Not sure about the specific unis you mention, but overall, it matters a lot. And not just for admission into an LLM, but even for scholarships/financial aid required to take up the opportunity. A friend (with no work experience) got into a prominent University of California system law school's LLM, and got several thousands of dollars in financial aid from the law school thanks to high grades. Not sure if you are thinking about UK LLM's, but if you are, grades are of vital importance in the admission process - from my experience as someone admitted to a UK LLM, possibly even the be-all and end-all in them making admission decisions. Therefore, if you are looking at a foreign LLM, just try to get the very best grades/GPA you possibly can. The higher, the better. My advice is to always think like the admissions selector would when looking at extraordinarily high quality applications. Suppose she sees two applications, one with average GPA but good work experience, and another with outstanding GPA (4/4 or whatever) and equally strong work experience. Which does she chuck in the bin? Obviously the first.
US LLMs these days are very easy to get. I mean even people at bottom of my law school are getting admissions in top US Law schools.
But problem is - Application itself is costly and tedious.
Money - You need atleast 1 crore Rs for the LLM and Living expenses, US is the most costly. Even after LLM, US is not immigration friendly and it's difficult to stay back.
These days US LLMs are done by kids who's parents are damn rich or senior Counsels. They use the LLM as a vacation.
If you have money (Rs. 1 crore $130K) then you should do a US LLM it's a fun learning experience. You will get a lot of exposure.
You must be in top of your batch to get a fully paid scholarship to the US. Otherwise it's very easy.
Short quote of previous comment: "They use the LLM as a vacation."
A very costly vacation, don't you think? Not to mention a rather painful one, having to adjust to a new country, facing hostile immigration processes, doing the daily grind of a student... and this is long before we get to the discomfort! Your average student accommodation in a typical western city like London or New York is nothing to write home to mother about. Smaller than a typical bathroom in a Bangalore house in a posh neighbourhood. In public law jurisprudence in England, they have a phrase, "the man on the clapham omnibus" (basically a variation of "reasonable man"). I don't think this would be the idea of a vacation that the man on the Clapham omnibus would have. :))
Doesn't matter. LLM is basically cash cow for US Universities. LLM placements are not even considered as it's not a ranking criteria.
Before attacking me. Read LLM reviews by American Students. They look down on them.
Just like how NLU students look down on LLM.
US LLM is more like a JGLS LLB. Money matters. More than anything else.
Even Harvard, Stanford is not as tough as it looks for LLM.
Do you have the money to pay up?
Yes - Admission granted
No - Get out.
Money is not easy money. I will give you an example. My batch mates went to harvard LLM.
Fees is (all inclusive)
Tutiton Fees - $90
Living Expenses - $30K
Flights (to and from India, within US for internships) and Miscellaneous - $20K
Totally it's around $140K
US dollar will always appreciate. So considering the current exchange and volatility.
You need 1.3 crore Indian Rupees for a Harvard LLM. Same applies to most US Universities.
Let's say you failed in law school. Even then you can get a top LLM. Just do a clerkship via connections in some High Court and request the judge for a recommendation.
No dispute regarding the rediculous expenses involved, or the fact that Americans look down on most LLM students.
However, one part of this is... interesting: "Let's say you failed in law school. Even then you can get a top LLM. Just do a clerkship via connections in some High Court and request the judge for a recommendation". Just one question: did your connection(s) who got into the Harvard LLM get in with less than fantastic grades? I only ask because I know two people - both with first law degrees from highly reputed UK law schools (and before you ask, one of them is Oxford) - who got in, but only after getting first class marks (75% and above) in their undergraduate law exams. Therefore, I think we would all be unendingly thankful if you could do us the immense favour of confirming that you're making the very substantial claim that students/graduates of Indian law schools can get into American LLMs (including Harvard/Stanford) without aptitude and with money, while their counterparts in Britain must struggle with grades. You would be doing us an even greater kindness if you could provide some evidence of this (obviously of an anecdotal and anonymized form where possible, considering LI rules/reputational questions).
Where you are right (again) is regarding the content of American LLMs. They are much less theoretical/academic and much more a 'baby first law degree' than their UK counterparts, as LLM students generally take advanced JD classes (which by definition are supposed to be below their level) (again speaking from knowing someone who did both the Oxford BCL and the Harvard LLM).
