After getting a CLP, and a good UOL external result (2.1), what would u suggest if one goes out and practice?

1) mid size firm or large firms?

2) which field?
Corp/conveyancing? or litigation?

3) what do u think bout real estate? taxation? insurance? IP?

4) how does one noes where his interest lies,

5) and how does one noes what field he is/will be best in?

6) other options? are they good? Criminal, AG's office? prosecutor, and some people practice/work under a judge? what's w dat?



This post has been edited by zohan: Sep 8 2008, 05:32 PM

thanks for the speedy reply.

without my careful reading on each and every word posted, u appeared to me like a practising lawyer. but the above made mentioned questions are still open to anyone capable of answering.

---

Added on September 8, 2008, 7:27 pmrelevant or not u wouldnt noe. it may not be relevant to ur work, ie Jurisprudence, but it will be relevant to your life or other subjects.

Conflict of Laws, as opposed to the common typo of ConflictS of Law, is one good subject to complement your knowledge on other subjects like COmpany Law. Some same cases emerge in both COmpany and COL.

what about Evidence? EU? IP?

This post has been edited by zohan: Sep 8 2008, 07:27 PM

this is not a courtroom. it is a forum. i just want answers. not necessarily the best answers. and i am not asking for authority. Its ok if u dun wanna answer.

That's what we do in the forum. we get information. not neccessarily believe fully in them.

An unanswered question from other thread,

"I heard some info from my friend in which people who didnt sit for A-level in Law cannot practise in the future.
So, it would be a bad news for those STPM student who already sign up for their LLB, isnt it ?

Correct me if im wrong because this info comes from one of my friend's father (Practised Lawyer)"

Any takers?

Thanks ayie1984 & wornbook for the info. Still, the more the merrier. anyone is free to give it a try on the questions. make this forum one.

This post has been edited by zohan: Sep 16 2008, 09:38 AM

what happened to this? anyone not replying it?

I think Xziled is trying to help in the most convenient way he feels.

It is not his intentions to be misleading with minimal authorities, although the effect of it can be.
And i am sure he knows it or has already know it after reading the other replies to his.

But i still think that this is not a courtroom and we should not be too overwhelmed by the fact that we are reading law, want to be lawyers, or is already one and start to be all authoritative about everything and anything.

my opinion is that This is still a cyber forum which purpose is circulation of information, albeit misleading ones.

and for that, Xziled, keep being active in the attempts to help the juniors, and also be open and chill to those constructive criticisms, if at all they are.

1) no one wants misleading info but tat does not mean info w authority is 100% correct.
2) not wanting it x equal to not getting it.
3) interpretation itself is a subjective process. even the right info may include wrong interpretation.
4) JE penner wrote in the 4th edition of a Jurisprudence text (ouh, i'm screwed, i dun have an authority!)that no matter where we discuss the law, or its jurisprudence, it does not matter. he mentioned even pub. i supposed with more alcohol in that circumstance, kopitiam seems like a much better place. And i am not even mentioning old town kopitiam, or cafes like those. point 3 of the above seems to suggest that misleading info occurs a lot in kopitiam. albeit the facts is silent as to who is discussing it.
if hypothetically, 2 presidents happen to discuss about top secret, national security or any important life and death situation in a "kopitiam", can we allow the discussion to be wrong and justified on the grounds that kopitiam discussion is allowed to be misleading?
5) My point 4 may be wrong. but if my interpretation is correct, then point 4 of aurora is also wrong. but if my interpretation is wrong, that does not goes to make aurora correct.
6) if u cant prove me wrong, does it make me more correct?
7) if u can prove me wrong, that does not make u right, or me more wrong, cos the interpretation of urs could be wrong.
8) if ur interpretation is wrong, can we also intepret that u express ur interpretation is also wrong too?
9) but if the way u express ur intrepretation is wrong, tat does not goes to show that the authority u quote is wrong!
10) but if the authority u quote is 100% wrong, but we intepret in a way that make u seem right, does it make u more right?

I understand that this is an education thread, but If u can know 100% a way to determine right from wrong, why do we have a forum to begin with?

This post has been edited by zohan: Nov 25 2008, 11:49 PM

"The Times Publishes 2009 UK Law School Rankings
LSE, KCL, and Leicester score big jumps from last year's ranking

Jul 1, 2008

British daily newspaper The Times has published its Good University Guide 2009. Notable changes on this year's Law School Ranking from last year include the London School of Economics (LSE) and King's College London (KCL) moving up to the 3rd and 4th behind Cambridge and Oxford. Leicester made a big jump to 8th place (from 21st place last year). Queen Mary moves up 4 spots to 12th."

