Value of LLM/ BCL for solicitors/ barristers?
For example, how much value would a BCL from Oxford add to an application with an LLB from a RG.
Do aspiring solicitors or barristers who do an LLB usually go straight to SQE/ PCL, or do some do postgraduate to further stand out to elite firms/ chambers in a competitive legal market.
Just trying to understand what the ROI for an extra year and lots of money is, that justifies completing a post grad.
Reply 1
Standalone academic postgrads in law (not an LLM attached to the bar course/SQE) seem to be more common at the Bar. Competition is more staunch, and many Chambers will partially asses you on your intellectual ability. Having a strong BCL or LLM is a good way to show that ability. The BCL is the gold standard for the Bar. If you get accepted and want to be a barrister it is a no-brainer.
Your desired practice area is also relevant. For the Bar, have a look at everyone who is under 10 years call at some of the chambers you might want to apply to. If literally all of them have a postgrad, it might be wise to get one. It doesn't mean that your spot there is conditional on that factor, though. It just means that, in the application process, that opportunity has given them substance to talk about which their employer found valuable.
The ROI can be difficult. Most places are stupidly expensive. Unfortunately, all routes to the legal profession are. The good news is that there will always be funding available. Research and apply for scholarships. If you get one, your ROI is higher because it is another thing to talk about on applications. Also know it isn't the only way to get a ROI. Getting practical experience in a law firm/NGO is really valued by some places (see above on research). The masters can come later. I know plenty of people who took career breaks just to study for a year.
Condensing the above, take time to research and figure out a path. After that, gain experience that would give you substance to talk about, rather than simply being an addition to the CV.
Reply 2
Disclosure of interest: I teach part time on the UCL LLM.
*The selection panel will be told that candidate A has a First/2.1 in [subject] and a [Master's level/Doctoral level] degree, but will not be told the name of the awarding university, or the name of the degree.
Reply 3
Disclosure of interest: I teach part time on the UCL LLM.
*The selection panel will be told that candidate A has a First/2.1 in [subject] and a [Master's level/Doctoral level] degree, but will not be told the name of the awarding university, or the name of the degree.
Regarding differences between an Oxford BCL and LLM( Cambridge for example) or a Harvard LLM, which do you think is seen to be the strongest?
Slightly confused with the Oxford system of a BA instead of LLB and BCL instead of LLM, and how these compare.
Reply 4
Standalone academic postgrads in law (not an LLM attached to the bar course/SQE) seem to be more common at the Bar. Competition is more staunch, and many Chambers will partially asses you on your intellectual ability. Having a strong BCL or LLM is a good way to show that ability. The BCL is the gold standard for the Bar. If you get accepted and want to be a barrister it is a no-brainer.
Your desired practice area is also relevant. For the Bar, have a look at everyone who is under 10 years call at some of the chambers you might want to apply to. If literally all of them have a postgrad, it might be wise to get one. It doesn't mean that your spot there is conditional on that factor, though. It just means that, in the application process, that opportunity has given them substance to talk about which their employer found valuable.
The ROI can be difficult. Most places are stupidly expensive. Unfortunately, all routes to the legal profession are. The good news is that there will always be funding available. Research and apply for scholarships. If you get one, your ROI is higher because it is another thing to talk about on applications. Also know it isn't the only way to get a ROI. Getting practical experience in a law firm/NGO is really valued by some places (see above on research). The masters can come later. I know plenty of people who took career breaks just to study for a year.
Condensing the above, take time to research and figure out a path. After that, gain experience that would give you substance to talk about, rather than simply being an addition to the CV.
Thank you for the detailed reply; this is very interesting. It seems a masters( particularly the BCL) indeed appears a common qualification among those I’ve researched.
I agree there seems to be limited value there if I choose to progress down the solicitor route, but also some real value for the barrister route; an opportunity to attend Oxford for a BCL would be a career changing experience on an intellectual level too, from what I’ve heard.
Do you happen to know much about the BCL, as it seems different to a traditional LLM in regard to the usual segmented specialisation in an area of law, and almost more general, but heavily academic?
Reply 5
Slightly confused with the Oxford system of a BA instead of LLB and BCL instead of LLM, and how these compare.
Please remember that chambers may consider applications university blind.
