http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459 en Opinions needed: best 5 law schools in the world (excluding US) - LLM GUIDE Discussion Board Mon, 28 Jul 2008 05:20:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49459 Hi everyone, I just won a scholarship, and I need some opinions. If you had to nominate five law schools for a scholarship, which would you select? There must be a maximum of two from one country. I am avoiding US law schools due to the cost of tuition (average of US$40,000), so I would appreciate the best law schools in the world, excluding US law schools. I would go for: 1. Oxford - UK 2. Cambridge - UK 3. McGill - Canada 4. UBC - Canada 5. Trinity College, Dublin - Ireland #1 and # 2 are obvious, but would you agree with #3, #4 and #5? Thank you. Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:34:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49469 Oh Canada! I'm not sure either McGill or UBC deserve to be on this list (especially ahead of the University of Toronto, which truly is one of the world's top law schools)... unless of course we're talking lifestyle, in which case both schools would fare pretty well. Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:30:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49494 For what it's worth, you may want to consider this ranking, although this is not law-specific: http://www.topuniversities.com/worlduniversityrankings/results/2007/overall_rankings/top_100_universities/ Wed, 30 Jul 2008 04:07:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49512 It depends on your interest. For example in Banking and Finance Law, ILF (Frankfurt) is one of the best; or in Mineral Law could be Dundee University (Scotland). Itīs difficult to rank, but in general terms and reputation, I would say (excluding american and british schools): 1.- Toronto (Canada) 2.- Mc Gill (Canada) 3.- Instituto de Empresa (Spain) 4.- Institute for Law and Finance - ILF (Germany) 5.- Leiden University (The Netherlands) Thatīs my personnal point of view. Good luck Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:02:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49567 For Canada, I would consider the Osgoode Hall Law School. For UK, I would consider the University of Edinburgh too other than Oxbridge. No point applying to the others. Just my opinion. Not Dublin. I would rather consider one of the rated European Law Schools. As a general rule, by selecting the national law School, you cannot go wrong. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:05:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49568 Osgoode Hall shouldn't be allowed anywhere near this list. Many wouldn't count it in the top 5 in Canada, let alone the world (ex US). Large, impersonal and utterly lacking in resources for its LLM students (I'm speaking of their academic LLM - they also offer a "professional" LLM). Also suffers from occupying the single most godforsaken piece of real estate in Canada... and that's no small honour. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:43:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49576 agreed.. osgoode hall is solely running on its name.. churning out heaps of grads each year.. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:03:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49584 If we are talking *purely* about the best law schools for LLMs here, I would be inclined to place UCL, KCL and LSE ahead of Oxbridge because they offer far greater speciality for the legal practitioner. However, if we are talking law schools in general then Oxbridge must come top for the UK. As for Canada, I would say McGill or UT. Although I do know two lawyers who studied for the Osgoode 'Professional LLM' and found it very good. Generally, I wouldn't promote Canadian uni's as a great place for LLM programs. I'm yet to see a really impressive one. This is illustrated by the fact many Canadian lawyers opt to study for their LLMs at US or British law schools. I never heard of Trinity College, Dublin being great for LLM programs either. Other non-US top law schools that spring to my mind: - Leiden - Leuven - Bologna As someone else has said above, how you rank law schools for LLMs ultimately depends on what speciality you are looking at studying. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:49:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49586 Ya, I gotta disagree with Cowboy on this one. UofT is one of the world's top law schools, period. It also has a world class LLM program. Not only does the Faculty boast numerous internationally recognized scholars, a great academic atmosphere and active/diverse student body, but the way the LLM program is run is completely first class. As an aside Cowboy, the stats would suggest that most candidates from most countries undertake their LLMs in countries other than those from which they originate. Also, and while I have no stats on this one, I think you will find Canadians who go to the U.S./U.K. are going to Oxbridge, Harvard, etc. As a result, I would suggest your assertion that the migration of Canadian LLM students abroad illustrates the deficiency of domestic LLM programs is highly suspect. I think UofT is a great school... but you'll still find me at Oxford come the fall. Cheers. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:32:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49589 Paddy, UT is a great law school - undeniably up there with other top international schools, and I'm certainly not bashing it. In fact, I was considering applying for the UT JD only the other year. However, I am not convinced that LLM programs in Canada are world-leading, particularly as they are bereft of certain specialities. Ironically, it was a UT professor that confirmed my opinion, as well as the opinions of number of fellow Canadian classmates who I had the pleasure to study with when the UoL intercollegiate LLM was still alive and well. Indeed, Canadians are found studying in Oxbridge, but if you venture to London or 'up north' during you time in England, you'll also find Canadians frequenting the UoL colleges and red-brick universities in the UK, such as, Manchester. Good luck at Oxford. Edit: on another note, I would interested to hear more about Osgoode's reputation (or lack of, that is talked about above). I have a good friend who considering the part-time LLM while studying for bar exams. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:59:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49591 Hey Cowboy, Osgoode Hall occupies a strange position. Its faculty is good, its students are good and - at least in Canada - it provides its students with good career prospects. Its general problem in my view is twofold. First, as I already mentioned, it is a singularly oppressive place to study, physically and geographically speaking. Anyone who has ever gotten off that bus after a 75 minute commute from civilization only to find themselves in a concrete wasteland in the middle of a Canadian winter knows what I mean. Second, it is inferior to UofT (Toronto's other law school) in almost every conceivable category. As a result, subject to acceptance of course, I just can't see why anyone would choose Osgoode over UofT for either the JD or LLM. As far as the LLM goes, I think its appropriate to distinguish between the academic (i.e. general) and "professional" LLM. The academic LLM falls into the category of lacklustre Canadian programs which, I agree (other than UofT), are generally not world-leading. The professional LLM, at least from speaking with my friends and colleagues who have enrolled in it, is perhaps something of a different story. First, its supposedly very practice-oriented (which, depending on your perspective can be a very good thing or a very bad thing). In an event, if one's goal is to further specialize in a specific area, it may prove useful. Second, its apparently not bad from a networking perspective. Cheers. Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:21:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49595 The LL.M program at the College of Europe, Bruges is conspicuously absent from the above discussion. This is likely the best LL.M for European law anywhere. I'd think it belongs in the list of the top 5 non-US programs Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:28:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49600 I share this view. I chose the College of Europe over Oxford [and Chicago]. And the choice was not money driven. I think the College of Europe has the best programme in general EU Law and EU Competition Law. Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:07:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49628 Out of curiosity, why did you pick the College of Europe over Chicago? I'm sure Bruges is the place to specialize in the particulars of EC competition law doctrine, but I'd have thought to learn advanced antitrust & economics, Chicago would be the spot. Obviously, technical econ drives US more than European law, though I'd assume as time goes on Europe will evolve closer to the law & econ model. Did you enjoy Bruges? Sat, 02 Aug 2008 17:43:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49629 Thanks for this info, Paddy. Certainly, the Osgoode Hall portrayed on the uni website doesn't exactly reflect the reality of its Keele Campus location. In terms of design, it reminds me a lot of British 1960s 'glass plate' universities (aka concrete jungles). I was told by one friend that the 'Professional LLM' is taught at a different location in rented offices somewhere in downtown Toronto, rather than the normal campus location (I don't know if this is still the case). Looking at the website now, it seems they are marketing it as a distance learning course also. Hey Cowboy, Osgoode Hall occupies a strange position. Its faculty is good, its students are good and - at least in Canada - it provides its students with good career prospects. Its general problem in my view is twofold. First, as I already mentioned, it is a singularly oppressive place to study, physically and geographically speaking. Anyone who has ever gotten off that bus after a 75 minute commute from civilization only to find themselves in a concrete wasteland in the middle of a Canadian winter knows what I mean. Second, it is inferior to UofT (Toronto's other law school) in almost every conceivable category. As a result, subject to acceptance of course, I just can't see why anyone would choose Osgoode over UofT for either the JD or LLM. As far as the LLM goes, I think its appropriate to distinguish between the academic (i.e. general) and "professional" LLM. The academic LLM falls into the category of lacklustre Canadian programs which, I agree (other than UofT), are generally not world-leading. The professional LLM, at least from speaking with my friends and colleagues who have enrolled in it, is perhaps something of a different story. First, its supposedly very practice-oriented (which, depending on your perspective can be a very good thing or a very bad thing). In an event, if one's goal is to further specialize in a specific area, it may prove useful. Second, its apparently not bad from a networking perspective. Cheers. Sat, 02 Aug 2008 21:47:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49638 Well I still have to start in Bruges. But my choice took me about two months of research and surveys. I think it is a pretty well made choice. Regarding my preference over Chicago, I think it is better to know first EC competition law, and almost for sure in the future I will think again of Chicago, but only after having gained a fairly broad experience. Learning EC Competition law in the US looked like a nonsense to me. Sat, 02 Aug 2008 22:04:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#49639 I think that makes a lot of sense. In fact, I know someone who did an LL.M at Bruges and then 2 or 3 years later in Chicago. That would certainly seem like the right order. In any event, if you're interested in learning the actual doctrine of EC competition law (as opposed to the underlying econ), then you're right to focus on Europe. Good luck at the College of Europe - I'm sure you'll get a lot out of it! Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:28:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50052 What about the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg? The law school has a great reputation for LLM's. agree/disagree? Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:39:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50055 I would definitely have the university of sydney and the university of melbourne on there. They are both highly reputable for law. Also, universities such as the national university of singapore and university of hong kong have very renowned law schools. Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:21:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50103 You may want to consider this ranking. It's not specified for law, but for social science which consumes law: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/hybrid.asp?typeCode=150 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:32:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50106 Hi Bush, While it is certainly arguable that law is a social science, the THES methodology actually does not include law for the purposes of the social science rankings. Cheers, Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:39:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50123 Hi Paddy Nolan, Please give me a reference to support that statement, I can't find one on either the THE or the QS websites. On the contrary, this link seems to imply that law is taken into consideration (bottom under "programs"): http://www.topuniversities.com/gradschool/schools/data/school_profile/default/londonschooleconomicspoliticalscience/ Sun, 24 Aug 2008 04:47:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50126 Hi Bush, The link is to a list of social science programs at LSE, not the THES methodology. Notably, the "methodology" section in the THES social science ranking does not mention law. Add to this fact that (1) several of the schools in the ranking don't even have law programs, and (2) the social science rankings do not match up with the THES law rankings, and the picture should start to become a little clearer. In any event, and regardless of whether law is in fact included, the confluence of these factors would seem to suggest that the THES social science rankings are a very poor proxy for a global law ranking. Cheers, Dan Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:35:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50233 Cowboy, Osgoode's professional LLM program is in fact taught downtown, at the professional development facility near Yonge/Dundas. The Keele Campus is in fact quite ugly and far from any good part of the city, but that's not really the best criteria by which to choose a grad school anyway, is it? With regards to Paddy Nolan's comments, I would have to disagree. I chose Osgoode over U of T and I've never regretted it. I had friends who went to U of T and complained about professors who were accomplished Academics but terrible teachers and who had no time for students. My professors were bright, interesting and always available to chat. I feel like I got a great education and met wonderful people. I think U of T-ers tend to confuse an expensive education with a quality education. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:55:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50234 For those who might be new to the UofT v. Osgoode debate, chazb has competently provided the standard knee-jerk argument in favour of Osgoode. I fully acknowledge (in fact, I do acknowledge above) that Osgoode's students and faculty are good. I also concede that UofT has some poor teachers (as all law schools do) and that the some law students may indeed prefer Osgoode to UofT. None of this, however, detracts from the reality that UofT is in many, many ways a far better school - especially for LLMs. Finally, as for the tiresome argument that UofT students are somehow blinded into thinking an expensive education is necessarily a good one... yawn. When are you guys going to check this ridiculous notion at the door already? It makes you look petty and detracts from your argument. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:25:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50235 No need to get snippy, PN. I think everyone can agree that the choice of LLM program is specific to the individual. If you really want to be of assistance to those asking about LLM programs, provide some specifics as opposed to bald assertions that U of T is "better". Yawning is not a particularly convincing rebuttal. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:05:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50236 "I think U of T-ers tend to confuse an expensive education with a quality education." Yawning might not be the most convincing rebuttal to a good point, but it's probably an appropriate one to yours. And there's clearly a need to get snippy (That's what anonymous forums are for). Your basis for propping up Osgood is apparently that your professors had a lot of spare time on their hands (Not a lot of journals banging down the doors?), while the death knell for the entire University of Toronto Faculty of Law is that some people you know complained about it. If you really want to be of assistance to those asking about LLM programs (my most fervent desire), you should probably provide some (non-specious) specifics as opposed to bald assertions that Osgood is "a really good deal - like saving 25% on a can of soup because it's dented." Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:07:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50237 Chazb, Your personal attack on the intelligence of UofT students does not warrant a 'convincing' rebuttal. Indeed, in the circumstances, I thought a single four letter word was more than adequate to pierce such a thin veil. For what it's worth, it would have been quite simple for you to rephrase your own bald assertion as a question: is the added cost of UofT worth it? Now that is a legitimate question and one certainly of importance to many prospective LLMs. Instead, you took the rather perplexing tack of insulting the intelligence of what are, by all objective standards, a pretty bright group of people. As I have articulated what I believe to be the specific merits of UofT elsewhere on this site, I will refrain from repeating myself. That said, I encourage Chazb, for the edification of prospective LLMs, to do the same for Osgoode. We already know about the architecture and location, what about the quality of graduate administration, flexibility of graduate programs, access to thesis advisors and other faculty, opportunities to assist in faculty research, job and internship prospects, etc.? Cheers, Paddy Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:27:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50240 Bender - it's "Osgoode". With an "e". Of course U of T students are bright, Paddy. I never said they weren't. But you have to admit (unless you're completely deluding yourself) that price of tuition is closely linked with quality of education in the minds of many. That doesn't make them stupid. I was simply cautioning against getting sucked in by the U of T marketing machine. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons to go there. I'm not going to bother to comb this site to find your other posts detailing the merits of U of T, but I'll take your word for it. As for the merits of Osgoode, I'm sure they're also detailed on this site, as well as on Osgoode's website. I'm only familiar with the professional LLM, which obviously offers the flexibility of part-time study and distance education, as well as a wide range of specialties. For my situation, it offered the best alternative. My partner did the regular graduate program at Osgoode and had a wonderful experience with his supervision committee, got to teach research and writing as well as a law course at York, and got to do research with a prominent labour law scholar. Sorry to have ruffled your feathers, boys. Deep breaths - it's the long weekend. Cheers. Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:02:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#50553 Definitely also add the Hebrew University of Jerusalem... experienced school with some famous Jewish scholars and many great visiting professors every year. (I was there as an exchange student for a semester) Sun, 26 Oct 2008 05:06:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#51316 I wish comments came from students of quoted universities. The reference to Oxford demonstrates ignorance. Have you ever heard of the 1 or 2 year BCL or that non-commonwealth other degree? What specialisation have you in mind? A graduate degree in law assumes a prior knowledge. An LLM is not magic. You bring content. Kennedy said it - don't ask what your LLM can do for you. Ask what you can bring to your LLM. If nothing, don't apply. Blogs BA LLB (Hons) BCL (2 yrs) LLD Barrister (Those in the know see the humour) Sun, 26 Oct 2008 11:12:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#51319 What? Tue, 28 Oct 2008 04:31:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#51356 Not in the know. Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:26:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#52903 I came across this post randomly while searching for information about non-US law schools. I dont actually have any plans to do an LLM abroad but starting nosing around after reading about the the situation with the legal clinics at University of Tel Aviv. I am actually a second year law student at UChicago. I am generally impressed by the thoughtfulness of most responses on this thread, but I must say as an ignorant interloper (officious intermeddler?) -- the vitriol and defensiveness of the Osgoode/U of T posts would deter me from even visiting either campus, let alone actually attending either school. The posters are obviously intelligent, but I havent seen more fallacious debate since high school. I think prospective students would benefit more if you both could calm down and engage each other as adults. Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:41:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#53464 As someone who has worked and taught in law schools in both the US and Canada (and a short stint in Oxford), it appears to me that there is a general consensus in Canada that Osgoode Hall's glory days are behind it. At any rate, the correlation between a law school and its LLM program is not a clear one, and in my estimation Osgoode's LLM program has no international panache. U of T is a fine law school, but not well-known in Europe or the US as a general rule, and their LLM is not highly regarded, at least in academic circles. Based on what I know of it, it is a solid program and one of the top in Canada but not world-class. McGill's law school is one of the most highly-regarded in academic circles (especially in international law circles), but their BCL.LLB program (which is transystemic and bijuridical) is quite unique and hence difficult to really compare to others. In terms of raw talent of the student body, you would be hard-pressed to find a better school. Again, however, the LLM program of a law school is a very different creature. McGill's Air and Space Law LLM is probably the foremost program of its kind, but obviously highly-specialized. If you are referring to their general LLM, housed under the umbrella of the Institute of Comparative Law, it is mainly known for human rights and comparative/international law. In years past I would have to say that their program, while attracting a very talented student body, was not worthy of the school in general and was treated like a poor