1 Cambridge 5*A 524 95% 100
2 Oxford 5*B 522 88% 94.9
3 London School of Economics 5*A 500 79% 92% 94
4 King's College London 5A 449 89% 84% 93.2
5 University College London 5*A 467 75% 90% 90.4
6 Aberdeen 5B 412 94% 89.6
7 Durham 5*A 485 74% 86% 89.3
8 Leicester 5A 396 86% 80% 88.3
9 Dundee 5B 400 82% 88% 87.1
10 Southampton 5*B 412 84% 75% 86.4
=10 Nottingham 5A 477 74% 83% 86.4
12 Bristol 5B 436 76% 89% 86.1
=12 Queen Mary, London 5*B 395 80% 82% 86.1
14 Newcastle 5C 435 84% 78% 85.5
15 Edinburgh 5B 448 74% 87% 84.9
16 Strathclyde 5A 444 74% 81% 84.6

see here: http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_gug/go...sub=38&x=35&y=5

"The University (of London) is a federal mega university made up of 31 affiliates (19 colleges and 12 institutes).[4] The nine larger colleges are Birkbeck, Goldsmiths, King's College London, the London Business School, the London School of Economics, Queen Mary, Royal Holloway, the School of Oriental and African Studies, and University College London (UCL)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_London

can we say that apart frm CAmbridge and Oxford, UOL is the best law school in the UK, for 3 out of the top 5 are won by them!

This post has been edited by zohan: Dec 11 2008, 01:02 PM

i am wondering too.

But i am also wondering if NUS never had LLB, or if there's no NUS, then maybe the externals can practice there
And the many 2 + 1s?

I think ATC is a good place to start UOL external. Just to see the UOL ext culture here in Msia.
Of cos BAC is not bad a place, but like one said above, it's indeed more well established with its CLP.
There is a recent rise of one particular smaller college, it's name is Mentari School of Law. near to ATC. The college has consistently produced 2nd uppers for the 2 or 3 years they are there, and from what i heard, most students actually scored well from there.

Some points to note if study in ATC.

1) they are too good in selling.
many of times the statistics shown are not the real stats. the failure rate is way higher than wat was perceived in the advertisements
2) too many cooks spoil the soup
too many lecturers teaching on one subject matter. the more maybe the merrier but not in this case. in the end, when subjects like trust or jurisprudence wic involves a lot of framings come into places, u get too many frames frm too many diff lecturers. thats how the maj flunk their 2 most difficult subjects for the respective yrs.
3) a foolproof syst is indeed a fool's improve system.
ATC market and express in such a way that failing is difficult and if u stay w them, u will just follow the flow and beocme one of their success story in no time. but in reality, its just a syst keep on insisting on improving the fools who believe in it. if u r working in it, perhaps u will noe how much income they gain for repeating students, who tries to improve themselves. go to class every yr and fail every yr. doint the same thing in hope of a diff result.
some of the 'mature students' there aren't exactly mature students when they came to ATC. they turn into one after yrs of brewing in ATC. Some of these students will move to other college like Mentari or sometimes even BAC to take up internals.
4) newbies lecturer
The only way that ATC could run such big volume on cheap labour costs is to hire the average joe newbies. means student who graduated last yr can teach almost the many classes this yr. cos its cheap to do so. the first yr wudnt noe. some of the part1 wud noe but they say its a norm, and they are 2 yrs my senior anyway so they'd better be good. the part 2 will dislike and complain but eventually after 4 months and exams nearer they gave up complaining and just change to the part 1 mindset.
(to see a distinct comparison,in Brickfields Asia College(BAC), i heard that they only hire the BEst of newbies, in which only when the newbie is a 2.1 of the tops unis, or the 1st classes, and they only serve as student mentor, not doing lectures. All if not most lecturers in BAC has LLM. over and above that, there is a rising frequency of BAC having actual UOL examiners and subect guide authors to come to BAC and do 60 hours Classes for certain subjects!)

But despite all has been said and done, ATC still has the BEST results from UOL exams 2008. With 14 2nd uppers and 1 first class. I heard at least 2 students there got the only As for Jurisprudence and the lists may go on. Plus, their Convocation is held in KL convention centre every yr and ppl like Wayne Morrison (the course director of UOL ext) stands as one of the indirect or direct endorsement of their achivements.

If u really have to do ONE law degree wholly in Malaysia, i would say UOL external is the best choice. Defly better than IPTAs and others.

