Well usually a full time lecturer can teach about 5 to 6 subjects especially when they are quite senior. Further, he had a team of lecturers with him, I don't think it was just him that was handling everything. Anyway, the 2006 KCL scholarship winner was his student if im not mistaken.

Alrite, he's your friend, and I'm sure you will be much more familiar with his capabilities. Anyway, honestly, if your friend cannot handle getting a 2:2 for UOL, with that, it'll be hard for him to pass the CLP the first time at least. The CLP is twice the bulk of the UOL prog and is 5 subjects spread over 1 1/2 weeks. I would have thought that getting a 2:2 and going to the UK to do the BPTC would maybe be a better option. Further, the problem with most UOL students (myself included ) is that they tend to start studying only in February or March, with exams being in May/June.

My advice to your friend would be to work harder (and maybe smarter as well), whatever his next step.

No, your working experience does not help your appeal, as the examiners will solely base their considerations on your overall results. Im not sure how much the appeal costs, but if minimal, just try...nothing to lose at this point since it is unlikely you will get anything lower than a third.

Obviously, you need to be able to speak well to be a good lawyer. Anyway, those are skills that you can nurture and develop whilst reading law. 4 years is a long time.


-

On another note, for those of you interested in pursuing the UOL LLM or just interested to know more, a University of London Masters in Laws (LLM) preview by Dr. James Busuttil, Director of Postgraduate Laws Programme will be held at the ATC KL campus, on 23/9/2010 at 6.30.pm. PM me for more information.

Firstly, what do you mean by "consider also my other optional paper will be EU, Succession, Conflict"? Are these the options available to you?

Secondly, if you're not bothered about the CLP, then there are only three reasons why you would want to pursue a particular option:
i) interest
ii) relevancy to what you do
iii) ease

I am unsure about Evidence, but relatively, amongst the four subjects you mentioned which I bolded, succession would probably be the easiest to score followed by probably conflicts. EU is a toughie to score imo.

In terms of relevancy, well, commercial and company law should be something you shud consider to especially the latter.

Well, I've heard that one before..."Eventually you will like it". I can't remember what you want to do again, or what your interests are...but anyway -

Having a law degree is good...as one mentioned, it helps you to think critically, analyse facts and so forth. But we have very nice LLB mills around, churning out hundreds of LLB graduates in KL alone. Only four things will make you stand out amongst other LLB grads:

i) Character/references
ii) LLB grades
iii) Other qualifications
iv) Work Experience

So there are a whole lot of LLB grads around. Having just an LLB is not going to help you a whole lot. Im not saying it's impossible to land a good job after, but your choices will be limited considering the oversupply of LLB grads.

If you are "forced" into doing the CLP and thereafter pupillage...that's when the real work starts. CLP is no easy exam...and pupillage can be tough depending on the firm. It takes almost 5 years to be a lawyer...so you really have to like it. If not, it will be very tough at the CLP stage, let alone pupillage!

I believe in following your passion...if this route aids you in your ultimate goal, then see it positively. If it doesn't, convince your parents. If that doesn't help, then let us know what might. Do your parents want to speak to lecturers to get their input? Practicing lawyers? Senior Lawyers? Let us know...we can provide whatever advice we can, but ultimately you have to decide and make a stand for what you want. If for some reason it's too late, then just do what you have to do. You're tunnel is probably just a little longer than others.

...just a word of advice to law students. Do as many attachments as possible, both in big and small firms. The more attachments you do, the more you are exposed to in terms of not only insights into local legal practice, but also to the different corporate cultures out there and you get to experience for yourself the difference between being part of a big firm vs small firm. Also add networking to this.

The bvc/bptc offers better training for would be lawyers obviously...and some law firms regard those who have done the BVC as better prepared for pupillage. Firms like Azmi & Assoc (according to their website) pay those who have completed the BVC higher than others. Some firms like to have a mix of pupils who have done everything, in order for them to share their experiences.

But everything boils down to your ability and passion of course.

