GDL vs LLB from low Uni Who is better? Magic Circle

Not to be the bearer of bad news - MC firms often require at least AAB at A-Level (Eg. http://www.linklatersgraduates.co.uk/application-process)

So let's say that you are an employer at a Magic circle firm. Which one would you hire?

Applicant one:
Has a First class Law degree LLB from Manchester Met Uni (Low ranked uni) but has then gone on to get an Oxford BCL. They have also passed the New York bar (as they could with the LLB)

Applicant Two:
Has a Politics degree (First class) from the University of York
Then has completed the GDL and has achieved a high grade.

I think you're putting too much of an emphasis on the universities the applicants attended instead of their actual degree; as long you as you achieve a first in llb law then you should not be hampered when applying for firms.

And to refer to your question, I think most employers whether they like to admit it or not would prefer the one with llb law as it's the most rich academically speaking; the level of legal understanding and knowledge applicant one has will far exceed that of applicant two because the amount of the time they spent studying law. There's also the fact that there is this unsaid stigma of pursing a GDL as it's associated with the notion of being unable to to meet the grade requirements of llb law, so they pursue an easier degree such as politics and use it as a leverage to do a little bit of law.

I'm not sure about this. You will find far more people with non-law Russell Group 2.1s at good law firms than you will find people with LLB 1sts from lower-ranked universities.*
***
*

Again, this isn't really borne out by observation. Just under half of my own intake is made up of LLB grads, and this is quite typical.

It's pretty rare to get a first in law, especially at a lower tier university because of the likelihood of their students having average or sub-par A-levels, thus accounting for why there are more people with 2:1 at good law firms than those with firsts from lower-ranked universities.

It's pretty rare to get a first in law, especially at a lower tier university because of the likelihood of their students having average or sub-par A-levels, thus accounting for why there are more people with 2:1 at good law firms than those with firsts from lower-ranked universities.

I think you're putting too much of an emphasis on the universities the applicants attended instead of their actual degree; as long you as you achieve a first in llb law then you should not be hampered when applying for firms. And to refer to your question, I think most employers whether they like to admit it or not would prefer the one with llb law as it's the most rich academically speaking; the level of legal understanding and knowledge applicant one has will far exceed that of applicant two because the amount of the time they spent studying law. There's also the fact that there is this unsaid stigma of pursing a GDL as it's associated with the notion of being unable to to meet the grade requirements of llb law, so they pursue an easier degree such as politics and use it as a leverage to do a little bit of law.

It's pretty rare to get a first in law, especially at a lower tier university because of the likelihood of their students having average or sub-par A-levels, thus accounting for why there are more people with 2:1 at good law firms than those with firsts from lower-ranked universities.

It is no more rare to get a first at a lower ranked university than it is at an elite institution. The course at a university which asks for AAA is more difficult than a course which asks for CCC, which means even a first may well not particularly impressive if it's from a poor university.

Just to clarify, I contacted Freshfields and Allen and Overy. They said they do not place too much emphasis on where the applicant attended university. Rather, they are more interested in the grades achieved and experience the applicant has. The women said and I quote: ' top grades and experience is merit within it's self'

Just to clarify, I contacted Freshfields and Allen and Overy. They said they do not place too much emphasis on where the applicant attended university. Rather, they are more interested in the grades achieved and experience the applicant has. The women said and I quote: ' top grades and experience is merit within it's self'

Just to clarify, I contacted Freshfields and Allen and Overy. They said they do not place too much emphasis on where the applicant attended university. Rather, they are more interested in the grades achieved and experience the applicant has. The women said and I quote: ' top grades and experience is merit within it's self'

For sure the Magic Circle would prefer the York non-law and then GDL. Sorry but come on, Man Met will never cut it for a MC firm. To start most would people mock you in saying "oh, you weren't clever enough to go to the University of Manchester", which for starters is Russell Group like York, respected, and a fair few graduates from there end up at MC or city firms as per the link below. If you scour Linkedin too that will also show this, especially recent graduates.

http://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/media/1067/what_is_a_good_university.pdf

MC firms love the Russell Group and Oxbridge, and as others have said, scour their trainee intake from the past few years and you'll see what they mean. You'll find very few non RG graduates, and those that are, are from much better unis than Man Met. I'd say the best non RG for the MC is Leicester. Any lower than that, not a chance.

