LLB or LPC? Which route to take?

thanks for the clarification over the conversion course.

does everyone agree that doing law at uni and continuing from there is as good as doing, say, business at uni and then converting to law?

ive heard that employers appreciate the breadth of knowledge gained by doing a non-law degree course, especially if its relevant to the field of law one wud liek to join.

alot of people i've spoken to, both academic and from firms say that they are sceptical of the GDL because they don't understand how someone who's studied law for 1 year, could possibly have the same depth and range of legal knowledge as someone who has a three year qualifying law degree. You can take business free electives if you want. Plus studying law now shows a commitment to law and also give you better access to be able to do things like join the law society, mooting competitions, pro-bono etc etc. A law degree is widely useful and well regarded whether you decide that you want to go into the legal profession or not. So If law interest you, I would say do a law degree. Or if you really want to do another degree. I would apply for a 2 year senior status LLB rather than he GDL because you cover more modules

Well, I'm not an expert on such things, but I would imagine that a Law degree would be more prestigious than a Business degree, which may have a bearing when you come to applying for Training contracts. Nor would it really be much of an advantage to have done an Economics/Business/Maths/English/History/etc. degree. But I agree with the general sentiments in this thread: as long as you are doing a fairly traditional, academic degree, it doesn't really matter what you do. Far more important is the rest of your application and CV.

You don't have to do anything business-related on a Law degree either. Even Company, Tax and Commercial, probably the three most business-related modules that you can take are all pitched at quite a high, academic level.

To be honest, I'm not convinced that what most of what you study is directly relevant to practice in a commercial setting. Of course, the basics of contract, tort and property are going to be important to keep in mind, but there is no reason why those basics can't be taught on the GDL. A lot of the extra, more advanced stuff that you cover in a Law degree may be useful, but ultimately it's not going to have that much grounding on your practice as a lawyer and if there are any key bits of law that you need to know it will be easy enough to look them up and learn them while you're on the job.

You are 'not convinced that what most of what you study is directly relevant to practice in a commercial setting'. Fair enough, that is your view which a lot of legal professionals would disagree with. But the 'basics' (so you have put) in the GDL are the absolute minimum for professional accreditation.

You've contradicted yourself there. The purpose of professional accreditation in law is to accumulate enough knowledge to put it into practice. According to many magic circle employers, the GDL is considerably superficial compared to an LLB. You are very wrong that 'it's not going to have that much grounding on your practice as a lawyer'. Speaking as a barrister's son, legal practice requires a lot of presumed knowledge and you can't just simply 'look up' information. Take, for instance, a defending barrister in court. When you are debating with the prosecutor, you can't just simply admit "give me time to look at my book of laws". You have to improvise by utilizing presumed knowledge. I'm not having a dig at the GDL, it is great in that you have knowledge in another academic degree. But the LLB is preferable because of your early and constant exposure to the law.

I agree. But there is certainly a preference for LLB graduates over other graduates who progress with a GDL, unless of course, you completed an academic bachelors course at Oxbridge. (Source: friend's father who has many friends in the magic circle). However you are quite right - the rest of your application is also important.

Plus studying law now shows a commitment to law and also give you better access to be able to do things like join the law society, mooting competitions, pro-bono etc etc. A law degree is widely useful and well regarded whether you decide that you want to go into the legal profession or not. So If law interest you, I would say do a law degree. Or if you really want to do another degree. I would apply for a 2 year senior status LLB rather than he GDL because you cover more modules

Rubbish.... complete rubbish. I don't mean to have a go at you, but this is just horribly misinformed. There is no preference AT ALL of LLB students over GDLers, a simple glance at the stats will tell you that; circa 50% of new trainees took the conversion course. Does this not perhaps indicate that firms are really not that fussed whether you did the LLB? The idea that you think you have to have a degree from Oxbridge AND the GDL to compete with pure LLB students is laughable.

Studying law at university is very different to the law you'll practice in real life. Academic law is just that - academic. From my housemate, studying law at uni is more about 'knowing about' rather than 'application of'.



Studying a non-law degree AND keeping up to date with current legal and commercial news shows more than enough commitment to law in my view. I don't get the fascination with 'covering more modules'. A lot of what you study at uni will largely be irrelevant, particularly if you go in to the City where legal knowledge comes in at the same level as commercial knowledge and the ability to foster excellent business relationships.


NB: I'd like to point out that both of these views (that the GDL is a crappy way in to law) come from students who have yet to even start uni, let alone got to grips with the application process. Not to be remarkably condescending, but I feel that even I (as a final year, non-law student) have a much, much better idea of what City law firms want in their trainees.

A source indicating the 50/50 split between GDL and LLB would be useful, thanks in advance.

A source indicating the 50/50 split between GDL and LLB would be useful, thanks in advance.

There is no difference. Employers take approx 50% law grads and 50% non-law.

Rubbish.... complete rubbish. I don't mean to have a go at you, but this is just horribly misinformed. There is no preference AT ALL of LLB students over GDLers, a simple glance at the stats will tell you that; circa 50% of new trainees took the conversion course. Does this not perhaps indicate that firms are really not that fussed whether you did the LLB?

Although the statistic by itself means absolutely nothing.

If a law firm takes 50 LLB trainees and 50 GDL trainees the useful information is of course not that there's a 50/50 split per se but that, for example, 50 LLB students applied with a 100% success rate, whereas 200 GDL students applied with a 25% success rate.

A bit of googling yourself would soon turn this up, but for the sake of it:

http://www.lawcareers.net/Information/Features/Detail.aspx?r=1235

From 2005, so possibly the figure stated is lower.

http://www.pinsentmasons.com/default.aspx?page=294


http://www.linklatersgraduates.co.uk/join/non-law_graduates.aspx


That's just a few to start you off.

Precisely. I too have that it mind.