Advice

Which uni should I choose for law: Durham, Warwick or QMUL?

By on
113

The Legal Cheek team give their contrasting responses

This week a prospective law student got in touch asking us whether he should plump for Durham University, Warwick or Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) for his LLB. He has offers from all three.

Our writers have responded with their advice…

Katie King

The three unis you’ve chosen consistently rank highly in league tables, so I don’t think you need to think too strategically about this. Make your decision a personal one.

One big, personal point to consider is location. I went to university in a largeish city centre, so, full disclosure, nothing would appeal to me less than a campus university like Warwick. Having visited Warwick on a Pathways to Law trip when I was 16, the only thing I really took away was that the on-site shops were minimal and not well stocked (the lack of dry shampoo stuck with me) and the bigger outlets were hardly ‘oh crap I’ve run out of milk for my cereal this morning’-distance away. Durham, too, has a very small town vibe; it’s also an age away if you’re from London like I am.

QMUL is in the capital, so much better suited to a city boy/girl. It also means you’re in close proximity to firms and chambers (and the bulk of Legal Cheek’s careers events!).

But with that comes the added costs of living in the capital. That might be enough to put you off, and it did me. But if the costs aren’t too much of an issue, I’d seriously consider it.

Polly Botsford

QMUL is certainly an exciting and dynamic proposition which chimes with its East London vibe. But I would pick Durham because the collegiate system has a lot to recommend: with that system you benefit from being part of a larger university but also get to know people really well, across subjects, within your college and can enjoy the support that a smaller community can provide.

Given that there is a fair chance that you may want to spend some of your working life in London, I would not rush to get there. It is crazy-expensive apart from anything. It will be there waiting for you when you are ready.

Alex Aldridge

I’d choose QMUL — the main reason being that it is not in a small town (Durham) or on a campus (Warwick). I wouldn’t have relished three years in my early 20s spent in what I imagine can be very claustrophobic places, cut off from the outside world in the pressure cooker environment of studying law.

Yes, Durham and Warwick are probably more prestigious as names to have on your CV, but they’re not Oxbridge. And let’s face it, if you didn’t get into Oxford or Cambridge, for most big law firms it doesn’t really matter where you went as long as you made it to a vaguely Russell Group-ish institution.

Certainly, QMUL fits that bill. Plus it’s located just a half an hour stroll from some of the world’s best law firms and chambers, which is obviously handy for finding a job at the end of the course.

Also, living in London will mean you are around many different types of people, doing many different things, which will help you maintain some perspective on life.

But a word of warning. Remember that QMUL comes behind UCL, LSE and King’s in many people’s eyes. If that’s a chip that you might find burdensome, perhaps consider somewhere different entirely.

Natalie Kaminski

To complicate things further, I’d probably go for Durham. Who wouldn’t want to study in a castle? If you’re like me and still haven’t got your acceptance letter from Hogwarts, I’d say Durham is probably the next best thing.

I’ve spent my entire school and uni life as a city girl so if I was to make the choice now I’d be excited to flee the nest in search of something different. So it depends whether you’ve always been a Londoner like me? I quite like the idea of a smaller town and tighter community, where everyone says hello in the morning. Seems like a world away from the death stares you get on the London Underground…

And it depends what kind of lawyer you want to be (if at all). If you’re a rising corporate star but worrying you’ll be missing out on the City firms if you do your LLB further out, then you can always go to London when you do your LPC.

It may not be Oxbridge, but the world has moved on and legal recruiters know that the twin elites don’t necessarily produce the best students. I wouldn’t believe that Durham lies in their shadow. Go for it, especially if you plan to work in London for most of your future career — this way you get the best of both worlds.

Thomas Connelly

If I were in your position I would go for Durham

Firstly, the university’s law faculty is a consistently strong performer in the various law school league tables published each year. As a result, Durham has an excellent reputation among City law firm recruiters who regularly make the trip ‘up North’ to attend the university’s various law fairs and networking events.

The law school itself, despite Durham’s historic architecture, is a modern building — once voted the most “impressive” in the world — situated in the heart of the campus.

And lets face it; Durham wouldn’t be a bad place to live. Low living costs (rent, alcohol and food) compared to its London counterparts make it the perfect place to embark on law student life. Having grown up not far from the Durham itself, the city, due to its high student population, offers a unique and friendly atmosphere.

Got a view? Add your own advice in the comments below.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek’s careers events, sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub.

113 Comments

Anonymous

Durham, part of that elite trio of unis, Doxbridge, is the perfect choice.