The Oxford BCL and the Harvard LLM are regarded by those who are into such things as the two most difficult and prestigious one year, taught and examined postgraduate law degrees in the World. The student who comes top in the Oxford BCL each year becomes the Vinerian Scholar. That's the Olympic Gold Medal of Common Law legal studies. "Have you met X, she's the Vinerian Scholar from my year" makes barrister jaws drop at cocktail parties.
Rightly or wrongly, the Cambridge LLM doesn't have quite the same standing. People sometimes disparage the Cambridge LLM as a degree that was invented to attract fees from overseas students. This may be unfair. It's still a Cambridge degree.
The nomenclature of Oxford degrees is historical. In the Middle Ages, students at Oxford studied Canon Law (the law of the Catholic Church). Oxford then started to teach Roman Civil Law, hence the BCL. To this day, European legal systems are called Civil or Civilian Law systems because they are based on Roman Law.
From the eighteenth century, Oxford taught English Common Law. Nowadays, the BCL is about the Common Law. It's called a BCL and not an MCL because long ago the BCL was an undergraduate degree.
In the typically whimsical Oxford manner, it is now possible to obtain an Oxford LLM in, you guessed it, Civilian Law.
More generally, Oxford and Cambridge use the terms BA and MA because those are historical degrees within medieval universities. Study a science at Oxford as an undergraduate and you get a BA. Oxford and Cambridge graduates qualify for MAs through time elapsed from matriculation. Medieval students would typically proceed from Scholar to Bachelor to Master to Doctor before a career in the university, in the church, in the civil service, or in the law. MA denotes a rank in the university. Universities founded later adopted the title MA for taught and examined postgraduate degrees.
I don't have a BCL and have not taught on the BCL course at Oxford. I don't have a law degree. I have an Oxford MA in History, a Diploma in Law from City University, and took the old style Bar exams at the old Inns of Court School of Law. I practise at the Bar and teach part time on the LLM course at UCL.
I know a bit about the BCL from talking to people who have BCLs and/or who teach on the BCL course. The BCL is very academic. It's quite intense. There is good choice of papers. It's very Oxford: you can specialise or diversify, and the tutorial is the main teaching tool.
By contrast, the UCL LLM, for example, involves a more specialised study of a particular type of law. My LLM students are either international candidates from India and China, including Indian barristers, or UK candidates who aim to work in large London law firms and specialise in international dispute resolution. Quite a lot of Chinese lawyers and in house counsel at Chinese companies have Chinese law degrees (China has a civilian law system blended with Communist Party rules) and UK or US LLMs.
Reply 6
The Oxford BCL and the Harvard LLM are regarded by those who are into such things as the two most difficult and prestigious one year, taught and examined postgraduate law degrees in the World. The student who comes top in the Oxford BCL each year becomes the Vinerian Scholar. That's the Olympic Gold Medal of Common Law legal studies. "Have you met X, she's the Vinerian Scholar from my year" makes barrister jaws drop at cocktail parties.
Rightly or wrongly, the Cambridge LLM doesn't have quite the same standing. People sometimes disparage the Cambridge LLM as a degree that was invented to attract fees from overseas students. This may be unfair. It's still a Cambridge degree.
The nomenclature of Oxford degrees is historical. In the Middle Ages, students at Oxford studied Canon Law (the law of the Catholic Church). Oxford then started to teach Roman Civil Law, hence the BCL. To this day, European legal systems are called Civil or Civilian Law systems because they are based on Roman Law.
From the eighteenth century, Oxford taught English Common Law. Nowadays, the BCL is about the Common Law. It's called a BCL and not an MCL because long ago the BCL was an undergraduate degree.
In the typically whimsical Oxford manner, it is now possible to obtain an Oxford LLM in, you guessed it, Civilian Law.
More generally, Oxford and Cambridge use the terms BA and MA because those are historical degrees within medieval universities. Study a science at Oxford as an undergraduate and you get a BA. Oxford and Cambridge graduates qualify for MAs through time elapsed from matriculation. Medieval students would typically proceed from Scholar to Bachelor to Master to Doctor before a career in the university, in the church, in the civil service, or in the law. MA denotes a rank in the university. Universities founded later adopted the title MA for taught and examined postgraduate degrees.
I don't have a BCL and have not taught on the BCL course at Oxford. I don't have a law degree. I have an Oxford MA in History, a Diploma in Law from City University, and took the old style Bar exams at the old Inns of Court School of Law. I practise at the Bar and teach part time on the LLM course at UCL.
