Studying law in UK

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! You folks are clueless. Yes, go to school in England for 3 years of undergraduate and then take the bar in the United States immediately. You are a lawyer after 3 years rather than 7; several American states allow this. All they care is that you have a degree in law from a common law jurisdiction.

Then go get an LLM at a relatively prestigious American law school — an easy admit compared to any JD program since a lot of the programs are just cash cows.

What states allow foreign lawyers to sit for the bar exam? I know many foreign lawyers who were never able to practice in the US because they would have had to get a law degree here in order to be able to sit for the bar exam. Maybe it’s gotten more flexible?

New York - subject to certain requirements. Not all foreign lawyers, but English LLB would qualify

[Anonymous]

Tl;dr

One could get a law degree from the Uk then do an LLM here and (after passing the bar exam) practice here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tl;dr

One could get a law degree from the Uk then do an LLM here and (after passing the bar exam) practice here.

You don’t even need the LLM for NY. But think carefully about whether this path will actually allow you to have the legal career you want in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m dual qualified, started in the UK and then took the bar exam here. The LLB doesn’t in itself qualify you to practice law in England. Kid would need a further year of law school and then 2 years of trainee-ship in a law firm. If the end goal is practising in the US and to do a JD in the US, I don’t see any real value to it, and it might be very boring and repetitive as they would end up doing 6 years of law. If the plan is to qualify in the UK as outlined above and then move to the US and take bar, skipping the JD, that is doable but kid will find it much harder to find a job in the US because most firms only want to hire JDs. I don’t think a UK law degree on its own is of much interest to international law firms. Even being dual qualified, as I am, is of limited interest! If kid really wants to study in the UK, I suggest something other than law as undergrad.

Curious. So you did a 3 year LLB with an extra year (not working?) and two year paid traineeship? Guessing total tuition for that (in current fees) would be $36,000 plus cost of the extra year and you started earning money three years before an American graduate? You’re probably working with American lawyers who paid about $350,000 in tuition fees and studied way longer. Do you have a view on whether which system produces better lawyers ? Or about the same?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m dual qualified, started in the UK and then took the bar exam here. The LLB doesn’t in itself qualify you to practice law in England. Kid would need a further year of law school and then 2 years of trainee-ship in a law firm. If the end goal is practising in the US and to do a JD in the US, I don’t see any real value to it, and it might be very boring and repetitive as they would end up doing 6 years of law. If the plan is to qualify in the UK as outlined above and then move to the US and take bar, skipping the JD, that is doable but kid will find it much harder to find a job in the US because most firms only want to hire JDs. I don’t think a UK law degree on its own is of much interest to international law firms. Even being dual qualified, as I am, is of limited interest! If kid really wants to study in the UK, I suggest something other than law as undergrad.

Curious. So you did a 3 year LLB with an extra year (not working?) and two year paid traineeship? Guessing total tuition for that (in current fees) would be $36,000 plus cost of the extra year and you started earning money three years before an American graduate? You’re probably working with American lawyers who paid about $350,000 in tuition fees and studied way longer. Do you have a view on whether which system produces better lawyers ? Or about the same?

I actually didn’t do law undergrad, so I had to do 2 years of law school instead of the one I would have had with an LLB, so 5 years of education instead of the 4 in the US. Those two years were paid for plus stipend by the law firm I then trained at, which is common if you train at a big firm. The pay for the training 2 years is less than 1st year associates get here, but of course we don’t have any debt.

I have met and worked with many many very good American lawyers so there must be something working with the system here, but I think the English system is better for training and also for allowing you time to really try out different areas of law in practice . The LLB is more similar to the JD as it is an academic study of law, but the mandatory year afterwards is very practical, and then obviously you have the two years in the firm where you do rotations into different departments and then decide after that where you want to work afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Nah, the two year traineeship (you are paid a real, albeit moderate, salary; not an unpaid internship or anything) is just like the first two years working as an associate in the US; it’s not education in the sense we are talking about, so don’t call it that. The UK is way faster and easier; OK to admit that.

The US is the only place where law and medicine are not first degrees. It is costly and absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nah, the two year traineeship (you are paid a real, albeit moderate, salary; not an unpaid internship or anything) is just like the first two years working as an associate in the US; it’s not education in the sense we are talking about, so don’t call it that. The UK is way faster and easier; OK to admit that.

The US is the only place where law and medicine are not first degrees. It is costly and absurd.

Agree that it’s not education like being in law school or college but there is a lot of actual training (specific courses and programs), but more importantly there is the opportunity to spend 6 months working in 4 different areas of the law. It is called training because that is what it is - a paid apprenticeship, with on the job mandatory training. And it’s mandatory as part of becoming a lawyer - just going to law school doesn’t qualify you for anything

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! You folks are clueless. Yes, go to school in England for 3 years of undergraduate and then take the bar in the United States immediately. You are a lawyer after 3 years rather than 7; several American states allow this. All they care is that you have a degree in law from a common law jurisdiction.

