ATAR Notes: Forum
Uni Stuff => Faculties => Law => Topic started by: MrCommerce on December 17, 2013, 07:30:33 am
-
Hi guys! ;D
Currently in tertiary preference week and would greatly appreciate some assistance.
So i am highly interested in banking and finance (perhaps investment banking if i'm capable) and am basically willing to undertake any course that will maximise my potential in this industry for my future career - hence i'm thinking of taking up Law (along with Commerce) as i have been advised that it may make me more employable. In regards to actually going into the law industry (i.e. becoming a lawyer, solicitor or barrister), i don't see it happening - but who knows, i might become more interested whilst undertaking tertiary studies.
I have constantly heard that i should not undertake Law unless "i am genuinely interested" otherwise i am simply wasting time/money/opportunities/mental health. My question to you (law students 8)) is what exactly constitutes a "genuine interest"? Do i have to actually enjoy reading countless case studies? Is my slight interest sufficient? - i took Legal Studies (yes, i know it isn't really representative of tertiary level law) and quite enjoyed it but simultaneously i wasn't the biggest fan of reading case studies - though some of them, commerce-related ones in particular, often gauged my interest. I went ahead and researched some of the content involved in a Law course and i can see myself really enjoying civil law, contracts, mergers, acquisitions but would be less enthused by criminal law. Would be awesome if you guys could advise me on whether i am truly cut out for law - my deepest fear is taking com/law at Monash and dropping law and then being stuck with Monash Commerce (in which case, i would much rather UoM Commerce and would rather not deal with external transfer dilemmas).
Secondly, what are your opinions in regards to taking a guaranteed entry pathway to UoM Juris Doctor (Full Fee + maintaining a 75 GPA) as opposed to a Commerce/Law Monash double degree? In regards to the excessive cost of JD, i am not OVERLY concerned (because i don't want to base my tertiary choice on monetary reasoning) and in regards to the 75 GPA, i can see myself achieving it as long i work hard :'(. I like UoM's facilities and location (20 mins by public transport) whilst Monash's facilities are perhaps less appealing (also takes me 40 mins by public transport). I am getting the feeling that more people in my position tend to go the Monash pathway, could someone enlighten me (or correct me) as to why this is?
Anyways, sorry for rambling! I apologize for so many questions - just that i never considered JD before because i didn't think i would get the ATAR for the guaranteed entry :'(.
Thanks alot!
-
On a side note, why do you want to do law to do investment banking? If you really want to do finance, wouldn't it be better to do the single degree, work hard, do extracurriculars and see whether you get good internships which lead to job offers? Law won't really relate to much to IBD, and if you want to work on the markets side, you'd be better off learning another language or picking up more math or programming.
-
- Law has little relevance to investment banking
- Investment banking is highly competitive and you need really top marks and extra-curriculars for that. Law will not only bring down your GPA but also reduce the amount of time you have for extra-curriculars
- Nobody can tell you whether you'll be good for law, that is something only you can know. However out of "civil law, contracts, mergers, acquisitions" - not sure what you mean by "civil law" do you mean as opposed to criminal? Contracts is studied in first year, and we do not study mergers/acquisitions (which is prolly a combination of contracts and corps), don't think there's an elective subject on that specifically. Crim is only 2 units out of many and nobody enjoys every single law subject they take so dw about that. It doesn't sound like you really know what studying law is about (which is fine, most people don't and it's hard to really convey to those who haven't taken a law subject!)
- If you don't like reading cases you're gonna have a bad time, it's perfectly easy to pass a law degree without ever reading cases but if you're aiming for a high-achievers field like investment banking which requires high marks - well, its possible to fluke good marks without ever reading cases but you'll be playing Russian roulette with your degree/career
- I advise people to choose Monash law pathway before the UoM Model because that way you are guaranteed a law degree rather than risking failing the LSAT. However in your position - you're not sure whether you even want to do law and your preferred career does not require law - I think undergrad commerce is a better option. You'll have a much better idea of what you want out of life after 3 years in uni and you can re-evaluate when you graduate as to whether you want to go the JD pathway (and if you do, Monash JD does not require LSAT I believe)
I am at work hence short/grammatically questionable replies (sorry) but am v happy to answer any questions you have about law
-
Thanks for the replies! :)
That's interesting, i was under the impression that it was common for students to undertake com/law for finance. So you're saying that for a finance career (which i'm pretty much set on btw), it is more suitable to perhaps take a single degree Commerce and go for a high GPA?