I know a bit about the BCL from talking to people who have BCLs and/or who teach on the BCL course. The BCL is very academic. It's quite intense. There is good choice of papers. It's very Oxford: you can specialise or diversify, and the tutorial is the main teaching tool.
By contrast, the UCL LLM, for example, involves a more specialised study of a particular type of law. My LLM students are either international candidates from India and China, including Indian barristers, or UK candidates who aim to work in large London law firms and specialise in international dispute resolution. Quite a lot of Chinese lawyers and in house counsel at Chinese companies have Chinese law degrees (China has a civilian law system blended with Communist Party rules) and UK or US LLMs.
Thank you for your detailed response.
I have a few questions that I’d be curious to hear your insight on:
1.
Regarding the practical value of the Oxford BCL, how beneficial do you think it may be to an aspiring commercial barrister-
I’m aware of how strongly it’s viewed, but as a bachelor of civil law, how does it help more than a focused LLM in a more relevant subject to this area of the bar.
1.
I’ve heard than the LLB is generally more direct/ focused for legal careers than a BA in law, but Oxbridge is higher ranked despite not offering an LLB.
1.
I’ve accepted my place at York for my LLB this year- this is a bachelors degree of course, and mixes practical and theoretical learning through PBL, with a research focus.
Oxford BCL seems very academic and theoretical, so if I was to be able to attend, would the focus of my undergrad and postgrad be seen as the wrong way round-
e.g. undergrad is often purely theoretical, whilst an LLM or masters includes more practical sides/ research, or do you think Yorks LLB will be viewed the same as any other, as it covers the same areas, just taught in a different way, and Oxford is viewed as gold standard for post grad anyway?
1.
After reviewing educational paths of recent members of top chambers, it seems that an LLB/ BA followed by the BCL and then a Harvard LLM is fairly common- although I’d thought the LLM and BCL were the same degree level, so why may people have done this.
Thank you in advance.
Reply 7
I have a few questions that I’d be curious to hear your insight on:
1.
Regarding the practical value of the Oxford BCL, how beneficial do you think it may be to an aspiring commercial barrister-
I’m aware of how strongly it’s viewed, but as a bachelor of civil law, how does it help more than a focused LLM in a more relevant subject to this area of the bar.
1.
I’ve heard than the LLB is generally more direct/ focused for legal careers than a BA in law, but Oxbridge is higher ranked despite not offering an LLB.
1.
I’ve accepted my place at York for my LLB this year- this is a bachelors degree of course, and mixes practical and theoretical learning through PBL, with a research focus.
Oxford BCL seems very academic and theoretical, so if I was to be able to attend, would the focus of my undergrad and postgrad be seen as the wrong way round-
e.g. undergrad is often purely theoretical, whilst an LLM or masters includes more practical sides/ research, or do you think Yorks LLB will be viewed the same as any other, as it covers the same areas, just taught in a different way, and Oxford is viewed as gold standard for post grad anyway?
1.
After reviewing educational paths of recent members of top chambers, it seems that an LLB/ BA followed by the BCL and then a Harvard LLM is fairly common- although I’d thought the LLM and BCL were the same degree level, so why may people have done this.
Thank you in advance.
No apology needed! I am happy to help if I can. Each of your questions is accidentally numbered 1, but here are numbered answers -
1.
The BCL is a continuation and refinement of a wide and deep legal education, which provides a strong platform for practice at the Commercial Bar. It's not an accident that many commercial barristers have BCLs. This is not to say that specialised LLMs do not have virtue, because they plainly do.
2.
If someone is suggesting that an LLB is somehow more useful for a practising lawyer than an Oxford or Cambridge BA in Law, that suggestion is incorrect. The name of the degree is irrelevant. The content and academic quality of the degree are what counts. No undergraduate law degree by itself qualifies or equips a person to practise law. Further study and professional training are required to qualify and equip the new lawyer to practise.
3.
I don't think that anyone would think that you were doing things backwards if you were to study for an LLB at York and then obtain a place on the Oxford BCL course. York's description of its LLB course suggests a USP, but problem solving is part of most undergraduate law courses, and each such course contains the seven core subjects. It's arguable that Oxford's approach of tackling the core subjects in detail and offering few optional papers provides a very thorough grounding in the law, based on which a practitioner may later choose to specialise. If you do obtain a place on the BCL course after York, be prepared for the step up in the level of academic intensity which studying at Oxford involves.