(28)(39)

Anonymous

*oxbridge
Stop this try hard ‘elite trio’ nonsense

(43)(8)

Anonymous

Doxbridge

That’s where it’s at

(8)(16)

Anonymous

Yet as a Barrister have never met an able Durham lawyer…

(4)(15)

Anonymous

As a tax barrister, I disagree.

(3)(4)

Anonymous

LOL anon at 2.02pm was clearly joking. Though maybe it’s been disliked by so many Durham students

(5)(1)

Broflake

A whole article dedicated to trolling?! Next level from you, Legal Cheek.

(27)(1)

Wendy

Why next level they always been like it……..

(0)(5)

Broflake

Shut up Wendy.

(9)(0)

Anonymous

I went to Warwick and would recommend Durham

(50)(4)

Anonymous

agreed, Warwick just tries to suck more money out of you every year whilst the teaching just deteriorates

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Warwick

(8)(8)

macass

I would go for Warwick. I went to Oxford and the Durham grads at my firm are fairly insufferable and perennially go on about “Doxbridge”. Warwick is a great university without the chippy, slightly desperate vibe that Durham seems to have. Both decent unis though and I would assume better than QMUL.

(54)(21)

Anonymous

Funny, I’m at an MC and the only people obsessed with bragging about uni are a small proportion of the Oxford trainees. Everyone hates them including fellow oxford trainees and all the lawyers. I went to Durham and never heard anyone here bragging about it. I certainly don’t.

(14)(26)

Anonymous

you do realise you’re sort of proving his point about sounding “chippy”?

(30)(9)

Anonymous

I didn’t mean it that way. I’m just saying, in my experience at an MC the only people obsessed with uni are a small proportion of oxford students. The large majority of Oxbridge students are lovely, clever, and couldn’t care less.

But someone says ‘all Durham students go on bragging about their uni’ and gets up voted, I say ‘in my experience it’s only a small minority of Oxford students who do that’ and get called chippy. Seems odd. Perhaps the top poster works at a rubbish law firm where Durham seems more impressive than it is. I’ve found in my MC no one could care less where you went and trainees don’t talk about it really.

(11)(20)

Anonymous

Again continuing with the chippiness. Accept it. You didn’t go to Oxbridge, that’s fine you went to a decent uni. It doesn’t mean everyone “hates” Oxford grads.

(17)(9)

Anonymous

I’m at a non MC city firm, same applies. Durham grads DO have a reputation for being arrogant wannabes – mainly perhaps from the internet and the fact it is a collegiate system which is similar to Oxbridge, but it isn’t Oxbridge by any stretch, BUT I have never met an unpleasant or haughty Durham grad in real life.

Not quite the same for Oxford grads. I’ve had friends come out of Oxbridge quite changed people unfortunately, and I do concur with the above re chippiness. I don’t know if it’s to do with the culture, the dinners, the ethos, the finals and the structure of the courses. “I went to Oxford” is something which is blurted out justifying one thing or another quite often – e.g. why did you want to do this? “I did law at Oxford, so…” – two separate people in my cohort. I haven’t encountered from at all from Cambridge grads either. So it could be that there is something very specific about finals which traumatises everyone so badly they end up this way.

(12)(9)

Anonymous

Actually it must be because of finals. Because they have 2:1s and are chippy about it. Because they’re all ambitious and hard working. And so all probably aiming high and probably for firsts. And doing finals in just over a week is a big hit and miss in terms of how well they do, and there’s a bit of luck. And then they come out with 2:1s like everyone else, and all they have is the Oxford brand. They haven’t had year 1 and 2 results reinforcing their relative mediocrity, whereas most students get a little stung after their first year results.

That’s my view.

(3)(10)

Anonymous

At Oxford you do get year 1 results, so I’m not sure where you’ve got that idea from. Obviously they don’t impact the final grade but given 15% of people get firsts and about 84-5% get 2:1s I doubt the majority of Oxford students are unaware of where they stand before finals.

Anonymous

It’s 18-24% firsts at Oxford. 19% and 24% in the last two years. Year 1 assessments are taken at the end of term 2 of year 1 (not even at the end of year 1), and only include 3 papers and are very unlike the depth and difficulty of finals. Nobody knows if they’re on for a first or not – if near 25% of the year are getting firsts, there are probably nearly c.50% with a “high” 2:1 (above 65) average.

Many students outside Oxbridge bemoan their 68% or 69% average as being on the cusp of a first, but the reality is there are hordes of students like them and the system deliberately draws quite big distinctions between the 69 and the 70 mark threshold.