cousin. (Disclaimer: I hold an LLM and DCL from McGill and also taught there for five years). Over the past few years they have revamped their program, injected resources, introduced a core curriculum including a methodology program, and made it more flexible. While I have not been involved in the program since before these changes, anectodal evidence suggests that a good program has become that much better. It is worthy of your consideration, but again, it depends on what you are looking for. McGill seems adverse to marketing itself, so you will find that name recognition, while extensive, can be uneven. You will get wider 'prestige' value from Oxford or the like, but you will have to work harder at McGill for the degree (I have very much enjoyed my time at Oxford and hope to go back in the future, but pedogogically speaking it is not impressive). I chose the McGill LLM some years ago because it was one of the only programs that required you to write a publishable thesis and defend it, which is practically unheard-of for an LLM. This probably explains why a good proportion of the class was made-up of academics. I note, however, that since then they have introduced an non-thesis option in addition to their standard thesis LLM. With respect to the earlier comment about law faculty and where they obtain their LLMs, as a general rule you are encouraged to obtain your LLM from a different institution than where you did your primary law degree. Many LLMs, Harvard being a good example, are degree mills that cater to international applicants who wish to get US credentials. Canadian academics tend to obtain their LLMs at non-Canadian institutions (note how many of McGill's faculty have higher degrees from the States or Europe, for example) while US applicants often look abroad. One final word of advice: I think people sometimes focus to much on what they think is the 'best' or 'best known' program. It's what you do with it that counts. Choose the program you like best, not the one you think others will admire the most. Trust me, you can be in the most prestigious program in the world, but you'll be miserable if it's not a good fit. The idea that anyone can somehow distill hundreds of disparate schools in various countries down into a simple ranking may be enticing, but it's intellectually empty and methodologically suspect. If you want to know which schools are the most competitive in terms of admissions, that's a tangible question that admits to an answer (albeit not without difficulties as this information tends to be closely-held). cheers. Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:38:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#53608 Top 5 LLM Programs in the United Kingdom in terms of international reputation and quality of instruction: 1. LSE 2. Cambridge 3. Oxford 4. UCL 5. KCL In the U.K., there are two types of postgraduate Master's degrees, the so-called taught Master's, and the postgraduate research degree. Oxford has a different nomenclature for the LLM: the Magister Juris (MJur) is their taught Master's degree, for non-common law graduates, while the Bachelor of Civil Law (BCL), for common law graduates. The Master of Studies in Legal Research (MSt), Master of Philosophy in Law (MPhil) and Master of Letters (MLitt) are Oxford's postgraduate research degrees, which may qualify one to pursue the University's highest postgraduate research degree, the Doctor of Philosophy (DPhil). All the other schools in the list grant an LLM and a PhD. Cambridge grants an LLD in addition to the PhD. Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:54:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#55288 I wonder if I could ask the posters here what kind of reputation the Frankfurt program in law and finance enjoys outside of Germany. It seems to be academically very rigorous w a compelling specialisation and to attract strong students from around the world. But i am just a little worried that as someone who will have already worked in 'biglaw' that the program would look weak on my resume. To be quite honest this suspicion is based in part on the fact that it seems to attract those wanting to enter rather than progress in the european capital markets industry. ... would i be mistaken to think of the frankfurt program as a sort of mba for lawyers (ie a way to lateral to a leading firm in london and not just a year away from work.) thank you, Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:55:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#55290 Best law schools in the world (excluding US) in my opinion: UK-IRL 1.Oxford Univ 2. Cambridge Univ 3. LSE EUROPE 1. Utrecht Univ 2. Oslo Univ 3. Leiden Univ AMERICAS 1. Toronto Univ 2. British Columbia Univ 3. McGill Univ AUS-NZ 1.Melbourne Univ 2.Sydney Univ 3.ANU ASIA 1.Tokyo Univ 2. Kyoto Univ 3.Hebrew Univ Jerusalem AFRICA 1.Univ Cape Town 2.University of Stellenbosch 3.University of Witwatersrand (Johannesburg) Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:41:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#67420 Hi All, Thank you all for the intriguing discussion!!! I would be very grateful if anyone can shed some light and provide me with some of their opinions on which choice would provide me with the best options upon graduation (especially during/post an global recession) for finding employment at a international law firm/Consulting/banking. Facts (obtained): Hon. BA (U of T) LLB (KCL-U of L) Choices: LLM-Osgoode (Full scholarship) LLM- U of T (No financial reward) thanks for your insights in advance. Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:10:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#73752 I can't say I know much about international rankings overall. I think it depends on what you want to focus on and where you want to do it. There are of course elite programs known around the world, but those would generally be the top British and American programs followed by top European, Asian, Australian and Canadian programs. I have a high opinion of Dutch schools like Leiden, Maastricht and Utrecht. It is usually possible to study entirely in English and with a very international focus. I think outside of the core of where people usually look there are some ones to be considered. Israeli law programs, for example, should be considered. Tel Aviv University has the top-ranked English-language law journal outside of the US, and that means ahead of hundreds of British, European, Canadian, Indian and Australian, etc journals. Haifa has a joint 1-year LLM with U-Ottawa taught in English. And some have already mentioned Hebrew University. Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:42:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#74213 From Brian Leiter, a law professor at the University of Chicago, and well known for his rankings of law schools: "The Toronto faculty is the strongest in Canada, comparable to the Georgetown/Northwestern/Texas cluster in the US, so stronger than some of those I assume you mean by “top 14,” and weaker than others. They have a particularly good law & economics group, which is unusual in Canada. Osgoode has the second best faculty overall in Canada, comparable to the US top 20-25 (I’m referring to my measures, obviously, not US News). McGill has at least as good a reputation in Canada, though its faculty underperforms at the international level. British Columbia is also quite solid." Source: http://www.top-law-schools.com/brian-leiter-interview.html Regarding journals, from a comprehensive study done by the Australian Research Council on the quality of journals worldwide, U of T, McGill, and Osgoode Hall were the only Canadian law journals to score within the top 5% of their field (i.e. law). Source: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list.htm UBC has somewhat of an inflated name internationally, perhaps due to its location in popular Vancouver, and I don't think its LLM program compares to the other three. McGill has an inflated reputation as well, however, it is still very good (just not as good as some top U.S. programs, even though those who study there sometimes promote it as such). I would only consider U of T, McGill, or Osgoode Hall if you want to come to Canada. But take into consideration the cold winters! Fri, 14 Aug 2009 10:14:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#74311 In my opinion are: Cambridge Oxford LSE McGill Tokyo University Mon, 21 Sep 2009 23:09:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75093 If you are concerned about fees, then as an overseas student you have to contend with what have now become the astronomically high fees at Oxford, Cambridge, and Edinburgh, as well as at the better U.S. schools. I received my D.Phil. in law from Oxford about a decade ago, and in those days it was still affordable for foreigners, but no longer. This is the reason the better Canadian schools come into consideration, since even for foreign students they are comparatively quite inexpensive. University of Toronto is far and away the best law school in Canada, since McGill is grossly underfunded and still trying to live off the memory of its once-great reputation, while Osgoode no longer offers a legal education at all, but instead just has a profoundly uncritical indoctrination camp in Political Correctness. which it misleadingly labels a 'law school.' Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:41:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75454 It is hardly worth engaging in threads like this. Even including US schools, and speaking only in terms of LLM and other law masters degrees, the Oxford BCL is leagues ahead of everything else. Subjects like Restitution, Jurisprudence and the Conflict of Laws take much of their modern shape from the BCL course - it is a forum for the development of the law. The resources and prestige of the degree within the University of Oxford alone are massive. It is possibly the only university where the masters programme has greater prestige than the undergraduate law degree. Everywhere else is miles and miles behind. After Oxford, (ignoring those who require particular specialisations), I would opt for Yale and Harvard, then Columbia and Cambridge. The University of London (esp through UCL or LSE) is in the next tier down but still very good. I can't opine on Canadian universities but internationally their collective reputation (McGill, UBC, Toronto, Osgoode Hall) is perhaps somewhat lower than the University of London colleges but better than most other English and Scottish Universities (e.g. Warwick, Bristol, York, Nottingham, Edinburgh). The better Australian law schools (Uni of New South Wales, Melbourne, Sydney) have masters degrees that are probably slightly behind the Canadian programmes but essentially comparable. Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:05:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75456 It is hardly worth engaging in threads like this. Even including US schools, and speaking only in terms of LLM and other law masters degrees, the Oxford BCL is leagues ahead of everything else. Subjects like Restitution, Jurisprudence and the Conflict of Laws take much of their modern shape from the BCL course - it is a forum for the development of the law. The resources and prestige of the degree within the University of Oxford alone are massive. It is possibly the only university where the masters programme has greater prestige than the undergraduate law degree. Everywhere else is miles and miles behind. After Oxford, (ignoring those who require particular specialisations), I would opt for Yale and Harvard, then Columbia and Cambridge. The University of London (esp through UCL or LSE) is in the next tier down but still very good. I can't opine on Canadian universities but internationally their collective reputation (McGill, UBC, Toronto, Osgoode Hall) is perhaps somewhat lower than the University of London colleges but better than most other English and Scottish Universities (e.g. Warwick, Bristol, York, Nottingham, Edinburgh). The