Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
If I may add on, for a NUS grad, it makes no sense to do a LSE LLM.
NUS law is ranked very highly.
NUS law is only inferior to Harvard, Yale, Oxford and Cambridge (“HYOC”) Law.
It makes absolutely no sense for a NUS grad to downgrade and do a LSE LLM.
If NUS grad intends to pursue career in academia/legal service, then it makes sense to do a HYOC LLM.
Otherwise there is really little advantage in so doing.
If you’re a RI/ HCI straight As person, and you intend to work in London Magic Circle, then straight away apply for Oxbridge.
It’s pretty pointless to apply for NUS law and not be satisfied working in the big four in Singapore, and then asking why you are unable to get into a London MC/SC.
The selection bias argument is totally irrelevant here. |
Here are the practical uses of doing a non-HYOC LLM:
1. I agree with you only insofar as Singapore corporate / litigation is concerned.
NUS will give Ox/Cam a run for it's money, as evidenced by the number of high flying litigators and corporate lawyers from
NUS. Look at the SC list as an example. Majority did not get a first from
NUS.
2. Why does QS rank certain schools above
NUS? I think it has to do with international repute.
NUS law is the best at Point 1 above, but beyond our shores it doesn't have that much reach. It is still a White dominated world. The biggest companies are UK/US and not home-grown. If we advise them on Singapore matters,
NUS is best placed. If we advise them on UK/US matters, any school that is well-regarded abroad is best placed.
3. This is why
LSE / Upenn / NYU / Stanford would make sense. The international side of any FLA / MC / SC etc is likely to do US or UK work. The barrier to entry is an understanding of how those legal systems work.
NUS trains you in Singapore law, but some aspects are better left to those with UK / US backgrounds. This is why if you went to
NUS, you would consider getting to those LLMs as an entry ticket. To get to those LLMs, you need a FCH.