Southampton vs Queen Mary - Law

So I have offers from Sussex, QM and Southampton. Sussex is my definite back-up as it has given me the lowest offer.

However which shall I put as my first choice between Southampton and QM (both require AAA)? My main preference is; which uni has the better reputation and which gives me the top chance of a top career in law after I graduate?

I know this question has been asked a lot. However I can find anything recent or specific to these two unis.

Thanks

(edited 13 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

I say QM

it doesnt matter too much ...QM has a better rep but SOHO is really good so it boils down to if you can hack city of london life for three years on a small budget...unless you a multi millionaire then buy your way into cambridge

i had offers form Southampton, QMUL, Dundee and Glasgow.
i am considering which to choose as well... i picked on LLM for internaitonal commercial law.
so which UNI is good in this subject?

Reply 5

elstevens

I'm basing this purely on friends who applied last year and how they talked about it, but I'd say Queen Mary's.
I also really liked the uni.

Reply 6

samir1106

I've heard law firms will look at the unis overall reputation though. In this respect Southampton wins doesn't it? Or is this not the case?

Reply 7

qhlc25

Original post by samir1106

I've heard law firms will look at the unis overall reputation though. In this respect Southampton wins doesn't it? Or is this not the case?

i got no idea about which one is good actually... do u have any further informations about these rankings stuff?

Reply 8

adam0311

To be fair, they are pretty equal as far as employment goes.

Reply 9

MarcvsAntonivs

When International Commercial law is concerned, the obvious choice for LLM is Queen Mary. Why? Centre for Commercial Law Studies => http://www.ccls.qmul.ac.uk/.
Presumably one of the best commercial law studies programmes in the world.
As to the other law modules, I am not sure, however, I can assure you, QM's Law School is of very high standard.
Do the research, go and visit the schools. We can only give you some overall feelings about them. You must choose for yourself - the one you feel the best with should be your choice.

Best regards

Reply 10

ronile

I'm a law student at QM, also a student ambassador. come and have a look round. The Guardian places QM third in the country for law, and first in London. The lecturers are outstanding. Why would you go anywhere other than the capital for commercial law? QM is renowned for its links for internships, work experience, pupillages and employment

Reply 11

jimmyatemyworld

Original post by adam0311

To be fair, they are pretty equal as far as employment goes.

I swear if you currently live in America you can't really have that great of an idea of English universities? Like I would assume Harvard and Yale are the best for everything, but then I hear NYU is ranked top for Law, but I also hear go Ivy League or go home. How can you possibly get the general consensus of what is the best for Law in terms of employability?

For what I've heard from work experience, tables, famous lawyers... Southampton is a good university in general but Law isn't really on the map - its part of the Russel Group which seems to make a lot of people cream, Queen Mary is known for it's good Law and medical school and history department and has some pretty famous alumni. QMUL consistently ranks in the top 10 for Law, and usually the top 20 for overall - Southampton is usually the top 30 for Law and I'm not sure about overall. It's generally known for medicine and engineering subjects more than anything else. QMUL is an older university (some people also get off on that) but less famous because it is only a college of the UL, but University of London degrees are pretty sought after in general. London is obviously the hub of Law, QM have great pro bono and networking due to that, which outside London unis tend not to have, but as a result it's more expensive - even for the east. Both schools have famous judges as alumni (famous if you're at all interested in Law) - QM have more famous people in the legal career if you want to aim your sights really high for a career.

Ok, so that was my balanced objective view. Subjectively, Queen Mary! It's ranked higher in league tables and is only getting better, has more famous/highly ranked lawyers including a LJ, London is the best place to be to get legal experience on your CV, they have three people who decide who gets scolarships to middle temple, organise social events with barristers and people are actually aware that it is an excellent Law school whereas Southampton is fine, but it's not exactly known. Plus Southhampton is a horrible city (lol). :smile:

Reply 12

adam0311

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

I swear if you currently live in America you can't really have that great of an idea of English universities?

Correct, I have no idea.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Like I would assume Harvard and Yale are the best for everything, but then I hear NYU is ranked top for Law, but I also hear go Ivy League or go home.