Admittedly, i don't have much of an idea of what the Law course involves - i can't seem to make it out of merely the university brochures :-[ + i'm only looking from the extensively limited scope of VCE Legal Studies :-\.
Would law be of any material benefit in my pursuit for a finance career? - I've always wanted to do more than a Commerce single degree. I'm just a little scared of the UoM pathway, because i could see the temptation of graduating with the undergraduate degree and going full-time in the workforce.
Also, i was reading the Law FAQ, and you say that both the JD and LLB are functionally the same. Is the fact that JD is a masters degree irrelevant then? Is the content in JD any more difficult than the law undergrad?
Thanks again!!!
-
A legal background helps in a whole RANGE of professions and definitely looks good on your CV, so it will come in useful in a general sense. It's a fair tangent if you're not interested, and a fair bit of work, but it won't ever be *useless* as a qualification.
Funny thing - on my first day of LLB I was one of only two, perhaps, people in the (large) seminar who said they were doing Law because they actually wanted to be a lawyer - I'd wanted to be a barrister since PRIMARY SCHOOL. Fast-forward a few years and I know a lot of people from that class are working lawyers....
....I'm not.
-
Thanks for the replies! :)
That's interesting, i was under the impression that it was common for students to undertake com/law for finance. So you're saying that for a finance career (which i'm pretty much set on btw), it is more suitable to perhaps take a single degree Commerce and go for a high GPA?
Admittedly, i don't have much of an idea of what the Law course involves - i can't seem to make it out of merely the university brochures :-[ + i'm only looking from the extensively limited scope of VCE Legal Studies :-\.
Would law be of any material benefit in my pursuit for a finance career? - I've always wanted to do more than a Commerce single degree. I'm just a little scared of the UoM pathway, because i could see the temptation of graduating with the undergraduate degree and going full-time in the workforce.
Also, i was reading the Law FAQ, and you say that both the JD and LLB are functionally the same. Is the fact that JD is a masters degree irrelevant then? Is the content in JD any more difficult than the law undergrad?
Thanks again!!!
I admittedly know very little about finance careers. I was merely speaking from the GPA point of view. Investment banking/finance type jobs are extremely competitive (I assume you're gonna be aiming for the big 4) and almost certainly law will bring down your GPA. For comparison's sake, honours in almost any other discipline requires a HD (80) average but for law you only need a 67 (last I checked - that's for 3rd class honours, but you can still write LLB (Hons) and nobody would be the wiser).
I don't think there's anything wrong with having just a commerce degree, as long as you have an impeccable transcript and you have co and extra curriculars.
JD is to LLB as the MBBS is to the MD - they are the same and grant you essentially the same qualifications. The content is the same - you are required to do certain units to graduate with a law degree (compulsory units) and beyond that, certain additional units if you want to be admitted to practice (quasi-compulsory units - you don't have to do these to get a degree but you won't be allowed to work as a lawyer). The workload may be slightly heavier because I believe the JD is conducted in trimesters not semesters, so you don't have as many breaks. I imagine the competition might be slightly tougher because your cohort would be more mature students who already have a degree under their belt and who are probably already professionals in other industries, and so probably have better work ethics, but that has nothing to do with the content itself.
Funny thing - on my first day of LLB I was one of only two, perhaps, people in the (large) seminar who said they were doing Law because they actually wanted to be a lawyer - I'd wanted to be a barrister since PRIMARY SCHOOL.
That's impressive, I didn't even know there was a difference between barristers and solicitors until like 2nd year lol
-
That's impressive, I didn't even know there was a difference between barristers and solicitors until like 2nd year lol
One makes coffee, one goes to court?
-
hurr durr
-
Just to add a bit of a different spin: I chose Comm/Law almost for the exact reasons that you've outlined.