4.
I suspect that the reason why anyone might do an undergraduate degree followed by a BCL and then a Harvard LLM is because that person can! If a student obtains offers to do this and can obtain funding (for example via one of the scholarships which facilitate study in the US), that student might value the opportunity for more study and for the chance to experience law the American way. The good lawyer never, ever, stops learning the law. I have been a lawyer since the 1980s. I am still learning the law.
Reply 8
1.
The BCL is a continuation and refinement of a wide and deep legal education, which provides a strong platform for practice at the Commercial Bar. It's not an accident that many commercial barristers have BCLs. This is not to say that specialised LLMs do not have virtue, because they plainly do.
2.
If someone is suggesting that an LLB is somehow more useful for a practising lawyer than an Oxford or Cambridge BA in Law, that suggestion is incorrect. The name of the degree is irrelevant. The content and academic quality of the degree are what counts. No undergraduate law degree by itself qualifies or equips a person to practise law. Further study and professional training are required to qualify and equip the new lawyer to practise.
3.
I don't think that anyone would think that you were doing things backwards if you were to study for an LLB at York and then obtain a place on the Oxford BCL course. York's description of its LLB course suggests a USP, but problem solving is part of most undergraduate law courses, and each such course contains the seven core subjects. It's arguable that Oxford's approach of tackling the core subjects in detail and offering few optional papers provides a very thorough grounding in the law, based on which a practitioner may later choose to specialise. If you do obtain a place on the BCL course after York, be prepared for the step up in the level of academic intensity which studying at Oxford involves.
4.
I suspect that the reason why anyone might do an undergraduate degree followed by a BCL and then a Harvard LLM is because that person can! If a student obtains offers to do this and can obtain funding (for example via one of the scholarships which facilitate study in the US), that student might value the opportunity for more study and for the chance to experience law the American way. The good lawyer never, ever, stops learning the law. I have been a lawyer since the 1980s. I am still learning the law.
This is very helpful.
The BCL is a prospect I’m very much interested in. I also had an offer from Glasgow for Common Law, which was founded in 2019, and I felt the 3 year structure of a more established York law school would benefit me more.
Although, I’ve seen Glasgow appear a few times as the LLB choice for new tenants at top chambers, but not so much York. Do you think York is likely to have been the choice of a good amount of them too, or is Glasgow perhaps stronger in this aspect?
This is good to hear about Yorks LLB however, as I was concerned the theoretical/ purely academic coverage of each module wouldn’t be focused enough, but I assume most other unis use problems in examinations anyway, so it’s virtually the same as the others/ not seen as less valuable.
Would you imagine a large part of this degree will be heavily academic still( in regard to how detailed its education on the 7 core modules will be), as I’m concerned about how chambers may view this( were they not recruiting university blind as you’d mentioned).
Reply 9
1.
The BCL is a continuation and refinement of a wide and deep legal education, which provides a strong platform for practice at the Commercial Bar. It's not an accident that many commercial barristers have BCLs. This is not to say that specialised LLMs do not have virtue, because they plainly do.
2.
If someone is suggesting that an LLB is somehow more useful for a practising lawyer than an Oxford or Cambridge BA in Law, that suggestion is incorrect. The name of the degree is irrelevant. The content and academic quality of the degree are what counts. No undergraduate law degree by itself qualifies or equips a person to practise law. Further study and professional training are required to qualify and equip the new lawyer to practise.
3.
I don't think that anyone would think that you were doing things backwards if you were to study for an LLB at York and then obtain a place on the Oxford BCL course. York's description of its LLB course suggests a USP, but problem solving is part of most undergraduate law courses, and each such course contains the seven core subjects. It's arguable that Oxford's approach of tackling the core subjects in detail and offering few optional papers provides a very thorough grounding in the law, based on which a practitioner may later choose to specialise. If you do obtain a place on the BCL course after York, be prepared for the step up in the level of academic intensity which studying at Oxford involves.
4.
I suspect that the reason why anyone might do an undergraduate degree followed by a BCL and then a Harvard LLM is because that person can! If a student obtains offers to do this and can obtain funding (for example via one of the scholarships which facilitate study in the US), that student might value the opportunity for more study and for the chance to experience law the American way. The good lawyer never, ever, stops learning the law. I have been a lawyer since the 1980s. I am still learning the law.