---

Added on December 22, 2008, 10:48 amUOL is the best recognised law degree if you are thinking of doing a Full 3 years degree in Malaysia. see the rankings i posted in earlier post.

"The Times Publishes 2009 UK Law School Rankings
LSE, KCL, and Leicester score big jumps from last year's ranking

Jul 1, 2008

British daily newspaper The Times has published its Good University Guide 2009. Notable changes on this year's Law School Ranking from last year include the London School of Economics (LSE) and King's College London (KCL) moving up to the 3rd and 4th behind Cambridge and Oxford. Leicester made a big jump to 8th place (from 21st place last year). Queen Mary moves up 4 spots to 12th."

1 Cambridge 5*A 524 95% 100
2 Oxford 5*B 522 88% 94.9
3 London School of Economics 5*A 500 79% 92% 94
4 King's College London 5A 449 89% 84% 93.2
5 University College London 5*A 467 75% 90% 90.4
6 Aberdeen 5B 412 94% 89.6
7 Durham 5*A 485 74% 86% 89.3
8 Leicester 5A 396 86% 80% 88.3
9 Dundee 5B 400 82% 88% 87.1
10 Southampton 5*B 412 84% 75% 86.4
=10 Nottingham 5A 477 74% 83% 86.4
12 Bristol 5B 436 76% 89% 86.1
=12 Queen Mary, London 5*B 395 80% 82% 86.1
14 Newcastle 5C 435 84% 78% 85.5
15 Edinburgh 5B 448 74% 87% 84.9
16 Strathclyde 5A 444 74% 81% 84.6

see here: http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_gug/go...sub=38&x=35&y=5

"The University (of London) is a federal mega university made up of 31 affiliates (19 colleges and 12 institutes).[4] The nine larger colleges are Birkbeck, Goldsmiths, King's College London, the London Business School, the London School of Economics, Queen Mary, Royal Holloway, the School of Oriental and African Studies, and University College London (UCL)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_London

On why UOL could be the best?

"univertism" definition: adopted from 'Racism', you are being categorised, discriminated, respected or responded to based on the university you come from.

I believe in "univertism" when it comes to the legal field. Foreign university definitely rank higher than IPTAs. Plus, many IPTA preahes the luxury of not having to do CLP (or for that matter BVC) which is a false ideology.

CLP helps u to understand Malaysian Law, its procedural sides and is invaluable to prep u into becoming a lawyer. BVC on the other hand, is the most conventional, some say best form of training to become an advocate and solicitor.

If the newer UK university like Northumbria, Oxford Brooke have difficulties convincing people about their law degree, what more bout Malaysia Universities which has no rankings at all? or at least not in the first 200 universities of the world.

"Last year, UM was forced out from the world’s best 200 university list published by Times Higher Education Supplement and Quacquarelli Symonds (THES-QS), slipping from position 192 to 246. It rose to a slightly higher position, 230 in 2008 but the fact that it failed to secure the top 200 ranking became an intense debate among the public, academicians and even politicians." -http://skorcareer.com.my/blog/um-to-reduce-undegraduate-students/2008/12/18/

This post has been edited by zohan: Dec 22 2008, 12:50 PM

Xziled, since you are from BAC, i have a question, why does BAC's results is not as good as that of ATC?

When i say not as good, i mean, apart from the king scholar last year (which is only at Intermediate level), why does BAC not have reasonable number of students scoring 2nd uppers every year in UOL? (even in a bad year like this year, ATC has 11? Mentari 2, Nirwana 1) in fact, there seems to be a 2.1 drought for a while already is it?

Of cos they focus more on the CLPs, but on UOL.. if small colleges like Mentari can produce, what more BAC, and the storming in of UOL lecturers?

I am just curios and interested to hear it from a current student's POV. thanks.

(correction to my earlier longer post, i think ATC has 11 2nd uppers this year from its Malaysian branch instead of the 14. 14 is the total number of 2nd uppers in Msia this yr)

This post has been edited by zohan: Dec 23 2008, 08:09 AM

Correction to my earlier post, "CLP helps u to understand Malaysian Law, its procedural sides and is invaluable to prep u into becoming a lawyer. BVC on the other hand, is the most conventional, some say best form of training to become an advocate and solicitor."

I would like to retract / amend that statement and i would suggest that Solicitors go through the LPC and not the BVC.

This post has been edited by zohan: Dec 25 2008, 04:25 PM

Elucidate me, what's the difference?

If at all it is such, why is it inaccurate to say 'Study Law'?

like i said, I only want explanations.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by zohan: Dec 28 2008, 10:15 AM