Anonymous

I literally didn’t say that though. I specifically said most oxbridge grads are brilliant and fun and nice. I’m just completely baffled by this hatred of Durham grads because being one myself I don’t know a single person like that, whereas I’ve met a few Oxford grads who talked endlessly about university.

The only lesson to take from this is that there’s dicks from every uni. Carry on thumbing me down and calling me chippy though, I’m just genuinely confused by the hatred.

(9)(9)

Wendy

Zzzzzzzzz… if it helps you’re all knobs

(1)(5)

Anonymous

The irony of saying “I’m just genuinely confused by the hatred…” when you’re the only poster that has mentioned “hating” anybody

(8)(2)

Anonymous

“the Durham grads at my firm are fairly insufferable and perennially go on about “Doxbridge”.”

If people are actually doing that they’d really wind me up too, I was just pointing out how ridiculous it is to tar all Durham grads with this when we feel the same way at my firm about a tiny handful of Oxford grads who can’t shut up about it. I’m not the one saying ‘Durham grads are all chippy and won’t shut up about being superior’, which is a pretty unpleasant view to express when it’s A) untrue and B) in the context of a school child deciding where to go to uni.

Anonymous

Durham grads would fit very well in herpes herbies. so many of the people at HSF love to boast about how great their firm are and cannot really talk about much else when meeting people outside work.
a snippet: “oh I’m on a client secondment at ___ for my next seat”
HSF: “oh they are our client! we do work for them!”

right. thanks. conversation ended.

(1)(0)

Durham Grad

Queen Mary seriously? Durham is at the top with Oxford and Cambridge so it’s a pretty easy decision.

(17)(27)

Anonymous

For Durham’s sake, I hope you’re a QMUL plant, just doing a stellar job of reinforcing the stereotype of Durham grads being 4th rate chippy tools.

(12)(9)

Durham Grad

Seriously what is your problem? My experience at Durham was phenomenal and it is one of the most prestigious Unis in the world, why is it an issue for me to advertise this?

(8)(27)

Harvard called and wants to have a word with you

“one of the most prestigious Unis in the world”

MEGALOL.

(27)(2)

Anonymous

Durham is not “at the top” – it’s a good RG university, not on a par with Oxbridge. It’s on a par with Bristol, Warwick, QMUL, KCL, Sheffield and other universities in the RG. It is not one of the most prestigious universities in the world. We have Oxford and Cambridge. LSE is also well known, as is UCL to a slightly lesser extent. Internationally, Durham is probably at best regarded on a par with Warwick and Nottingham depending on the country. But domestically, no one cares. If a grad has been to Oxbridge, that’s sometimes an interesting plus, but a 2:1 from Durham is not better than a 2:1 from, shock, Newcastle. And a 1st from Newcastle is always better than a 2:1 from Durham. And – to law firms – better modules grades in a 2:1 degree from Newcastle is better than a 2:1 from Durham with worse module grades.

I know you’re the type of sap to think AAA A-level grades and going to Durham will be perceived as better than someone getting AAA and going to Leeds, but it is simply not the case, and that attitude alone creates the impression you are insecure and arrogant.

(36)(6)

LL and P

I have to agree with you on this. I’ve always wondered why someone with the exact same grades will think they are better because they went to Durham rather than Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, Warwick, Birmingham or Southampton. However I have since realised it is probably a private school/posh thing. It is drilled into them that if they get in Durham or Bristol then they are better than everyone else except Oxbridge who they feel inferior to. If you go to state school and come from a less well of background then this marginal snobbery isn’t important to you. I notice posh kids trying to do the same thing with Exeter and St Andrews these days too.

(13)(3)

Anonymous

Very true (unfortunately). All the time universities like Durham and Bristol have 35-40% of their students from privately educated backgrounds, this mentality will continue to fester.

(3)(1)

LL and P

Yeah maybe. It’s all a bit childish. And many of these kids will think they know better than grad recruitment in firms. Giles went to Winchester and sailed a first in classics at Bristol. He definitely deserves a tc more than anyone else.

(3)(0)

Libeturd

Ummmm… I am a Bristol grad and in no way feel inferior to an Oxbridge grad. Nor do I feel I am superior to any other grad. I stand and fall on my own merit.

I do realise my uni may provide some semblance of insight into my perceived pedigree but it in no way defines me as a lawyer, that rises and falls on my own merit and actions.

(2)(5)

Anonymous

I wish I could up-vote you more.

Oxbridge >>>LSE>>UCL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RG

RG universities are losing all prestige internationally.
Shortly, the only internationally known UK Law schools will be Oxbridge and LSE.