"which route"?

on another note, i dun see how anyone can provide u with info on which area of law you "shud go for", especially at your stage...

1) do you have any pre-u qualifications that may be considered A level/stpm equivalents?

2) you can "bypass" A level to take LLB, but you will need an ALE/STPM equivalent to take CLP

3) if UOL Ext LLB and CLP is your preferred route, about RM50k...but you will still have to undergo pupillage to be "qualified" as an A&S

4) roughly 3 years for LLB, 1 year for CLP then 9 mths for pupillage to be an Advocate & Solicitor

I concur. Alot of good lawyers here are UOL grads. It's not what qualifications you have, but how good you are.


BTW, the legal career fair is being held on 12.2.2011 (Saturday) at Corus Hotel, (Jalan Ampang, Kuala Lumpur) from 10am to 4pm. Do visit the fair if you're interested to find out more about legal practice and information on the firms that will be present. I'll be there.

This post has been edited by alsree786: Jan 20 2011, 06:36 PM

Coincidentally, a Sime Darby Scholar just joined the firm im in.

Anyway, it all depends on what you want to do. Imo, it is not difficult to land a job in legal practice, they will take you in so long as you do reasonably well. The first step is Pupillage, and well, the firms usually take in more than they retain...so those 9 months is for you to prove your worth if you want to stay.

But what do you want?

Always bear in mind that a nine month period for pupillage is a short time to learn. Attachments allow you to explore practice before you embark on it, it allows you to meet people and understand what is required from you. Pupillage in some firms can be competitive, so having more experience may give you the upper hand over your colleagues.

the same can go for pupillage...so the bottom line is, join a good firm that trains its attachees. Most definitely pupils will be given primacy, but im sure you have friends who have done attachments that were fruitful in some way.

What do you intend to do with this legal qualification you wish to pursue?

peers or not, there are pupils who start their pupillage at 21 years old...so unless u fall into the 21 or 22 category, you still ay find yourself taking instructions from younger LAs.

With regards to the second part of your query, the remuneration is not as high as it should be considering we are professionals and fully responsible for advice given and are regulated. But i think in Malaysia, every industry pays low if you want to compare, even your investment bankers. Starting salary of lawyers is RM3k to 4k (or 4.3k).

Start studying from day one and start preparing notes early on. If you have no time, then ensure you attend the revision classes. Ensure you reserve leave for the exam week as it can be very tiring.

Yes. In terms of time, that would be sufficient. But I recommend ensuring that you get proper notes from the colleges. I left my job in early May to concentrate on the CLP, despite not attending classes earlier. Was okay for me. All of us know ppl that managed to pass the CLP first time whilst working full time, so I think if you intend to go full time study months prior to the exams, should be okay.

I beg to differ. The range of ages for pupils I have worked with is from 21 to 30. I have met and worked with almost 40 pupils so far. Age is or at least should be irrelevant. Why would it be harder to fight with the younger ones? From my experience, the older ones are usually more matured and usually have some form of working experience. I would take the candidate that impresses me most overall.

I still believe if you are decent enough (need not be strong 2:1 above), it is not hard to get a pupillage position in a good firm in the legal world. There are so many good firms for various type of work. Im not sure whether that extends to freshie LA positions. Have not decided on that point.

Well, if you're 27 or 28 and you have no working experience, that is a major drawback on your resume (unless you have added qualifications). That person must have been doing something (construtive hopefully) considering in Malaysia you should be able to complete your legal studies latest by 24. If you took time off for 1 to 2 years to chill, well obviously I'd overlook you too. There are no two similar candidates wherein lies the need to resort to considering age as a determinant.

I know a couple of engineers who switched to law. Well, i trust you'll make the best decision for yourself.

For the bolded question, that is just how i view it. I personally don't take long breaks. I took two days off after my pupillage ended purely by choice. Im also still very much a part time student. So if I were to interview someone, I'd consider what you were doing during your time off. But of course, that's just me.