better Australian law schools (Uni of New South Wales, Melbourne, Sydney) have masters degrees that are probably slightly behind the Canadian programmes but essentially comparable. Just my personal opinion and to provide an alternative viewpoint, but i would disagree with respect to oxford's supposed pre-dominance in restitution and jurisprudence. Furthermore, I don't think oxford supposed facilities and resources are that impressive especially compared to Harvard and Yale. Oxford has lost Peter Birks and - having studied the subject - , I don't really see any academic currently teaching in oxford who is anywhere close to Professor Birk's standard, especially in terms of originality of thinking. To me, the best Restitution Scholar in the world right now, is from one of the Canadian universities which you rank as below the UoL colleges. To me, it is without the doubt that the most cutting edge research in restitution comes from Lionel Smith at Mcgill, especially given his ability - similar to Professor Birks - to abstract from the particularities of the cases and to give a general theory of the subject. I generally only skim though Andrew Burrows' work - I think he's the one currently teaching Restitution in Oxford - because it is way too similar to Peter Birks. Within the UK, I much prefer Virgo's work at Cambridge since it is much more original. With regards to jurisprudence, I don't think oxford is leagues ahead everyone else contrary to Brian Leiter's philosophical gourmet. NYU has an outstanding legal theory faculty coupled with the fact that aspiring legal theorists can work with their philosophy faculty, which Leiter himself ranks as the best in the world. Particularly because of the fact that NYU philosophy faculty is so strong and aspiring legal theorists get to work with the beforementioned faculty, I would place the NYU LLM ahead of the oxford BCL for theory. Additionally, the last really big jurisprudence name at oxford, Ronald Dworkin teaches now at NYU not at oxford anymore. Off the top of my head, I think the only big name I can recall who teaches at oxford in juris is Joseph Raz. Personally, I have my doubts about the quality of John Finnis' work so I don't consider him a big name. Even within the UK, I think UCL's legal theory faculty is just as strong as Oxford. They have some really big names, like William Twinning and Stephen Guest. Additionally, just like oxford, UCL has a star studded philosophy faculty, with one of the pre-eminant Kantian Scholars - Sebastian Gardner - and also another pre-eminant Political Theorist - Johnathan Wolff - teaching there. Lastly, with regards to facilities, I don't see how oxford is even in the same league as Harvard or Yale. If I remeber correctly Harvard's endowment is somewhere between 20 something billion while Oxford is a relatively small 5 billion. If one needs resources - books, facilities etc- Harvard and Yale is the place to go. This is not to say that I don't think Oxford is a great school. I just think that it is not leagues ahead of everyone else as your post seems to indicate. Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:50:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75463 I hardly disagree with anything you write but you are discussing overall faculties and universities, not masters programmes. I would rank Harvard as being in a different league to any UK university in terms of research. Of course Harvard's resources are greater than Oxford's. Vastly so. But I am only discussing masters degrees. The Harvard LLM is a vague afterthought compared to the JD or its research students. This is true nearly everywhere. That is what makes the Oxford BCL different. I believe that Restitution at Oxford is taught by Professors Burrows, Mitchell and Edelman as well as Bill Swadling. Considering that this includes small group tutorials I don't think anything matches it. I'm not discussing whether Oxford's jurisprudence (etc) faculty is better than anywhere else's (though leaving out Gardner and Honore suggests you're not really trying and, while I'm no great fan of Finnis's either, he's obviously a very big name). The point is that they devote personal attention and resources to teaching on the BCL. Most big names would have very little interest in developing masters-level courses. If they do any teaching at all it will usually be at the first-law-degree level. At Oxford, even those who no longer teach undergrad will very likely be found in BCL seminars. Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:34:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75464 I hardly disagree with anything you write but you are discussing overall faculties and universities, not masters programmes. I would rank Harvard as being in a different league to any UK university in terms of research. Of course Harvard's resources are greater than Oxford's. Vastly so. But I am only discussing masters degrees. The Harvard LLM is a vague afterthought compared to the JD or its research students. This is true nearly everywhere. That is what makes the Oxford BCL different. I believe that Restitution at Oxford is taught by Professors Burrows, Mitchell and Edelman as well as Bill Swadling. Considering that this includes small group tutorials I don't think anything matches it. I'm not discussing whether Oxford's jurisprudence (etc) faculty is better than anywhere else's (though leaving out Gardner and Honore suggests you're not really trying and, while I'm no great fan of Finnis's either, he's obviously a very big name). The point is that they devote personal attention and resources to teaching on the BCL. Most big names would have very little interest in developing masters-level courses. If they do any teaching at all it will usually be at the first-law-degree level. At Oxford, even those who no longer teach undergrad will very likely be found in BCL seminars. Just to clarify, I left out Gardner on purpose. There's a reason for that. I remember an essay in which he was