(1)(6)

Anonymous

Lol

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Durham can be as expensive as London – and for most doesn’t work out cheaper than QMUL would do, esp if from the south. I didn’t go to either, I just know the costs.

Food prices are about the same. Accommodation is equivalently priced or almost to London – first year accommodation, albeit catered, being about 5.5-7k for 33 weeks. Property outside is also unusually expensive to rent not in line with the North. Train tickets can be expensive too especially if travelling from the south – if you don’t book months in advance (and no one usually does) the average return to e.g. London is about £130ish standard. You can get 20 quid standard tickets if you do book months advance and you get lucky, but usually each way closer to 55-65 standard if you book 2-3 weeks in advance. If you book last minute with only a few days or a week in advance you could be paying 125 each way.

(3)(6)

Anonymous

Don’t know where you live in London that the common £100/week rent in Durham for a nice place is equivalently expensive. Or a £1.50 pint is equivalent to the £5 in London. Obviously halls are different but that’s only 1 year in 3.

(9)(2)

Anonymous

I went to LSE. I paid 135 a week for catered halls, then 110 a week in Stratford in a houseshare, then 125 a week in Camberwell. You can find a 110-120 a week double room in an OK house in say, Leytonstone today easily. There are cheaper and more expensive areas. I currently rent for 530 a month in a big double Clapham including bills, although this definitely below market rate.

No student in London has ever paid £5 for a beer. LSE has cheap cafes and bars, including SU around it, as would QMUL esp if it has a campus. At LSE, in central London, it is £1.50 for a pint, double vodka + red bull, £2.95. Gym costs etc. are also discounted.

You’re basically projecting having gone to Durham.

(4)(6)

Anonymous

If you lived in Stratford for 110 a week it must have been an absolute shithole, plus you were paying for transport. In Durham I paid 80 a week for a massive house with a couple of mates and a 2 min walk to lectures. And we could actually go out places and not just sit in the union bar. And there were actually piles of amazing extra curricular activities, music, theatre, sport etc to get involved in unlike at LSE.

I’m not trying to knock LSE, it’s a great uni, I’m just pointing out how silly it is to suggest it competes with Durham on something like price or quality of life.

(6)(2)

Anonymous

You’re still projecting. Stratford was decent accommodation and included bills. It depends on the area, and prices change all the time, and also what you find, but you will find 110-120 a week within 10 minutes commute of that university.

Durham is a little town; there are so many places (bars, pubs, restaurants, clubs) which are cheap in London, they would outnumber Durham 1000 times over to the power of 10. Roxy, Cheapskates, Moonlighting in general, Borough Market etc…and places like Proud in Camden or Tiger Tiger x 10000 others do student nights every week. And I am in no way a party person.

Food from supermarkets is also the same price in London as Newcastle.

The idea you’re comparing things to do at LSE/QMUL/London to a little university town in the north of England is intriguing. London does suck for sport though. But on costs, there’s not a huge difference. Durham is an artificially very expensive town compared to Newcastle in most things. The first year accommodation is fairly comparable to London in pricing. It’s impossible to number crunch but in the scheme of the loans available, it’ll be a relatively paltry difference of a grand, maybe two, when you’ve taken into account tube/rail fares over the course of a degree. Given the overall costs involved of tuition and living expenses, the 3 year period and the loan repayment period, it’ll make no visible difference to a repayment schedule in a grad job, and you’ll pay back in the same time as you would anyway.

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Actually supermarket shopping is probably more expensive in Durham than London. Because there are lots of Aldis and Lidls close to many different areas here. They may be somewhere on the outskirts of Durham, but they won’t be anywhere close to the town for students without a car.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Durham, of course

(5)(4)

Anonymous

Try and get a place at SOAS via clearing- best decision ever!

(4)(5)

Anonymous

Speaking as someone involved in sifting CVs for interview, Durham or Warwick are more eye catching names. If you cannot decide between the 2, I would recommend you think about where you want to practice in the future. I’m at the regional Bar and it is flooded with those from local universities over Russell Group graduates.

(11)(5)

Anonymous

You mean the closest you’ve gotten to a Legal career is as a poor HR consultant? Please confirm.

(4)(5)

Anonymous

He’s a barrister in the regions – the definition of a career failure.

(3)(9)

Anonymous

What career?

(2)(2)

Anonymous

There is reasonably good chance that as a law grad you won’t actually practise law. Based on 2015 data there were roughly 5,000 training contracts registered compared to 16,000 law graduates. Also remember that a chunk of the 5,000 training contracts will be going to GDL students so the odds of getting a training contract are very much stacked against you.