Not really sure what you are trying to say here, nor do I understand the relevance.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

How can you possibly get the general consensus of what is the best for Law in terms of employability?

The interwebs. Most statistical measures of employment have QMUL and Southampton pretty equal. I think it would be foolish to say that one would be significantly better off in terms of employment...the difference is marginal at best.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

QM have great pro bono and networking due to that, which outside London unis tend not to have

With regards to pro bono---Just from a quick search:
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/law/ugoppurtunities/pro_bono_march2010.html

Not sure why you would think legal services for the poor are only needed in London.

With regards to networking due to location--its been discussed at length on these forums. To sum it up, I think the resources that non-London universities offer are more than enough. Graduates from Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Nottingham, Bristol, etc. all seem to do just fine without London.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Southampton is a good university in general but Law isn't really on the map

Southampton is a top 20-25 in pretty much all law subject tables. Not sure how this would place it off the map.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

QMUL consistently ranks in the top 10 for Law, and usually the top 20 for overall - Southampton is usually the top 30 for Law and I'm not sure about overall.

Refer to above, and....

Overall:
Sunday Times for Soton: 12
Sunday Times for QMUL: 30
Complete University Guide for Soton: 14
Complete University Guide for QMUL: 36
Guardian for Soton:28
Guardian for QMUL:36

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

QM have more famous people in the legal career if you want to aim your sights really high for a career.

Using what measure?

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

It's ranked higher in league tables and is only getting better

Soton is ranked higher in the general rankings, and about 10 spots behind in the law rankings. This is a marginal factor at best.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

has more famous/highly ranked lawyers including a LJ

Again, using what measure?

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

organise social events with barristers and people

So does every other law school.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Plus Southhampton is a horrible city (lol). :smile:

Same could be said for East London.

Again, I reaffirm my initial statement--Southampton and QMUL are pretty close to equal.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 13

chalks

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

I think Adam has beaten me to the punch on this one, but a lot of what you say has little or no basis.

With respect, you have yet to start University yet you profess to know which is better in terms of employability.

League tables for law are notoriously unreliable given the enormously subjective measures they use to assess and compare institutions.

Equally, I'm not quite sure how you can suggest "QM have more famous people in the legal career" or Qm has "more famous/highly ranked lawyers". Even if you were able to support such an assertion, it has little or no bearing on how any current or future student will fare.

As for the based-in-London factor, many people (myself included) have explained why that shouldn't be overplayed. Jacko, to his credit, pointed to some useful things organised by QM which might not be available elsewhere. However, to suggest that they're factors which puts QM ahead of other similar institutions (eg Soton) is gilding the lily.

Firms regard them, essentially, as institutions on a par.

Reply 14

jimmyatemyworld

Original post by adam0311

Correct, I have no idea.

Again, I reaffirm my initial statement--Southampton and QMUL are pretty close to equal.

Seen as you didn't seem to understand a lot of things I said (maybe your basic grasp of English is poor or something), to sum up: my first paragraph was demonstrating how you can think you know what's going on across the pond, but obviously, you have yet to experience it. I was relating it back to the fact that I can read about American universities but I've never had legal experience with American lawyers so how would I know anything in reality?
The famous law alumni is an easy thing to find out. You simply look up famous alumni from each university. They both have some, QM has more. However, this doesn't mean it has better employability. You seem to be confused that I was equating the two - it merely means that those lawyers happen to have found fame either by high rank or otherwise. This might be important to someone who is interested to know it will perhaps be more likely they will be a top dog, or at least has the possibility to.
Also, there is a massive difference between a university that is ranked top 20/30 (top 30 this year) for the particular subject you want to do and one that is ranked top 10. Either way, I was pretty balanced about both! You can't really pick out anything I said and make it wrong...because it's not, it's all right. As per.
And as for my 'not being on the map' statement, it's true. As I'll repeat again, as you either didn't understand or ignored it the first time, Law is probably Queen Mary's best subject, engineering/science/medics is Southampton's. It's very well respected for that, but it has nothing to do with the quality of the Law facilities (not that I know the quality, so don't have a spasm).
Oh yes, and my comment about being a Law school in London, it's not going to be a disadvantage is it? Guess what? All the barristers work in London, the chambers are in London, the Magic Circle is in London. For work experience, it's going to be good. There's not point saying it isn't. It may not make or break a university, I was merely pulling out pros.
And there is no point picking out my subjective points at the end, because they were, as I clearly stated, subjective. In case you didn't know, subjective means what I personally think i.e. my thoughts and feelings about both. Getting even more personal, I have nothing againt Southampton for other people, my mother got her medical degree from there, she liked it. I don't think I would and there is something about the train workers in Southampton Central that makes them seem like total c*nts. But I live in the South already, I can't help but have a bias that the further West you get, the worse it is until about Bristol. I think Mile End road is fine, probably better than some of the places around me currently, but I love London - it's my favourite British city. I think whether you like where you are is important, e.g. I picked universities where I knew I liked the city and where it wasn't surrounded by horrendous fields. The less grass, the better for me.
There is some unholy bias against QM on here, more than anywhere else. Some people would have the debate that Nottingham Trent is better than QM (gasp) just for a chance to say all their pre-prepared putdowns, which simply aren't true.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 15

