T Nation

Australian Law School

Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar.

Why don’t you just email the universities and ask?

My question is levelled at current lawyers regarding any stigma. I’ve been talking with the universities but I doubt they’d be as upfront about any associated stigma since they’re obviously biased.

The requirements for Australian law schools are pretty low.

You have to:

  1. be able to drink 12 bottles VB in under an hour

  2. beat up 3 angry Lebs

  3. mire Zyzz

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Law is inherantly local – not just the law itself, but the other lawyers and judges.

So if you intend to practice in Australia, it’s a great idea. If you intend to practice in Canada, it’s stupid.

As an aside, our firm does not hire anyone who did not have a 95% or better score on the LSAT, top 10% and law review or equivalent. The school we hire from are the top 20 schools and then local schools that are widely respected. For example, while we are based out of NY, in Texas we hire out of University of Texas and University of Houston for out Texas offices. In, MA, it’s Harvard and BU. Etc.

Also, there is a direct relation between prospective law students who had a good LSAT and their later satisfaction of being a lawyer — in short, it’s a good predictor of ability to “think like a lawyer” and be good at the profession. I strongly encourage you not to be a lawyer if your LSAT (or whatever the equivalent test is) sucks.

It’s like that across many degrees. Depends on a number of factors, but I guess the reason for lower entrance requirements is because most of the students coming out of high school with the highest scores go into the sciences and medicine.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Law is inherantly local – not just the law itself, but the other lawyers and judges.

So if you intend to practice in Australia, it’s a great idea. If you intend to practice in Canada, it’s stupid.
[/quote]
This.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Law is inherantly local – not just the law itself, but the other lawyers and judges.

So if you intend to practice in Australia, it’s a great idea. If you intend to practice in Canada, it’s stupid.

As an aside, our firm does not hire anyone who did not have a 95% or better score on the LSAT, top 10% and law review or equivalent. The school we hire from are the top 20 schools and then local schools that are widely respected. For example, while we are based out of NY, in Texas we hire out of University of Texas and University of Houston for out Texas offices. In, MA, it’s Harvard and BU. Etc.

Also, there is a direct relation between prospective law students who had a good LSAT and their later satisfaction of being a lawyer — in short, it’s a good predictor of ability to “think like a lawyer” and be good at the profession. I strongly encourage you not to be a lawyer if your LSAT (or whatever the equivalent test is) sucks.[/quote]

I’ve yet to write the LSAT. I’m currently in the process of taking more undergrad courses to raise my average. I graduated with honours but for requirements within Canada I’m not satisfied yet. My Canadian plan is to write the LSAT in June or September.

As for your local point. Some of the Australian schools (Bond for example) offers NCA certified courses as electives and are affiliated with Canadian schools like UBC and Manitoba, and have some of their profs teach in Australia.

I gather this would mean little to your firm though and obviously many Canadian ones will share your opinion.

I’m not worried that I can’t eventually put together a successful Canadian application. But given that it could take another 2-3 semesters to do so I could nearly be done Law School down under by then.

However, an unemployed lawyer with a scorned degree sounds like an awful fate.

Practicing in Australia hasn’t been ruled out, I just don’t want the door back home closed on me.

Update- I decided to come to Australia. I’ve just Finished my second semester of classes with exams starting next week.

I won’t really know if this was the right decision until I get a job or I don’t. But considering the Canadian contingent out here and the caliber of teaching I’m confident thus far I’ve made the right decision.
My current average after translation into Canadian NCA equivalency is an 84 and I expect it to rise as time goes on. I’m hopeful that I should be able to find work in a medium sized Calgary/Edmonton Firm with that kind of track record upon my return.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
The requirements for Australian law schools are pretty low.

You have to:

  1. be able to drink 12 bottles VB in under an hour

[/quote]

Note, that’s 12 large bottles not stubbies

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Why not do your degree via correspondence? Deakin university offers bachelor of laws via correspondence as does New England. You can sit a short test(ALSET - Australian Law School Entrance Test) and get offered a place.

Keep in mind what JB said about locality. If you want to practice law in Aus do your degree in the state you intend to practice in. And if you want to become a barrister the quickest way is to become a tipstaff.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
The requirements for Australian law schools are pretty low.

You have to:

  1. be able to drink 12 bottles VB in under an hour

  2. beat up 3 angry Lebs

  3. mire Zyzz [/quote]

Funny shit. How about you stick 12 bottles of VB up your arse?

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Keep in mind what JB said about locality. If you want to practice law in Aus do your degree in the state you intend to practice in. And if you want to become a barrister the quickest way is to become a tipstaff.[/quote]
does a tipstaff still carry the club?

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Why not do your degree via correspondence? Deakin university offers bachelor of laws via correspondence as does New England. You can sit a short test(ALSET - Australian Law School Entrance Test) and get offered a place.
[/quote]

I guess you didn’t read the rest of the thread but I just bumped it to give an update. I’m already 7 months into the JD degree.

[quote]MementoMori wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Why not do your degree via correspondence? Deakin university offers bachelor of laws via correspondence as does New England. You can sit a short test(ALSET - Australian Law School Entrance Test) and get offered a place.
[/quote]

I guess you didn’t read the rest of the thread but I just bumped it to give an update. I’m already 7 months into the JD degree.
[/quote]

Sorry I missed the last part of the thread. I thought you were looking to do an undergraduate degree in Aus. I didn’t realise you’re already seven months into your JD. Which uni are you at if you don’t mind my asking?

It’s alright. I’m at Bond. Started in Sept, 2nd semester exams start on Thursday.

Since you mentioned New England I’ll also throw in that I’m originally Canadian and will be returning there to practice next August.

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
Any lawyers on here who can comment on any “stigma” there may be regarding Australian Law School graduates? Their schools have significantly lower entrance requirements, but higher fail rates, better facilities and lower teacher-prof ratios. The tuition is also very high (25-33k per year). The degree can be finished in 2 years (3 semesters per year) as opposed to 3 in North America.

Some Australian Schools (Bond, Sydney, Melbourne) actively recruit Canadian exchange students and I’m considering the possibility. I just don’t want to incur 70k in debt for a degree that may be scorned by Canadians and would require further NCA accreditation courses before approaching the Bar. [/quote]

Law is inherantly local – not just the law itself, but the other lawyers and judges.

So if you intend to practice in Australia, it’s a great idea. If you intend to practice in Canada, it’s stupid.

As an aside, our firm does not hire anyone who did not have a 95% or better score on the LSAT, top 10% and law review or equivalent. The school we hire from are the top 20 schools and then local schools that are widely respected. For example, while we are based out of NY, in Texas we hire out of University of Texas and University of Houston for out Texas offices. In, MA, it’s Harvard and BU. Etc.

Also, there is a direct relation between prospective law students who had a good LSAT and their later satisfaction of being a lawyer — in short, it’s a good predictor of ability to “think like a lawyer” and be good at the profession. I strongly encourage you not to be a lawyer if your LSAT (or whatever the equivalent test is) sucks.[/quote]

Do you have anyone who graduated from University of Memphis law school in your firm? Just curious.

That is where I am. I scored a 171 on my LSAT, but wanted to keep my young one close to family and I love the U of M.

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
It’s alright. I’m at Bond. Started in Sept, 2nd semester exams start on Thursday.

Since you mentioned New England I’ll also throw in that I’m originally Canadian and will be returning there to practice next August.[/quote]

Pretty sure Sexmachine meant the “New England” in Australia, not in the US.