It’s not just that getting a training contract can be difficult. Many people discover during their degree that the idea of actually being a lawyer is no longer appealing and roles in the civil service, marketing, consultancy, teaching etc. suit them better.

I would completely disregard how good the university legal department is and go for the university that will look best to employers whatever profession you go into. Look at university league tables.

(4)(7)

Anonymous

How many of those failed TC hopefuls went to Durham or Warwick? I’d guess it’s quite a small proportion.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Probably a larger proportion than you think. Durham is pretty notorious for churning out lots of non-law grads who hope to get a TC but fail.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Is this copied/nicked from a thread on The Student Room by some chance?

(7)(0)

Anonymous

I was in a similar position choosing between Durham and Warwick for law and after choosing Warwick I do not regret my decision one bit! The experience at Warwick is so unique being one of the largest campuses in the country. In regard to Law in particular, Warwick focuses on a law in context approach more than other universities, better preparing you for a career after uni. I have many friends who go to Durham and love it yet, when comparing experiences, they are often segregated in their colleges and don’t have the full uni cohesion found at other universities who actively use a Students Union and run societies and sports clubs university wide. Ultimately both Durham and Warwick will stand out to employees, it’s down to which will suit you best.

(12)(2)

Anonymous

What a completely pointless article. Desperate for views by attempting to get a rise from the aforementioned universities’ alumni…

(6)(0)

Anonymous

It apparently worked best at getting some Oxford grads out to hate on Durham…

(5)(5)

Anonymous

Go visit them. Go to the one that you feel you will enjoy having the best years of your life at. Then be a boring as fuck lawyer.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

you’re going to be unemployed and struggling to find work in 3 years time. where you go Uni doesn’t really make much difference at all.

(0)(0)

Theresa Mayday

Brexit means Brexit you c*nt.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Go to Durham! Its a special vibe there. I have chosen Warwick and it was the worst decision in my life! Wish I would have chosen Durham 3 years ago. Please update us on your choice 🙂

(2)(16)

Honest Dunelm

Durham law school has lost some key staff recently and is substituting what was a strong commercial staff for frankly entrenched and unacademic human rights / socio-feminist professors.

I can’t really comment on the others due to lack of experience. Warwick has some excellent academics however. QM might be better for a masters.

(8)(4)

Anonymous

Truth to this. Good academics at two. Fenwick I think heads Durham and/or its recruitment; she’s a very left-wing ultra feminazi lheadcase.

(1)(6)

Anonymous

I’ve just graduated from Durham and hugely benefitted from the range of modules available, including human rights related and various socio legal modules… why would that ever be a bad thing or considered less academic?

(0)(3)

Trumpenhammer

Cuck spotted!

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Warwick and Durham are on the same level, QMUL falls behind quite a bit. I’d say go to Warwick if you don’t want people to laugh at you because you think Doxbridge is a thing.

(7)(7)

Anonymous

Marginal between Durham and Warwick – depends on whether you want campus or city and whether you like the collegiate thing. Stereotypically, Durham probably a posher student body than Warwick, but all universities have people from different backgrounds and you’ll end up falling in with the friendship group that suits you wherever you go.

League tables may say that QM is equal to the other two, but in terms of reputation (both with law firms, chambers, and more generally (which is important as you might not end up a lawyer…)) it’s some way behind. Unless you are desperate to stay in London, it’s not a sensible call. Alex says it comes behind LSE, Kings and UCL “in many people’s eyes” – that’s an understatement – it is not in the same league as those three universities, and no reasonable, unbiased observer would suggest that it is.

As to the joyous “Doxbridge” debate that goes on above; anyone who is deluding themselves that, both domestically and internationally, there are any British universities with a reputation to match Oxford or Cambridge is a fool. Everywhere else is scrapping for third.

Broadly, you are looking at:

1) Oxbridge
2) UCL, LSE and Imperial (obviously not for law…)
3) Bristol, Durham, Kings, Warwick, Edinburgh and St Andrews
4) Nottingham, Manchester, SOAS
5) Leeds, Newcastle, Exeter, York, Sheffield etc.,
6) “Modern” Russell Group
7) The rest

Before anyone says it, I didn’t go to Oxbridge, nor did I go to Bristol or Durham (the two that most commonly seem to think that they are in the Oxbridge league). And I’m sure you can point to league tables that say X uni should be higher up the list, but the above is (broadly) how most people in the City see the world. I know exceptional lawyers from every tier above (including 7) before anyone suggests that I’m a snob…

(16)(14)

Anonymous

SOAS are probably more likely in group 5 or even possibly 6.

