Are LLBs overrated nowadays?
With the SQE ushering in alternate pathways to qualification, and the non-law graduate to solicitor pipeline becoming increasingly common, there is no longer a single standard route into the legal profession.
On this week’s Legal Cheek Podcast, Julia Szaniszlo and Ryan Scott share their perspectives on whether aspiring solicitors should study law at university or pursue another subject and convert later. Ryan took the more traditional path, studying law at Cambridge before securing a training contract, while Julia studied languages at Cambridge and is now preparing to take the law conversion route, sponsored by her future firm.
Together, they explore whether a law degree really gives future lawyers an advantage, considering the increasingly competitive training contract market, the cost of postgraduate legal study, and the new qualification landscape under the SQE.
From the value of STEM backgrounds in IP and tech-focused practices to the soft skills and international perspective that languages graduates can bring, the pair reflect on their own degree choices and ask whether passion, employability or “commitment to law” should matter most when choosing what to study.
You can listen to the podcast in full via the embed above, or on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
I can confirm from many chambers’ perspective, including my own, there is no difference in terms of recruitment as to whether you did an LLB or conversion course. Far far far more important is the result you got/get, so if you think you stand a better chance at getting a higher mark on the LLB then do that or vice versa. Would also warn against presuming you’ll get a higher mark on the LLB because you have 3 years, results have shown that’s not always the case. On the conversion you’re also surrounded by people who really want to be there and engage.
My takeaway is that it does not matter whether you studied law at Cambridge, or langauges at Cambridge, as long as you studied at Cambridge
Oxford is obviously better.
My view is that it depends where you’re applying to and how much time you have on your hands. I can’t speak to the solicitor route.
If you’re likely to get into Oxford or Cambridge, yes just do something else and convert. Regrettably, having been there in any capacity is still overvalued to this day and some sets you will scarcely find a new tenant who did not go to Oxbridge either at undergrad or postgrad.
If you’re applying just about anywhere else, do Law if that is what you want to do. I found that studying Law at undergraduate gave me broad knowledge of many different areas and allowed me to see similarities in legal philosophy between them, which helped me make decisions later on. So if you don’t yet have a career planned out that may help you.
I think both sides of the profession nowadays are looking for a story. Whatever route you take to your legal career, if you can make it sound interesting and varied, you will be better off. If you’re still young, try different things, do postgrad courses, get some work experience. If you’re a mature student, probably best to get on with it as quickly as possible.
As someone who graduated with a solid 2:1 with an LLB in Law with French Law from a London Russel group but cannot secure a TC/vac scheme for the life of me, do you recommend LLMs? Are they worth it, or just more student debt with no promise of a job?
Absolutely do not do an LLM unless you 1) want to for your own enjoyment 2) have the money to do it without stress. They will absolutely not help you get a TC/VS.
Appreciate the honesty, thank you!