I can't stand Law (I find it quite dry) and am using the law degree to boost my chances of securing something in the commerce field. While I'm not too keen on Investment Banking, I do know A LOT of people in that industry that have completed Comm/Law at Monash. If that's the industry you're keen on, I cannot recommend Comm/Law enough - I have about 9 friends that have gone through that pathway, and many more who are already going down that road.
Just to clarify some points that ninwa made - IB is not the big 4 at all. It's essentially dominated by bulge bracket banks (think Goldman, JPM, UBS, Citi, Mac etc.). They really, really like Comm/Law grads (some more so than others). Doing a 5 year degree also gives you time to pick up work experience and boost your extracurriculars.
An interesting point to note: people doing JDs are viewed as more likely ending up in the legal profession, whereas that view doesn't exist for Comm/Law. As meganrobyn pointed out, very few people do the Monash LLB with the intention to actually work in the legal field.
A law degree also lifts the glass ceiling, so to speak. You'll find a lot of the higher-ups in the finance industry have law degrees (and not necessarily legal backgrounds).
Would be awesome if you guys could advise me on whether i am truly cut out for law - my deepest fear is taking com/law at Monash and dropping law and then being stuck with Monash Commerce (in which case, i would much rather UoM Commerce and would rather not deal with external transfer dilemmas).
I have a friend who is doing straight commerce at Monash and landed an IB internship at Mac. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if you're at Monash or Melbourne, as long as you come across as a "person" (though certain banks tend to hire exclusively from Melbourne).
-
Just because a lot of people do Comm/Law and then do investment banking doesn't mean that there's a causation. A lot of good students do the double degree because they get into it, so you'd expect a lot of the top jobs to go these students anyway.
I have quite a few friends in Melbourne who will work in IBD this year out of Melbourne, and many others who will be doing big 4 commercial banking out of Melbourne. One of the people I know doing IBD got a 99.95 and thrived at uni; I'm pretty sure that it only matters that you do well instead of doing a particular degree. Basically everyone I know who went to Melbourne has ended up at a prestigious company. Yeah, it's important that you go to a G8, but I'm really not sure how much of a boost Comm/Law gives you.
I'm also pretty sure that the extra two years in IBD in the analyst program (if it works the same in Aus) looks better on your CV than the superfluous law degree.
-
I'm pretty sure I know who you're talking about - that person is incredible. So much respect for her.
I guess my main point was that doing a 5 year degree gives you time to build up your resume and find out exactly what you want to do.
I only worked out what I wanted to do this year (after 3 years of uni). Now I'm building my skills and resume to work towards breaking in to that industry.
Ultimately though, I think you're right - though I'm quite happy with my decision to do Comm/Law instead of Comm :)
-
I'm in a similar boat to the OP except even after a BA I am still unsure of what it is I wish to do. I have been accepted into postgraduate law but don't know if I should accept when I'm not 100% convinced that it's the right choice. I've always had an interest in law since the end of VCE but have been somewhat scared off by the thought that it could be three years of hard work and no reward if I end up choosing another path. The other field I'm tossing up between is doing higher journalism study. I know I enjoy journalism but the instability currently characterising the media industry is another worry. If the professionals are losing their media jobs, what great hope do I have? Anyway, any advice/guidance is appreciated :)
-
A bit off topic - but would you guys say that enjoying debating is an essential trait to studying law? (I was at Monash today and they seemed to brag a lot about their superior abilities in debating.)
Honestly, i've had high school leadership roles, but have never been a natural public speaker (still shake sometimes lol). Is this problematic? (Though i'm motivated to improve this.)
I previously thought this would only be fundamental if i was going into law (e.g. barrister) and assumed that debating and mooting is merely optional (can anyone confirm this?).
Also, at monash, how many pages can i expect to read per week (on average)? I've heard at other law schools it can be anywhere from 200pgs per week to 200pgs per night.