QM is highly targeted for diversity reasons, so isn’t necessarily a bad call. All the time the university has over 50% BME UK students and high proportions of students from low SEB backgrounds, but with a relatively high A-level admissions requirement, firms and chambers will want to target it, as well as employers outside of the legal profession. No other university in the UK can really compete on these combined diversity factors like QM.

(6)(1)

Anonymous

I’m a junior barrister at a commercial set in London. Like most sets, we publish our selection criteria on the pupillage pages of our website. A first class degree from any of these universities would meet our academic criteria in sifting. We do occasionally interview candidates with 2:1s, but this is rare.

We wouldn’t discriminate on university choice as outlined above. I am also quite sure that the big city law firms don’t do this either. We do review A-levels as part of our academic sift which often narrows the number of universities, but that is all. As someone has said above, willy waving about doing well in an interview at 17, or having chosen Nottingham or Leeds is not particularly interesting to us.

A lot is made of the high numbers of Oxbridge educated barristers, but we only discriminate on the best candidates. Many, but not all, happen to have gone there and done rather well.

(5)(0)

K

merge category 4 and 5 and i’d say that’s about right

(0)(0)

Former SOAS student

SOAS is not even part of the rest lol. It’s a laughing stock for law. Trust me I know abit about SOAS, I went there and it is very below par uni let me tell you.

As for Exeter I got an offer from them this year, and let me tell you again ,Exeter is tad beleow York and good cliff drop from sheffield both in terms of law and university. Exeter is dull as dish water and monosyllabic.
Lastly as for this Queens, Durham or Warwick bull-shite let’s put an end to it.There is only one truly elite university in the UK, and I’m sad say it’s what you might think it’s is . Let me give you a clue, it starts with an O. Yes, that right :Oxford. I know a lot of people will give me hate for that but I think that’s the only university where the name makes a difference. Don’t get me wrong Cambridge is the best uni in the country for generally everything, but when it come to an Oxford grad v a Cambridge grad; unfortunately the Oxford grad will come out on top most of the time. Our country is riddled by an insidious class system where who you know is more likely to determine your life prospects rather than what you know and how good you are at it. So if Oxford is the only elite university in the UK with Cambridge a respectable but lets face lagging second what hope for us all? I say we need to stop this crap about ‘ my university is better than your university’. There is unfortunately a pecking order but that should not let us from striving to fulfill are talents and break these wicked structural hierarchy . As for the Durham v Warwick thing, go to Warwick; it unlike Durham, has or is at least trying to forge its own individual identity. Plus, warwick is top uni. If you go Warwick no one can never lay a strong claim and call you an Oxford or Cambridge reject. Be a man, and be a individual for that is the only way forward.

(4)(16)

Anonymous

You sound like a fool. You probably got into university through clearing.

(5)(1)

K

Hahahahaha

(0)(0)

Former SOAS student

The best units in the country are as followed

Oxford

Cambridge

Warwick

Lse and imperial

St Andrews

UCl

The rest of the RG, excluding Durham

Durham i.e. King of Oxford and Cambridge rejects

The rest

Then SOAS lol

(6)(19)

Aberwystwyth

Aberwystwyth

(2)(0)

Former SOAS student

Remember lse and imperial are specialist institutions only focusing on the social sciences and true sciences for that reason Warwick trumps then in my opinion.

Comment away

(1)(1)

I'm am NF

Good point, but then again that sounds like the kind of shit sad by a SOAS student.

(0)(0)

I'm am NF

Standing for nutty fisher

(1)(0)

I'm am NF

nutty fisher

(1)(0)

Anonymous

In my day there were a lot of pretty thick people at Cambridge. I was one of them. There have got to be brighter people at other universities – surely.

(0)(2)

Heavily Whipped MC Trainee.

If you want a career in the city, I would pick Durham, closely followed by Warwick, and then QMUL. Although there’s a lot of Durham bashing in the comments, I must say the Durham graduates I’ve met have been lovely people. I find it quite awful that so many are willing to rubbish the accomplishments of those who read law at Durham – at the end of the day the entry tariff (UCAS score) is virtually the same as Oxfords. The students there are very bright. Indeed, some of them, including me, did not attend a top public school and thus found the Oxbridge interview an extremely alien experience. I remember i fell flat on my face at 17. My friend who went to Shrewsbury school got into Oxford, despite doing far worse than me and several others at GCSE, AS-level and A-level. I wonder why.
This is also an interesting read.
http://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to-start/newsletter/law-firms-preferred-universities

(3)(7)

Anonymous

Why lie about your job? You’re obviously just as a Durham shill. You went to Durham and apparently you’re just ‘lovely’.