jimmyatemyworld

Original post by chalks

You can read above my other reply if you like. Everything I said had factual basis, some of it subjective yadayadayada. I read my paragraph AGAIN, I don't think I ever said I knew what was better in terms of employability?!?! I only looked up famous alumni i.e. the point was saying 'these people did it, you can do it too!' - I even said they both have famous ones. My main comment about employability was that how does adam (it sounds creepy using his name as ofc I don't know him) know about universities here for employability, when lo and behold he lives in America! I have managed to get a small idea of what legal people think, I've met a lot of judges as I've done work with them, and I've done some work with solicitors and I've spoken to my teacher's husband whose a barrister etc. to get a sweeping generalisation. One of them told me that to be a barrister in this day and age you need a first from Oxbridge, UCL or LSE, otherwise its highly unlikely. I'm not sure I believe him, he himself went to Warwick, but he's in the profession so maybe he knows. If this is so, and you're trying to go to the Bar, pick a name out of a hat because the OP, as I am, is screwed before he begins!

Anyway, I have a tendency to ramble. Perhaps I should have written my orginal paragraph like this 'Both universities are good. Southampton is good for these reason but I think QM is better for Law specifically for these reasons'.. Oh wait..

Reply 16

adam0311

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

The better question is--how can either of us know anything? Neither of us have even started university.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

The famous law alumni is an easy thing to find out. You simply look up famous alumni from each university. They both have some, QM has more. However, this doesn't mean it has better employability. You seem to be confused that I was equating the two - it merely means that those lawyers happen to have found fame either by high rank or otherwise. This might be important to someone who is interested to know it will perhaps be more likely they will be a top dog, or at least has the possibility to.

I've gone through both, and I don't see a difference between the two sets of alumnus.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Also, there is a massive difference between a university that is ranked top 20/30 (top 30 this year) for the particular subject you want to do and one that is ranked top 10.

Oh really? Warwick is ranked #19 by The Complete University Guide. Is there a massive difference between Warwick and Nottingham (#6)? Or Exeter (#25) and Reading (#8)? A massive difference between Manchester (#23) and QMUL (#7)?

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Either way, I was pretty balanced about both! You can't really pick out anything I said and make it wrong...because it's not, it's all right.

You can't be serious.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Oh yes, and my comment about being a Law school in London, it's not going to be a disadvantage is it? Guess what? All the barristers work in London, the chambers are in London, the Magic Circle is in London. For work experience, it's going to be good. There's not point saying it isn't. It may not make or break a university, I was merely pulling out pros.

Again, Non-London university students get London based vac schemes, work experience, etc.

Reply 17

jimmyatemyworld

Original post by adam0311

The better question is--how can either of us know anything? Neither of us have even started university.