-
I'm in a similar boat to the OP except even after a BA I am still unsure of what it is I wish to do. I have been accepted into postgraduate law but don't know if I should accept when I'm not 100% convinced that it's the right choice. I've always had an interest in law since the end of VCE but have been somewhat scared off by the thought that it could be three years of hard work and no reward if I end up choosing another path. The other field I'm tossing up between is doing higher journalism study. I know I enjoy journalism but the instability currently characterising the media industry is another worry. If the professionals are losing their media jobs, what great hope do I have? Anyway, any advice/guidance is appreciated :)
Congrats on the offer! Do you want to be a lawyer? If so, the market is pretty tough, but like you said so is journalism.
It's hardly no reward! Your reward is a qualification which is recognised internationally (I'm assuming you're doing the JD not the LLB). A law degree opens a lot of doors into other careers as well, not just practising law.
If you've been interested in it since VCE then I think you should give it a shot. You could always quit after a trimester if you don't like it :P
A bit off topic - but would you guys say that enjoying debating is an essential trait to studying law? (I was at Monash today and they seemed to brag a lot about their superior abilities in debating.)
Honestly, i've had high school leadership roles, but have never been a natural public speaker (still shake sometimes lol). Is this problematic? (Though i'm motivated to improve this.)
I previously thought this would only be fundamental if i was going into law (e.g. barrister) and assumed that debating and mooting is merely optional (can anyone confirm this?).
Also, at monash, how many pages can i expect to read per week (on average)? I've heard at other law schools it can be anywhere from 200pgs per week to 200pgs per night.
No, debating is most definitely not essential. Mooting is a good thing to experience at least once (and Monash offers a first year moot, so you won't be competing against more experienced later year students), but it only really has relevance to those who want to become barristers (i.e. the lawyers trained in advocacy - the ones who speak at court). And I'm pretty sure even the most charismatic barrister shook at their very first court appearance! It's something you develop with experience and time. Solicitors don't generally speak in court (except maybe for minor Magistrates Court matters) so you can definitely be a lawyer without being some public speaking maven. I can't public speak for shit and I refused to do any more mooting after the first time, but I did a court appearance (representing a real client) as part of an elective unit and still got very good reviews.
I put up some reading guides for some of the later year subjects here. Ethics and trusts are compulsory subjects if you want to be admitted to practise later, so I would have a look at those reading guides for an idea of the workload.
-
A bit off topic - but would you guys say that enjoying debating is an essential trait to studying law? (I was at Monash today and they seemed to brag a lot about their superior abilities in debating.)
Honestly, i've had high school leadership roles, but have never been a natural public speaker (still shake sometimes lol). Is this problematic? (Though i'm motivated to improve this.)
I previously thought this would only be fundamental if i was going into law (e.g. barrister) and assumed that debating and mooting is merely optional (can anyone confirm this?).
Also, at monash, how many pages can i expect to read per week (on average)? I've heard at other law schools it can be anywhere from 200pgs per week to 200pgs per night.
Agree with ninwa. I never debated at high school and never got involved at university. Plenty of friends that are keen on becoming barristers down the track are not involved either - though they do tend to get involved during moots.
In terms of reading - I probably read a couple of pages a week :P Probably not even that. You realise after a while that reading cases and textbooks adds very little knowledge; I spend more time reading notes from previous semesters. A lot of people overstate the amount of reading that you need to do in law. It's all relative to the mark that you're aiming for: e.g. if you want a HD, you will have to put in a fair few hours and read more widely (e.g. journal articles and the like), whereas you could probably get a D by just reading notes.
-
In terms of reading - I probably read a couple of pages a week :P Probably not even that. You realise after a while that reading cases and textbooks adds very little knowledge; I spend more time reading notes from previous semesters. A lot of people overstate the amount of reading that you need to do in law. It's all relative to the mark that you're aiming for: e.g. if you want a HD, you will have to put in a fair few hours and read more widely (e.g. journal articles and the like), whereas you could probably get a D by just reading notes.
Hahaha that's interesting, most people have 'warned' me of the excessive levels of reading - even the new Dean :-X. Do you think you've developed that capability to read less as time progressed with your law degree?
-
Hahaha that's interesting, most people have 'warned' me of the excessive levels of reading - even the new Dean :-X. Do you think you've developed that capability to read less as time progressed with your law degree?