Finally, your A levels are not good enough for the MC, because most MC firms and the city firms have filters of AAB, some ABB. You have ABCC, which is pretty poor for applying to a MC or City firm. Regional firms and lower; yes you have a chance. It does not matter even if you magically ended up at York cause the catch is your A level grades, so then its not your uni that lets you down, but your prior grades. The filters are usually at the very beginning of an application form asking do you have AAB/ABB at A level, and if you do not have the grades, thats you gone. No application possible.

Sounds harsh but stop kidding yourself, I'm afraid you wont be the next Harvey Specter raking it in at an MC firm.

So let's say that you are an employer at a Magic circle firm. Which one would you hire?

Applicant one:
Has a First class Law degree LLB from Manchester Met Uni (Low ranked uni) but has then gone on to get an Oxford BCL. They have also passed the New York bar (as they could with the LLB)

Applicant Two:
Has a Politics degree (First class) from the University of York
Then has completed the GDL and has achieved a high grade.

I thought this as well until I actually spoke to some grad recruiters (MC included). I haven't been able to find anyone from top firms who says their firm uses A-level filters. It would be quite short-sighted of them to do so I think - I got ABB at A-level (missing many top firms' AAB requirement) but a 1st from UCL after that (along with work experience, vac schemes, positions of responsibility and the rest).*

This isn't to say that A-levels don't matter.*

For sure the Magic Circle would prefer the York non-law and then GDL. Sorry but come on, Man Met will never cut it for a MC firm. To start most would people mock you in saying "oh, you weren't clever enough to go to the University of Manchester", which for starters is Russell Group like York, respected, and a fair few graduates from there end up at MC or city firms as per the link below. If you scour Linkedin too that will also show this, especially recent graduates.

http://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/media/1067/what_is_a_good_university.pdf

MC firms love the Russell Group and Oxbridge, and as others have said, scour their trainee intake from the past few years and you'll see what they mean. You'll find very few non RG graduates, and those that are, are from much better unis than Man Met. I'd say the best non RG for the MC is Leicester. Any lower than that, not a chance.

Finally, your A levels are not good enough for the MC, because most MC firms and the city firms have filters of AAB, some ABB. You have ABCC, which is pretty poor for applying to a MC or City firm. Regional firms and lower; yes you have a chance. It does not matter even if you magically ended up at York cause the catch is your A level grades, so then its not your uni that lets you down, but your prior grades. The filters are usually at the very beginning of an application form asking do you have AAB/ABB at A level, and if you do not have the grades, thats you gone. No application possible.

Sounds harsh but stop kidding yourself, I'm afraid you wont be the next Harvey Specter raking it in at an MC firm.

It's not just necessarily filters though, the smallest margins between candidates can mean an interview/no interview. You clearly tick the boxes in terms of a 1st from one of the best unis in the country and it would be stupid to filter you out based on 1 grade lower at A-level. As harsh as it is, York isn't UCL. MC firms get inundated with applications with people with flawless A-levels and firsts/high 2.1s from the 'next tier of RG' (Take that classification as a very broad generalisation - I mean non-Oxbridge/non-London unis) and my gut would say that A-levels would be one of the things they would use to distinguish people.*

That being said, people often forget that often recruiters look at your application as a whole, and don't break down individual elements too much. If you tick the boxes elsewhere but have one part which slightly drags you down, it may not be the end of the world.

One last thing - I'm a trainee at an MC firm. I got A*AA at a level and haven't spoken to anyone who got lower (admittedly, A-levels are barely ever talked about!) and I think the 'lowest' UK uni on our intake is probably Birmingham in terms of law rankings.