What I don’t get is why someone who can’t write for sh1t thinks they should be in a position to proselytise to others on academics?

(4)(4)

Anonymous

That was a surprisingly aggressive response. Apologies if I offended you.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

You didn’t offend anyone, you’re just lying about being a trainee. I suspect you’re insecure because you don’t have a training contract.

(0)(3)

Anonymous

Damn, you got me. How did you find out? Now, can we talk about what’s relevant or do you enjoy making baseless accusations?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

He’s right though. Aside from Oxbridge, Durham vastly outstrips every other uni in terms of its representation in City law firms. Chambers did research on it: http://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to-start/newsletter/what-universities-do-most-trainees-come-from

(2)(6)

Anonymous

There are careers outside of city law firms. For all we know the person asking this question might want to work in human rights abroad or in immigration law in Bradford. But Chambers doesn’t collect that kind of data in their interviews with firms, all of who pay thousands of pounds to advertise in its publication.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Prestige Rankings:
Oxford
Cambridge/ LSE
UCL/ Warwick/ Kings
Durham/ Edinburgh/ Nottingham
__
other RG
__
Plebs

(16)(9)

Anonymous

I disagree:

Oxford/Cambridge
LSE/UCL
Durham/Warwick/KCL
Nottingham/Bristol/QMUL/Leeds

Other

(1)(9)

Big Boiii Lawya Man yea

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(1)

Anonymous

If I had to choose I’d pick UCL slightly above Warwick, but the difference isn’t that great to warrant it to be in a separate tier. Durham borderline getting there but still is in no way on par with Warwick or KCL.

(3)(0)

Aberwystwyth

Aberwystwyth

(3)(0)

true story

“Yes, Durham and Warwick are probably more prestigious as names to have on your CV, but they’re not Oxbridge. And let’s face it, if you didn’t get into Oxford or Cambridge, for most big law firms it doesn’t really matter where you went as long as you made it to a vaguely Russell Group-ish institution.”

For once I agree with Alex A. Also Durham grads are insufferable!

(7)(6)

Anonymous

I’ve firmed Durham Law. The comments seem to be quite critical of the university. I hope I haven’t made a mistake.

(1)(3)

Anonymous

Durham is consistently ranked as one of the best law schools in the country and the world. Sure, Warwick is a fantastic university, but is mostly known for Business, PPE, Economics, and other mathematically based social sciences. Durham is best known for humanities and arts that aren’t so mathematically based such Literature, Music, Law and History. QMUL is ranked higher than Durham for it’s world law ranking, but overall its reputation is not as prestigious as Durham. Furthermore, if you look at the statistics of the number of people from each university obtaining training contracts at Magic and Silver Circle law firms, Durham has a much larger percentage than either Warwick or QMUL. Lastly, Durham has the collegiate system which offers a sense of community and belonging that you don’t get at non-collegiate universities. There are many societies within the colleges as well as university wide societies with the Student Union. Both types are equally popular. This reasoning is how I made my choice.

(2)(6)

Big Boiii Lawya Man yea

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(3)(0)

My 2p

I had the choice of Cambridge (Downing), QMUL and Kent. I chose QMUL because Cambridge had significant extra costs and I did not want to carry any more debt than necessary.

Fast forward to the end of my degree and I have a TC with a city (k+l gates type) firm. I know 11 other graduates who have TC’s (a mix of MC and others) and 3 pupillage winners and 3 people who got TC’s via their vac schemes this year. Clearly you lose nothing in terms of ‘prestige’. The graduating class is 180 people.

QM also has guaranteed on-campus housing for first years starting from £125/wk (all-in). It’s all really convenient with a 24 hour library, 24 hour security, tube, grocery stores, malls, the park, Canary Wharf firms, Liverpool St firms.

As part of the U London group you get access to all other facilities and can compete in the intra-uni competitions hosted by various law firms.

(7)(9)

Anonymous

Ha alleging to have firmed Queen Mary over Cambridge? ROFL

(11)(4)

Anonymous

It wouldn’t be my decision, but it happens.

(4)(3)

Anonymous

They explain that part of the reason for their decision was a financial one. But those from a position of financial privilege wouldn’t really understand why that would influence your decision of which university to choose.

(4)(1)

Aye

Well said. People can’t understand that some others cannot afford to live away from home for 3 years. It’s tough.

However OP should have gone for UCL or KCL.

