Magic Circle Law - Oxbridge or bust?

Hmm...doing it in two years is basically like second and third year, isn't it? You have to do some of the courses other people do in first year, but the major difference is you start out doing the same number of papers as a second year law student. I hope my experience is a bit more like JP thinks than as West Wing see it, but I'm expecting to have to work very hard anyway.

Sorry to derail the thread, just interested in what Cambridge law students have to say about the affiliated/transfer course.

Thanks, thats good news. I would imagine a convert would be at a bit of a disadvantage, though, without the foundational year in the subject?

Also, do you know if there is any kind of conversion course or GDL-type-thing at Cambridge (a year long) - so I finish my anth degree then want to become legally qualified? I didn't see any such thing on the website, but just asking for finality.

Sorry, OP, for diverting the thread somewhat.

Looking at the profiles of trainees - well, doesn't that give you a bit of a deluded view of what their intake REALLY comprises of? Every firm will have anti-discriminatory safeguards put in place, so of course, they want to put up the impression that they recruit from a wide range of unis. But as someone pointed out to me before on an open day at Freshfields, they put up a slide showing their trainee intake which was in fact 50% Oxbridge.

The majority of the trainees will be Oxbridge; there's no point disputing that because they are simply the indication of the sub-standard, high-calibre candidate they're looking for. They didn't go through the competitive process of getting into Oxbridge for no reason.

If you look at it another way - people who went to UCL, Kings or LSE to do law probably did apply to Oxbridge as their first choice, but didn't get in. If there are people who did get into Oxbridge, why should they not stand the better chance of getting into a top law firm?

We can't play down the fact that being in a top-class university still plays an important factor in the recruitment process today. I would feel a great deal of injustice if I was deprived of making a better impression with my degree than say... someone who graduated from a much lower-ranked university.

- I understand that Oxford and Cambridge each take approx 200 undergrads each year for their BA courses.
- Around 75% of those who graduate go into the legal profession (see Oxford's own website)
- That gives us 300 grads a year from Oxbridge



What about all the non-lawyers? A huge number of graduates of history/english etc do the GDL. Some apply for TCs in their second year. I'm sure that more than 300 grads a year apply who have been to Oxford.

That's a fair call. How many would you add into those numbers?

With all due respect, this sounds like a very naive post from someone who hasn't really seen people go through the process. It's not as simple as that at all. The firms are looking for different skill sets first up. Getting into Oxbridge is a fantastic academic achievement; and whilst top law firms undoubtedly look for intelligent candidates they are also on the lookout for that rarefied quality of "commercial awareness". This is certainly something Oxbridge (or any other university) won't teach you. Secondly, someone with good work experience and interview skills from a "second-tier" university, will quite often trump a clearly intelligent but extremely dry candidate from Oxbridge. Thirdly, whilst it is undoubtedly true that Oxbridge attracts an extremely high calibre of student, it is also had to be remember that there are many talented people at universities all over the country (although I am willing to accept that Oxbridge does have a greater concentration).

I'm not going to dispute that going to Oxbridge isn't an advantage, because it is. However (particularly when it comes to solicitors these days) it's certainly not the be all and end all. It would be a huge mistake for those at Oxbridge to be complacent about their job prospects. It is a leg up but without the necessary work experience and personality (as well as general commercial awareness) there is no guarantee of a job. Not to mention degree classification. One of my friends graduated from Cambridge with a 2.2 in law last year. Sadly for her she can't get a job for love nor money (certainly not the prestigious job she wants). It's also a misnomer to believe that a 2.2 from Oxbridge equals a 2.1 from anywhere else or a 2.1 equals a first. Because again, whilst I accept that there is a greater volume of work than anywhere else at Oxbridge, it's simply not true.

I never said going to Oxbridge is the be all and end all; I merely emphasised that it gives someone a massive advantage over other average candidates, especially in terms of intellectual capability - yes, you can have amazing business acumen and an abundance of work experience that demonstrates a genuine interest in law, but without a solid foundation of logic in you, you won't even stand a chance of being able to apply it.

Perhaps it is a misnomer to suggest that a 2:1 from Oxbridge = a 1st from UCL, but how about if you're comparing a 2:1 from Oxbridge with a 1st from the University of East London? The distinction becomes even more apparent when you're comparing like for like e.g. 2:1 at Oxbridge compared to a 2:1 at another university, and surely, the firms have to take this into account.

I think its probably somewhere in the middle. I don't think you'll have time to do that many Part II papers other than EU/Equity, and these are definitely harder than the other subjects.

Your evidence for top law firms (not chambers) being "very Oxbridge heavy, maybe with a few UCLs and LSEs"?

Thank you very much, at least someone gets it

Barristers don't get into Magic Circle Law firms (or any kind of law firm), they have chambers. You mean solicitors.

Well sorry but I meant the 4 top commercial law chambers and the best law firms.

Very hard to say! I know that at City a high proportion of people on the GDL were Oxbridge. So that's about, maybe 100 more? and then the other law schools.

Well sorry but I meant the 4 top commercial law chambers and the best law firms

I cant be bothered to read this thread... so here's my two cents.

I went to a red brick uni - NOT oxbridge, NOT london. Warwick.
I also got a 2.1. NOT a first.

Im going to the MC. *waves*

Pretty much nailed, but is it not much harder to enter the elite sets than it is to enter the magic circle firms?...because someone I know was saying that competition for pupillage and MC training contracts were on a par...I disagree

Pretty much nailed, but is it not much harder to enter the elite sets than it is to enter the magic circle firms?...because someone I know was saying that competition for pupillage and MC training contracts were on a par...I disagree.

Chalks: In regards to evidence of where I got the '50% Oxbridge and 50% elsewhere'?...Plainly and simply from attending law fairs and speaking to graduate recruitment from each, given that a law degree from Oxbridge is quite difficult and intense, I guess it makes sense. Even though its quite unfair when an asian lad from a sub-standard faith school from East London, entered Cambridge and upon admissions secured a TC with Simmons & Simmons, don't ask me I don't know how, it was on the news.