (Written decisions).

As I said before, if you have a dog of a case, a degree from U of T, Harvard, or Oxford is most likely wouldn't get you very far.

 

 

I am sorry you were not accepted to a Canadian law school. It really does suck to be waitlisted more than once and not get in. I applaud your resilience in going through this process for multiple cycles. 

But nothing you wrote here makes any sense. And the advice you are giving is disingenuous to those looking into this path and very one-sided. It would be helpful if you presented both sides of the debate in a measured and less emotional manner. 

[lawstudent20202020 583]

21 hours ago, Targetstar said:

I am certain that I can go toe to toe with any Canadian trained lawyer and I currently do not have a Canadian law degree.  Oh wait, I have gone toe to toe with Canadian trained lawyers and have been successful (Written decisions).

[artsydork 5628]

How many written decisions do you have if you were wait listed in schools in 2018? 2 years to go the foreign route + NCA exams + articling. 
 

I've seen many self reps go on and on about how they "won" and beat a lawyer. I've seen lawyers incredibly surprised that they lost against self-reps in motions simply because they're lawyers. Facts are facts in a case and even "brilliant" lawyers won't "win" if the facts are patently against them. Self reps can literally produce nothing and still can "win" if the facts are that stacked in their favour. 

Noting success as being able to go "toe and toe" with counsel strikes me as someone with little-to-no court experience.

[LabouriousCorvid 215]

22 minutes ago, artsydork said:

Noting success as being able to go "toe and toe" with counsel strikes me as someone with little-to-no court experience.

Hell, as a 1L student who has at this point completed a general course on ethical lawyering, one of the first things nailed into you is that opposing counsel is not your enemy, and court proceedings should not be viewed as a game/contest.

[LittleSaint 4]

8 hours ago, lawstudent20202020 said:

Stealing this! 🙈

[timeisticking 37]

On 3/21/2021 at 2:21 PM, Targetstar said:

Ignore the people here if you have a legal background.  Have a network to tap into.   Have a drive to succeed. And would like to have a degree that will be recognized in 5 nations once obtaining. NCA accreditation. 

Some people here have shown they are successful 'even' by going the UK route.  

The cost is similar. (2 year degree).  You learn from a place where common law originated.  You learn different doctrines (depending on school) in various jurisdictions (including Canada) along with the corresponding case law.

Depending on your marks, you can apply to Osgoode, U of T, or BC to obtain an LLM ( 1year course) to get your 'Canadian' law components.  Simply.  Way more options.  Or get the required components at a Canadian law school. 

Lastly, there are a lot of people that go the NCA route and get articling positions.  Just anedotal from the people I know. 

You have to question people who have graduated 15 years ago, and who have nothing else better to do, than try and kill a person's law dream.

A person is going to succeed or fail on their own regardless of where they learn law.

I am certain that I can go toe to toe with any Canadian trained lawyer and I currently do not have a Canadian law degree.  Oh wait, I have gone toe to toe with Canadian trained lawyers and have been successful (Written decisions).

As I said before, if you have a dog of a case, a degree from U of T, Harvard, or Oxford is most likely wouldn't get you very far.

 

 

While I agree that people have managed to create their own success stories with a foreign law degree, I don't think people appreciate the pretentious attitude you are portraying through your post. 

Let's be realistic here. You can be leaps and bounds ahead with an established network and motivation to do well, but it isn't something most law students start off with. It's difficult to do it for local students with a Canadian law degree. What makes you think it would be easier for foreign-trained graduates?