(1)(2)

Anonymous

Maybe they were their other UCAS options and they weren’t offered a place. Or they didn’t take or pass LNAT (which both UCL and KCL use).

(1)(0)

Anonymous

No offence to either UCL or KCL, but neither of them are Oxbridge. KCL in particular is very overrated. UCL and LSE look down on KCL as the poly on the Strand. Most KCL grads then say “hey we’re as good as you guys, and…and…at least we’re not QMUL”. It’s just like Durham pretending to be Oxbridge or whatever the shills above are saying about it being one of the most prestigious universities in the world.

The reality is all three of them are OK, and about as good as one another. Academically, they share many of the same staff, many have flitted between the institutions, or at least the same calibre of staff. QMUL is very good for IP, commercial law, employment and HR, KCL is known for public law and European law, UCL is known for jurisprudence, public law etc. At an undergrad level, there’s no difference.

Neither is there really for graduate prospects. All 3 are perhaps marginally more targeted than Durham or Warwick for US firms, since most people in the US have no idea about any of these universities; Oxbridge is the best bet, and London sounds good, but for some offices trying to appease their US masters back home it can be a tiny consideration. The comm bar doesn’t care so long as you have a first – most reading this will never be in that top 10% to begin with, so is fairly irrelevant. Big law firms which sift on mass filter on undergraduate module grades and A-level grades. If there happen to be a larger intake of UCL grads than Bristol grads, despite a larger Bristol cohort, at a particular magic circle firm, that doesn’t indicate said MC prefers Bristol. It just means more UCL grads better fit the necessary criteria/were better candidates. Saying a UCL grad or a LSE grad or even an Oxford grad got a job simply because of where they went to university is a mass oversimplification of any recruitment process, and actually denigrating the individual.

Out of the 4 London universities, I would have definitely picked KCL last knowing those who studied there.

(2)(1)

My 2p

Couldn’t because I did not sit for the LNAT. And in my view they did not fit what I was looking for as perfectly as did QM or Cambridge.

(2)(0)

My 2p

I am not made of money and Cambridge has the cost of college fees over and above the normal tuition. I am (was) an international student (Canadian) and had an earlier degree and a decade of work experience. I knew:

a) What uni you attend matters very little in the grand scheme of things

b) The average salary I could expect to earn which placed a cap on what type of debt I could service without going hungry. The Cambridge option was a year longer and twice as expensive relative to QMUL.

c) My interest lies in arbitration, litigation and admiralty. QM is well known for all 3. Cambridge is a good overall uni and has the ‘rubber stamp’ but QM is a great uni for law and for my interests in particular

(2)(0)

Anonymous

MEGALOL.

(0)(3)

Frothy af

You’re an idiot for firming QMUL over Cambridge for anything. You can therefore only ever be an authority on bad decisions in life. Go away.

Lol at the SOAS person several posts above who put Warwick above LSE and Imperial because the latter are ‘specialist’. As if the diversity of the courses on offer ever had an impact on the quality (in absolute terms) of the research produced by, or indeed the reputation of, a university. You don’t see MIT or Caltech being ranked below UMass or UC:SD because the latter provide a wider range of courses, do you? Maybe he or she should focus on their Islamic finance and honour killing course, or whatever else they teach over at SOAS nowadays.

I’d pick Durham by the way. At least its law students are half-intelligent.

(5)(8)

Anonymous

Unlike you who seems to lack any intelligence.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Why people would ever turn to the snobby, elitist, and downright nasty LC comment section for advice on what University to go is the real question here.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

The same elitist snobbery is seen pretty much everywhere else in areas connected to law. Its pretty difficult to find an unbiased view, or anyone who has got clear knowledge/experience of multiple universities.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

I did well at a non-oxbridge uni mentioned in that list….and no it was not durham.

I am young, happy, rich, doing the area of law I always wanted to do and own a nice big house. Came from a middle income household, first to go to uni etc etc.

What uni you go to is only half the battle – the real battle is maintaining who you are.

(2)(0)

Former SOAS student

As I said before got to Warwick, what many peeps fail to comprehend is that one day warwick will be on par with Oxford and Cambridge; it is the new Stanford of the UK in many respects. Durham, however, will always and forever be a dumping ground for ” oxbridge” rejects. Give it another 30-40 years “Woxbridge” will be a thing.

(4)(3)

Anonymous

This is funny. Actually, it isn’t. It’s bad trolling.

(2)(1)

Former SOAS student

Peace out bitches, and to the anonymous racist, suck my bbc and taste the load.

(0)(1)

Comments are closed.