Okay, here's a related question: what is the value of T1 law firm's work exp for US & EU-based LLMs respectively? For someone who graduated from a top law school like NLS/NALSAR with a rank anywhere around the middle — among the 40 to 60% of the batch — how many years of work exp (if at all) can make one likely to get offers from a top UK/US LLM? What about NUS or other EU countries — are they even likely to open doors
Let me start by saying that I can't speak to your question about Singapore and LLMs in Mainland Europe (non-UK) because I don't know enough. However, I can speak about the UK and the U.S.
You will forgive me if I say that you are making a classic mistake that so many applicants for these things do. It's not "how many years" that matters so much as the quality of the experience gained. What sort of work did you do? How specialized was it? How does it relate to your intended course of study/intended research? If you were looking at Oxbridge specifically, you could be a multi-million-dollar-earning Equity Partner at Kirkland & Ellis, but if your grades weren't up to scratch (i.e., you didn't have top grades), they wouldn't give tuppence about your work experience. Especially see what they say about references: they would much rather have academic references than professional ones from employers, it tells them much more about what an applicant will be like as a student. I think it hardly needs to be stated that a professor is more likely to give a former student with good grades a reference than do that for one with not-so-good grades, unless there were specific extenuating circumstances. Other non-Oxbridge Russell Group LLMs are slightly more willing to compromise, to a very limited extent, on the GPA-work experience balance. However, be warned that they would rather take someone with good grades and good work experience, as opposed to average grades even if their experience is good. As someone who got into a non-Oxbridge UK Russell Group LLM and is not ashamed to admit an Oxford rejection, always assume that applicants with top grades and fantastic experience are applying, and that you are a mere drop in the ocean. If you are specifically thinking/asking about quantity, this compromise effect would most likely kick in if you had at least five years PQE.
In the U.S., they will want to see how your work experience would make you fit better into their “law school community”. If you see the Harvard LLM website, for example, they mention having judges, law professors etc. from foreign countries as part of the cohort. Again for avoidance of disappointment and to prevent you sacrificing money in paying for application processing, I'd say take it as a rule of thumb that they'd prefer someone who's academically strong as opposed to someone who isn't: clearly demonstrated by the number of recommendation letters they require (minimum of two, maximum of five for Harvard specifically, if I remember right). Sorry about the length of the comment, but if you were to look at Yale, they specifically want people intending to go into academia, and view their LLM as a training ground for future academics. However strong the work experience, this would mean that their mindset likely is “top grades not present = bad student = rejection pile”. Some of these applications have processing fees of over $150, it’s your decision if you think it’s worth making them despite having grades that aren’t the very top on your profile that cannot be explained by extenuating circumstances, especially seeing as these might come to bite you later and result in your money being wasted when you get an email from their admission offices beginning “Dear applicant, unfortunately…”.
But problem is - Application itself is costly and tedious.
Money - You need atleast 1 crore Rs for the LLM and Living expenses, US is the most costly. Even after LLM, US is not immigration friendly and it's difficult to stay back.
These days US LLMs are done by kids who's parents are damn rich or senior Counsels. They use the LLM as a vacation.
If you have money (Rs. 1 crore $130K) then you should do a US LLM it's a fun learning experience. You will get a lot of exposure.
You must be in top of your batch to get a fully paid scholarship to the US. Otherwise it's very easy.
A very costly vacation, don't you think? Not to mention a rather painful one, having to adjust to a new country, facing hostile immigration processes, doing the daily grind of a student... and this is long before we get to the discomfort! Your average student accommodation in a typical western city like London or New York is nothing to write home to mother about. Smaller than a typical bathroom in a Bangalore house in a posh neighbourhood. In public law jurisprudence in England, they have a phrase, "the man on the clapham omnibus" (basically a variation of "reasonable man"). I don't think this would be the idea of a vacation that the man on the Clapham omnibus would have. :))
Before attacking me. Read LLM reviews by American Students. They look down on them.
Just like how NLU students look down on LLM.