criticising corrective justice and he was obviously using an inferior form of the theory to make his case, which to me seemed like intellectual bad form. Unlike say Rawls or even Oxford's own Hart, who usually take the strongest versions of a theory to criticise, Gardner didn't even discuss the strongest versions of corrective justice which is usually developed by Ernest Weinrib, Jules Coleman and Stephen Perry. That left me with a sour taste with regards to Gardner's work and admittedly I haven't read much of him since. Gardner could have improved substantially since the last work I read, but I just can't bring myself to read or speak about Gardner because of the experience. I left out Honore because isn't he already almost fully retired. I think he does teach from time to time but not that much. I admit I might be mistaken to Honore's work schedule but that's the reason I left him out. You right though, if Honrore still does teach regularly, then I was wrong to leave him out. Admittedly though, when I evaluate legal theorists, I evaluate them in terms of philosophy professors not lawyers trying to do theory. That's why I'm actually a pretty big fan of oxford's Raz even though I don't buy into legal positivism. Like a true philosopher, he is precise and systematic and he supports his arguments extremely well. I always feel I learn something from Raz whenever I read his books. Finnis - to me - on the other hand is a different kettle of fish. That's despite the fact that - like Finnis - I buy into natural law myself, but the natural law I buy into is the - partially secular version - of the 18th century enlightenment professors. Natural Law and Natural Rights to me seems overly sloppy without the systematic nature necessary to be considered true philosophy in my view. I also disagree that most Big names don't teach at least in north american law schools. I'm pretty sure Jules Coleman at Yale still teaches though not this year. Ditto for Jeremy Waldron, Stephen Perry, Brian Leiter et al. I'll give you oxford's tutorial system though, which isn't found in any other LLM program in the world. I just don't think it's that important, since - to me - the point of a masters program - even coursework intensives programs since in many north american law schools at least, coursework intensive LLM students are assessed by long paper instead of exam - is research and with research tutorials don't matter much. It is much more important to be sipping coffee while the Big Name demolishes your argument - and by that process learn something - than it is with a big name trying to teach you what he has already concluded. To me - the whole point of postgrad - is to go past the frontiers of knowledge not learn what is already known. And to clarify, by stating this, I am not saying that oxford's supervision system isn't superb. From what I hear it most cartainly is, I'm just explaining why I don't think tutorials are that big a deal. That also explains why when I was presenting my point of view, I emphasized so much on the Names. To me, the quality of teaching is related to the Names, since you want this obviously brilliant people to be the one who make a mockery of your hard fought argument, so that you learn new ways of attacking and building viewpoints. That to me is a lot more important than knowing what the actual law is. That's also why I would place the best North American LLM programs either above or alongside Oxford. Who cares about the seminars, what's important is access to the most brilliant people of the world especially since at postgrad level I think one should already be able to pick up almost any field of law and learn it without help; that was the whole point of the LLB to teach you to learn other areas of law by yourself. The help needed at LLM and JSD level, is learning how to formulate your own viewpoints past what people have already written. While Oxford certainly has a lot of very brilliant people, I always find the collection at Harvard or Yale to be more impressive since - with their greater resources - they obviously have a better ability to (i) attract a far greater number of brilliant professors than oxford - harvard's faculty seems hugh - and (ii) retain them. Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:45:00 +0200 http://www.llm-guide.com/board/49459/last#75614 Hey guys, I think we had better stop this fuzzy discussion. I prepared following measurements to decide top llm courses of the universities outside of US. 1.Entrance difficulty (based on the entrance requirement and stats such as GPA/work exp/interview/exam/rate of competition ) 2.The level of Research (based on RAE in UK) 3.The level of Practicality (based on course structure) 4.Graduate Prospects (based on job offer and salary after graduation) No1 represents the level of student. No2 represents the quality of professors. No3 represents the quality of teaching. No4 represents the level of our future job. And each item has 5 kinds of points. 5=very high 4=high 3=middle 2=low 1=very low And the score is a sum of them. Following Scores are the result of this calculation. [[TOP LLM Ranking excluding US]] RankA+ Oxford/LSE RankA Cambridge/UCL/Toronto RankA- McGill -----[Big 6]----- RankB+ King's/UBC RankB Queen Mary/Melbourne/ANU RankB- Warwick/Utrecht/Tokyo/Hitotsubashi RankC+ Oslo/Leiden/Sydney/KeioU 1.UK Oxford=5+5+4+5=19 Cambridge=5+4+4+5=18 LSE=5+5+4+5=19 UCL=4+5+5+4=18 King's=4+3+5+4=16 Queen Mary=3+4+5+3=15 Warwick=3+3+5+3=14 2.EUROPE Utrecht=4+3+4+3=14 Oslo=3+3+4+3=13 Leiden=3+3+4+3=13 3.America Toronto=4+5+5+4=18 McGill=4+4+5+4=17 UBC=3+4+5+4=16 4.Oceania Melbourne=3+3+5+4=15 Sydney=3+3+4+3=13 ANU=4+3+4+4=15 5.Asia Tokyo=4+3+3+4=14 HitotsubashiU=4+2+4+4=14 KeioU=4+2+4+3=13 ChuoU=3+2+4+3=12 I know it's far from a perfect ranking. But at least it is less subjective, I think. You can arrange each point rating if you feel strange. :-) And you can also add other universities. But I guess Big 6(Oxbridge/LSE/UCL/Toronto/McGill) may dominate outside of USA in any case.