We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Firstly, I couldn't care less whether anyone here decides to spend their money on an LLM or not. The only reason I'm responding is because OP put this question up for discussion. Your insinuation that my response is bourne out of some deep rooted insecurity about my financial status is therefore laughable.
Coming to the merits of your response. It is interesting to me that despite calling me out for taking financials into consideration, you fail to explain any 'use' of an LLM degree yourself. The wording of the question makes it clear that OP is looking for a functional use of the degree and even if financials do not matter in the isolation to them, it is still important to bring them up if only because the advantages bourne out of an LLM are negligible to nil.
As for your bringing to light my supposed ignorance about the existence of scholarships and the lower cost involved in pursuing an LLM in another jurisdiction, I'll readily admit that my figures were stated taking into account a US LLM only. The reason for that is simple: A US LLM gives you the best chance to secure a BigLaw role, often in Singapore or the UK (compare the number of NYU/Colombia grads working abroad as opposed to even Oxbridge, there's a study done by Amicus in this regard). These are perhaps the ONLY jobs that can give you any substantial return on a foreign degree, save for certain niche IMF/WB roles (often again, bourne out of a US LLM). With or without scholarship, or even tuition fees, what use does an LLM from the University of Oslo serve? The lakhs of rupees I'll spend on living costs should get me more than just the experience of looking at the northern lights. The cheaper colleges in Continental Europe that you speak about often have zero brand recognition in india so pray tell how exactly would they add anything whatsoever to one's resume even here.
In conclusion, if all that an LLM gives you is a cathartic experience, I believe you might as well spend that money on a world tour, which is about the same functionally and would bring greater bbreadth to your life experiences.
(Am exception to my answer would be pursuing a Canadian LLM after getting a PR. The local education can be of help once you don't have visa sponsorship to worry about)
if you have any other co/extra curricular achievements (however small) then it is guaranteed
1. want to join academia and would pursue phd in the next couple of years (talk to a senior who has taken this path and preferably have some tuition scholarship)
2. worked in a domestic law firm for 4-5 yrs and want to have a foreign tag to ease move upwards (talk to colleagues on the higher band and preferably a managing partner)
3. worked in a domestic law firm for 2-3 years and want to move to foreign firm (talk to foreign firm HR and research like crazy, this is one of the most uncertain routes in the list)
4. got tc but the firm has deferred joining date (talk to the firm HR and get the degree funded by them, several uk firms have this deal, last happened wholesale in 2008, may happen next year again)
5. someone who is sufficiently privileged (annual family income upwards of 1 crore) wants to spend 50 lakhs for the postnominals (and has a cushion to land once they are back)
one should not do llm if they fit somewhere in the following circumstances:
1. you want to experience a foreign country
2. you want a job in the foreign country (see 3 in the previous para)
3. you want to network
4. want an extended holiday
5. everyone is doing it, you think it might help but dont know how
Of course, what commenter 10 won't tell you is that not all LLMs cost 1 crore as he says, only US programmes do. Plus, there are lots of scholarships available in less popular places like the EU, Australia, Singapore and Canada: all countries with very good law schools. Yes, you need good marks for a scholarship, but surely commenter 10 doesn't expect people to play computer games 24x7, get low grades in exams and then get a scholarship?
Commenter 10 also won't tell you that some EU colleges are affordable even with full costs. At Oslo University in Norway (QS law rank 83 and QS overall rank 100) the fees is ZERO Euros for International students. Yes, ZERO. You pay only for living costs and even there you have scholarships. The programmes are in English . Alumni of this law school include a former UN Sec Gen, a former ICJ President and a former ECHR President.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_University_of_Oslo_Faculty_of_Law_alumni#International_lawyers
Commenter 10 also won't tell you is that doing an LLM even in India can be pretty expensive, especially at private law schools.
Commenter 10 thus exemplifies the typical LI commenter. [...]
So if that is the basic premise, I am not sure what value the whole privilege/marginalisation argument is adding.
If they had said finances were an issue, my answer might have been different. Your 'reminder' of unpleasant surprises to me, an entirely self-funded LLM, is presumptuous :)
And that's just the stuff we can reasonably anticipate. Over and above that, allow life to surprise you a little :)
But honestly, it was a vanity project - sure, the academic experience was very good, challenging and so on. But that learning is not really needed for litigating in India. If money is no object, go right ahead. But the quantifiable gains for this may not be value for money if you're taking a loan/stretching your family finances.
Certainly, LLMs don't matter if your life's ambition is to join CAM after graduation and become a partner there, but not everyone wishes to pursue that path. So I'm sceptical on the repeated negative comments on LI discouraging people to do LLMs abroad, very often by people in their early twenties with very little life experience and no ambition in life beyond working for CAM.
however, one should only do llm if they have a clear plan as to what they are going to do next and how llm is going to aid in that respect
if you want to practice when you return to india, then i would suggest doing your llm from us as the courses there are more practice oriented than in the uk which in my opinion has more academic oriented llm
Not taking financials into consideration, what use is a LLM abroad? I'm tempted to apply just because I want to go live abroad for a year. I have no intention to settle down there, fully intend to practice in India. Also after meeting some tier 2 UK LLM returnees, I don't see they're acquired a skillset which isn't available for free on the internet.
What am I missing?