Agree with this poster. Firstly, law grads from NUS/SMU are not disadvantaged vis a vis their UK educated law grads when it comes to securing slots in international law firms that are operating in Singapore. It may well be difficult at the first instance (i.e. a NQ lawyer without much experience) but that is the same position for overseas law grads face as well.

A good law degree is advantageous as a stepping stone into a decent law firm handling cross border work. Beyond that, it’s the individual and his/her exposure to the correct practice area (in other words, be suitably positioned with sufficient cross border work to be eventually headhunted by magic circle or foreign firms).

In all respect, banking has the most mobility. A person training in a big four banking dept would have sufficient ease of moving over laterally to a MC or international fairly easily. This is the nature of banking work, the skills set are highly transferable. Work with very little transferability (in this respect) would then be litigation, conveyancing, regulatory and local capital markets.

Thus it really depends on how a lawyer eventually wants to position himself/herself. There are very good lawyers dominating the litigation scene in Singapore and there would be very little incentive to move over to an international firm to do corporate work. In other words, sometimes the comparison is simply not necessary / not even called for in the first place due to the nature of the practice area and the kind of work that international law firm does.