If you've gone through the list of famous alumni you literally must be blind to not be able to see the difference. For a start, there is one or two famous lawyer from Southampton and about ten for QM. Not that it matters that much? I brought it up in the first instance because it is a pro, but as long as a uni has one lawyer who has made a name for him/herself then it shows that it's possible to do it. And there isn't a massive difference when one year they've been a top ten university, and another year they've been bumped down to a top 20, no. But when you are consistently a high top 30, there is a difference. Of course! It's all about consistency if you're going to use table rankings. And lastly, I don't know about employability! I've stated that! You are the one who claimed you knew the employability rates for each university. I'll reinforce this AGAIN and a few times because it simply doesn't seem to be sinking into that brain of yours - I am stating my opinions, that IN MY OPINION, QM is the better candidate for law, and that in my opinion, for what I think would be useful for studying law, and what I would prefer in a university, and elements that might sway you towards studying at QM over Southampton, whilst recognising they are both good. None of what I'm stating is at all wrong - QM does rank higher for Law, QM does have more famous law alumni etc. - whether that matters at all is an entirely different matter, but it doesn't make them factually wrong. As far as I'm concerned, those things aren't really a debatable matter! And at the end of the day (although I'm the OP has picked his uni because I'm pretty sure the dead line is closed), I'm answering the question - I think he should pick QM because that's what I'd do out of the two. Saying they are the same seems to be a little unhelpful in this context! Jezuzzzzz

Reply 18

Konran

I wouldn't recommend anyone come to live and educate themselves in East London. The place is dangerous with violent crime.

If you had a choice, why would you come here?

Reply 19

adam0311

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Just curious, what method are you using to classify famous? What lists are you reffering to? Are you seperating successful from famous? I would consider a partner at an MC succesful, but not famous. Here's what I pulled from each respective website:

Soton:
Geoffrey Rowland-Attorney General
Peter Price-MEP
Richard Thomas-Chair of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council
Baroness Hooper-Former Conservative MEP for Liverpool and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Dept. of Health Now Deputy Speaker, House of Lords
If you want to throw in Senior Partners:
Stuart Popham-Clifford Chance
There are a bunch of other's listed on their website (editors of the times, VP's of XYZ, etc.--but again these are more succesful rather than famous)
QMUL:
Laura Cox-Justice of Higher Court
Robert Bartfield-Judge
Christopher Pitchford-Lord Justice of Appeal
Tony Froggatt-Chief executive until November 2007 of Scottish and Newcastle plc
^^^
That's all I could pull from QMUL's law alumni site @ http://www.law.qmul.ac.uk/alumni/

So then I went to wiki and checked the QMUL list of alumni. While there were MP's and some lawyers (i.e one that started a big television network in India), they didn't graduate with an LLB.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

And lastly, I don't know about employability! I've stated that! You are the one who claimed you knew the employability rates for each university.

I don't claim to know anything. I'm simply looking at published employment rates.

For example:
unistats.direct.gov.uk

Its also worth noting that (judging from firm's recruiting schedules) the same type of firms seem to be recruting from each QMUL and Soton. So no difference there either.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

I'll reinforce this AGAIN and a few times because it simply doesn't seem to be sinking into that brain of yours - I am stating my opinions, that IN MY OPINION, QM is the better candidate for law, and that in my opinion, for what I think would be useful for studying law, and what I would prefer in a university, and elements that might sway you towards studying at QM over Southampton, whilst recognising they are both good.

LOL. I love how you feel the need to throw in personal attacks throughout the course of this debate. Of course I know its your opinion. That's why I'm unsure why you claim

You can't really pick out anything I said and make it wrong...because it's not, it's all right.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

QM does rank higher for Law

And this is really the only factor you are correct on. Alternatively, Southampton ranks higher in every table for general university rankings. So it definitely is a tradeoff. Honestly I think the difference of 10-15 spots on a league table is pretty minisucle between spots 10-25. Especcially considering the bulk of those universities are pretty equal (i.e Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, etc.). Also worth noting that these same league tables are putting Reading (as an example) above Bristol, KCL and Warwick.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

QM does have more famous law alumni etc.

Refer to above.

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Saying they are the same seems to be a little unhelpful in this context!

I'm saying they are the same when it comes to the typically debated factors--suggesting that the OP should consider other personal factors...location, cost, campus type, etc.

Anyways, it seems pretty clear you either firmed or insuranced QMUL. I'm not saying anything bad about QMUL. I'm saying its practically the same caliber as Soton. One is not particularly better than the other in terms of objective factors.