US LLM is more like a JGLS LLB. Money matters. More than anything else.
Even Harvard, Stanford is not as tough as it looks for LLM.
Do you have the money to pay up?
Yes - Admission granted
No - Get out.
Money is not easy money. I will give you an example. My batch mates went to harvard LLM.
Fees is (all inclusive)
Tutiton Fees - $90
Living Expenses - $30K
Flights (to and from India, within US for internships) and Miscellaneous - $20K
Totally it's around $140K
US dollar will always appreciate. So considering the current exchange and volatility.
You need 1.3 crore Indian Rupees for a Harvard LLM. Same applies to most US Universities.
Let's say you failed in law school. Even then you can get a top LLM. Just do a clerkship via connections in some High Court and request the judge for a recommendation.
However, one part of this is... interesting: "Let's say you failed in law school. Even then you can get a top LLM. Just do a clerkship via connections in some High Court and request the judge for a recommendation". Just one question: did your connection(s) who got into the Harvard LLM get in with less than fantastic grades? I only ask because I know two people - both with first law degrees from highly reputed UK law schools (and before you ask, one of them is Oxford) - who got in, but only after getting first class marks (75% and above) in their undergraduate law exams. Therefore, I think we would all be unendingly thankful if you could do us the immense favour of confirming that you're making the very substantial claim that students/graduates of Indian law schools can get into American LLMs (including Harvard/Stanford) without aptitude and with money, while their counterparts in Britain must struggle with grades. You would be doing us an even greater kindness if you could provide some evidence of this (obviously of an anecdotal and anonymized form where possible, considering LI rules/reputational questions).
Where you are right (again) is regarding the content of American LLMs. They are much less theoretical/academic and much more a 'baby first law degree' than their UK counterparts, as LLM students generally take advanced JD classes (which by definition are supposed to be below their level) (again speaking from knowing someone who did both the Oxford BCL and the Harvard LLM).
You will forgive me if I say that you are making a classic mistake that so many applicants for these things do. It's not "how many years" that matters so much as the quality of the experience gained. What sort of work did you do? How specialized was it? How does it relate to your intended course of study/intended research? If you were looking at Oxbridge specifically, you could be a multi-million-dollar-earning Equity Partner at Kirkland & Ellis, but if your grades weren't up to scratch (i.e., you didn't have top grades), they wouldn't give tuppence about your work experience. Especially see what they say about references: they would much rather have academic references than professional ones from employers, it tells them much more about what an applicant will be like as a student. I think it hardly needs to be stated that a professor is more likely to give a former student with good grades a reference than do that for one with not-so-good grades, unless there were specific extenuating circumstances. Other non-Oxbridge Russell Group LLMs are slightly more willing to compromise, to a very limited extent, on the GPA-work experience balance. However, be warned that they would rather take someone with good grades and good work experience, as opposed to average grades even if their experience is good. As someone who got into a non-Oxbridge UK Russell Group LLM and is not ashamed to admit an Oxford rejection, always assume that applicants with top grades and fantastic experience are applying, and that you are a mere drop in the ocean. If you are specifically thinking/asking about quantity, this compromise effect would most likely kick in if you had at least five years PQE.
In the U.S., they will want to see how your work experience would make you fit better into their “law school community”. If you see the Harvard LLM website, for example, they mention having judges, law professors etc. from foreign countries as part of the cohort. Again for avoidance of disappointment and to prevent you sacrificing money in paying for application processing, I'd say take it as a rule of thumb that they'd prefer someone who's academically strong as opposed to someone who isn't: clearly demonstrated by the number of recommendation letters they require (minimum of two, maximum of five for Harvard specifically, if I remember right). Sorry about the length of the comment, but if you were to look at Yale, they specifically want people intending to go into academia, and view their LLM as a training ground for future academics. However strong the work experience, this would mean that their mindset likely is “top grades not present = bad student = rejection pile”. Some of these applications have processing fees of over $150, it’s your decision if you think it’s worth making them despite having grades that aren’t the very top on your profile that cannot be explained by extenuating circumstances, especially seeing as these might come to bite you later and result in your money being wasted when you get an email from their admission offices beginning “Dear applicant, unfortunately…”.