Then go get an LLM at a relatively prestigious American law school — an easy admit compared to any JD program since a lot of the programs are just cash cows.

You are clueless. This path is available but if your goal is to be a lawyer in a good firm, or government, you won’t get in that way.

Agreed, good luck to any person with an LLM trying to get a decent job in the USA unless they have connections or top credentials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow! You folks are clueless. Yes, go to school in England for 3 years of undergraduate and then take the bar in the United States immediately. You are a lawyer after 3 years rather than 7; several American states allow this. All they care is that you have a degree in law from a common law jurisdiction.

Then go get an LLM at a relatively prestigious American law school — an easy admit compared to any JD program since a lot of the programs are just cash cows.

That is what my nephew did. He is right. several states Bar associations allow you to sit for the Bar. My nephew has a UK Law degree and now practices in 3 US states….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would it make sense for an American to do a 3 year bachelor of law in the UK then go to a US law school? I’m thinking the main advantages might be (a) saving one year of college tuition and foregone income by doing a 3 year undergraduate degree and (b) an English law degree might make the candidate attractive if applying to international law firms.

I’m not a lawyer and am interested in hearing from lawyers whether this does or doesn’t make sense.

That makes no sense.

I am a lawyer who studied in England.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would it make sense for an American to do a 3 year bachelor of law in the UK then go to a US law school? I’m thinking the main advantages might be (a) saving one year of college tuition and foregone income by doing a 3 year undergraduate degree and (b) an English law degree might make the candidate attractive if applying to international law firms.

I’m not a lawyer and am interested in hearing from lawyers whether this does or doesn’t make sense.

That makes no sense.

I am a lawyer who studied in England.

It would be more useful if you said why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m dual qualified, started in the UK and then took the bar exam here. The LLB doesn’t in itself qualify you to practice law in England. Kid would need a further year of law school and then 2 years of trainee-ship in a law firm. If the end goal is practising in the US and to do a JD in the US, I don’t see any real value to it, and it might be very boring and repetitive as they would end up doing 6 years of law. If the plan is to qualify in the UK as outlined above and then move to the US and take bar, skipping the JD, that is doable but kid will find it much harder to find a job in the US because most firms only want to hire JDs. I don’t think a UK law degree on its own is of much interest to international law firms. Even being dual qualified, as I am, is of limited interest! If kid really wants to study in the UK, I suggest something other than law as undergrad.

Thanks. So the only real benefit is maybe saving one year of study costs and forgone income?

Is there any field of law (eg contract, international litigation) where qualifications from both countries is useful?

I’m the dual qualified PP. It has definitely helped me to be competitive for certain positions, and I think it’s useful in several areas of law - primarily international commercial like M&A, capital markets, international arbitration, privacy. But I would put it at the same level of usefulness as being fluent in a foreign language - it’s unlikely to be relevant in most jobs but there might be a few where that specific skill is very highly valued depending on the specific range of clients and work. Part of the reason it’s not as useful as you might think is that it is hard to build the expertise you need in each jurisdiction. It isn’t very valuable to be a newly qualified lawyer with no practical experience, and if you merely qualify in England and then never practice there, then you won’t really bring much to the table as an English lawyer.

Agree. In my experience, if a US law firm needs expertise in the UK, they hire an experienced lawyer, preferably a QC (or now KC, I guess). If you have expert English counsel, having a US attorney with a degree from there who had never practiced would be of limited utility.

[Anonymous]

I know someone who went to Cambridge for three years and then did a one year LLM at Harvard and got barred in NYC. He got a job at one of the Uber elite firms (DPW I think but I don’t remember). He does international banking law as a partner at some firm in Hong Kong now.

He is smarter than your kid though. And me. And pretty much everyone else at Cambridge and Harvard as I recall.

It doesn’t tend to work the same for mortals so if you try it you’ll want to be one of the top 2 or 3 kids in your class at Oxbridge. But it is a path that has worked at least once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know someone who went to Cambridge for three years and then did a one year LLM at Harvard and got barred in NYC. He got a job at one of the Uber elite firms (DPW I think but I don’t remember). He does international banking law as a partner at some firm in Hong Kong now.

He is smarter than your kid though. And me. And pretty much everyone else at Cambridge and Harvard as I recall.

It doesn’t tend to work the same for mortals so if you try it you’ll want to be one of the top 2 or 3 kids in your class at Oxbridge. But it is a path that has worked at least once.

.

Btw, he wasn’t American though. He was basically some sort of international kid. Ethnic Chinese with perfect English that sounded slightly British to an American and slightly American to a Brit. I forget where he grew up, multiple places I think. Probably some Hong Kong or Singapore diaspora connections at one point. So he didn’t make this weird plan at 18, he just decided to spend some time in the USA after dominating his classmates in the UK. Presumably if DPW didn’t drop he would have happily gone back to London.

I gotta admit as a white guy I am just too lazy for all of that. He can be my boss’s boss as long as I can leave work at 5:30 and drive my kids to sports practice. We are who we are I guess.