I feel it’s also worth noting that I very much intend to practise law, not pursue academia, but I’m also highly interested in obtaining more than one degree( whether that be a BCL/ LLM) , for both personal achievement, and a genuine interest in legal theory.
I’m wondering( after the LLB), what is typically very helpful for a full legal education, and what’s somewhat a waste of time/ money.
For example, if I progressed as follows:
LLB
BCL
Or:
LLB
BCL
LLM
Would both of these masters be useful/ what would be the next step- I’m thinking perhaps the LLB and BCL and then progress towards qualifying as a barrister, and then a PHD later in my career- is there anything else that could be added to this?
Many thanks again.
Reply 10
I suggest that you see how your ideas develop as you study, and what opportunities life throws at you. I don't think that any academic course at rigorous university is a waste of time. By all means study for a doctorate if you wish, but that would involve a big commitment of time and money, and, once you start in practice and start to acquire the furnishings of adult life (mortgage, maybe children, all of that kind if thing), you might find it difficult to step off the moving staircase for long enough to complete a doctorate.
Reply 11
I suggest that you see how your ideas develop as you study, and what opportunities life throws at you. I don't think that any academic course at rigorous university is a waste of time. By all means study for a doctorate if you wish, but that would involve a big commitment of time and money, and, once you start in practice and start to acquire the furnishings of adult life (mortgage, maybe children, all of that kind if thing), you might find it difficult to step off the moving staircase for long enough to complete a doctorate.
I’m inclined to agree with your expectation of a marketing ploy being used here. Being a qualifying LLB, like any other, I’m assuming a strong theoretical focus will be maintained, although by integrating problems more frequently than merely on examinations perhaps. My concern was from an angle of not wanting an LLB that tries to include too much beyond the classic modules, but it seems as though this won’t be the case.
Given that my aspired area of practice as a solicitor would be corporate law, or to practice at the commercial bar as a barrister, I recognise these are the most competitive areas, and thus LLMs, whilst valuable, may be better fitted to more niche areas to enhance my competitiveness, although perhaps it would still be a good way to stand out against others in this large competition.
I think if I am to progress down the corporate solicitor route, I would likely avoid a masters degree entirely, due to the general ROI, as I imagine experience will be more valuable.
However, if I opt for the barrister route, I think the Oxford BCL would be a big prospect I’d like to aim for, before bar preparations, to fulfil both my educational and career aspirations- your comment on a doctorate seems sensible too, and those considerations won’t arise until later on regardless.
Many thanks for your responses, they have been very helpful again.
Reply 12
Given that my aspired area of practice as a solicitor would be corporate law, or to practice at the commercial bar as a barrister, I recognise these are the most competitive areas, and thus LLMs, whilst valuable, may be better fitted to more niche areas to enhance my competitiveness, although perhaps it would still be a good way to stand out against others in this large competition.
I think if I am to progress down the corporate solicitor route, I would likely avoid a masters degree entirely, due to the general ROI, as I imagine experience will be more valuable.
However, if I opt for the barrister route, I think the Oxford BCL would be a big prospect I’d like to aim for, before bar preparations, to fulfil both my educational and career aspirations- your comment on a doctorate seems sensible too, and those considerations won’t arise until later on regardless.
Many thanks for your responses, they have been very helpful again.
You're welcome, and your ideas about how you might develop your career look sensible to me.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Law Conversion Routes
- MPhil in Law v BCL - which one is more difficult?
- University of London Worldwide LLB Law OR University of Law Online LLB Law full-time
- SQE then LLM?
- I need some serious advice
- intellectual property law - sqe or btc?
- What is the equivalent of a solicitor training contract for barristers?
- Law at NTU
- Postgraduate Law Advice
- Likelihood to transfer unis and if it’s worth it?? Help
- Oxford or Cambridge best in uk for law? Direct answers if possible.
- Degree Apprentice in Law
- Career Pathways after the Barrister Training Course
- Likelihood of becoming a barrister with these credentials?
- Seeking Advice!
- Harvard or Yale LLM?
- Which uni? LSE or UCL?
- Help needed with best options for postgraduate law courses/Master's
- Oxford - BA Law - UCAS Personal Statement
- Advice for the Oxford BCL.
Articles for you
How The Student Room is moderated
To keep The Student Room safe for everyone, we moderate posts that are added to the site.