The thing is, academics (like the Dean) have to do that - they're hardly gonna say "hey new students, you can still do decently well without ever reading any of the cases on the reading guide" :P
I'm hardly the pinnacle of excellent marks but I'm not a total failure either. I haven't read a case since first year lol! IMO, law exams are maybe 10% intelligence, 30% hard work, 10% luck and 50% knowing how to actually write a law exam answer, because you could know the course back to front but still fail because you regurgitated everything you knew instead of actually analysing the problem.
-
Congrats on the offer! Do you want to be a lawyer? If so, the market is pretty tough, but like you said so is journalism.
It's hardly no reward! Your reward is a qualification which is recognised internationally (I'm assuming you're doing the JD not the LLB). A law degree opens a lot of doors into other careers as well, not just practising law.
If you've been interested in it since VCE then I think you should give it a shot. You could always quit after a trimester if you don't like it :P
Thank you! I am considering becoming a lawyer one day, my main interests are family and criminal law, but I am excited to just give it a go and see what piques my interest.
Yes, I'll be doing the JD at Monash which was my first choice. I think I'll take your advice and give it a go. I'm prepared to give it a year and take the plunge! At the end of the day, at least I'll satisfy my curiosity. Plus, I'll change if I have to :) I think that path is easier than trying to get into law again...
-
The thing is, academics (like the Dean) have to do that - they're hardly gonna say "hey new students, you can still do decently well without ever reading any of the cases on the reading guide" :P
I'm hardly the pinnacle of excellent marks but I'm not a total failure either. I haven't read a case since first year lol! IMO, law exams are maybe 10% intelligence, 30% hard work, 10% luck and 50% knowing how to actually write a law exam answer, because you could know the course back to front but still fail because you regurgitated everything you knew instead of actually analysing the problem.
Hahaha - just wondering though, if you haven't read a case since first year, how do you quote them in your exams? Do you just use the ones you study in class?
-
Thank you! I am considering becoming a lawyer one day, my main interests are family and criminal law, but I am excited to just give it a go and see what piques my interest.
Yes, I'll be doing the JD at Monash which was my first choice. I think I'll take your advice and give it a go. I'm prepared to give it a year and take the plunge! At the end of the day, at least I'll satisfy my curiosity. Plus, I'll change if I have to :) I think that path is easier than trying to get into law again...
Ooh, those are tough (as in, emotionally, not necessarily job prospects) career paths! But infinitely more rewarding than working for big corporations.
Yep, that's a good attitude to have. You're (statistically) going to change careers 3 or 4 times in your lifetime anyway, so why not give everything a shot while you're still young!
Hahaha - just wondering though, if you haven't read a case since first year, how do you quote them in your exams? Do you just use the ones you study in class?
Lecturers go through every case on the reading guide anyway. And all you really need to know are the salient facts of each case and what legal principles they represent. If you read the cases yourself you might be able to quote some obscure passage on the exam and impress your examiner, that's all (but you can still do well without that).
-
Some of my highest marks for law subjects are for those where I never read a single case. Some of my lowest marks for law subjects are from ones where I read everything on the reading guide and then some.
Law exams are about being efficient and comprehensive, not about showcasing your depth of knowledge. I have heard directly from examiners that have told me all they care about in problem style questions is issue spotting and that the best answers are those which are 'consistently average'.
Reading cases is an important skill for almost everything law related, but it really is a case of diminishing returns when it comes to law exams (at least for issue spotting type questions). There is a danger of knowing too much and consequently running out of time.
Obviously reading cases is critical for research essays or things like mooting, which is why these things are infinitely better from an academic standpoint than law exams are. Law exams are more about testing your work ethic (i.e. ability to grind practice exams) more than anything else (in my opinion at least...)
-
Some of my highest marks for law subjects are for those where I never read a single case. Some of my lowest marks for law subjects are from ones where I read everything on the reading guide and then some.
Law exams are about being efficient and comprehensive, not about showcasing your depth of knowledge. I have heard directly from examiners that have told me all they care about in problem style questions is issue spotting and that the best answers are those which are 'consistently average'.
Reading cases is an important skill for almost everything law related, but it really is a case of diminishing returns when it comes to law exams (at least for issue spotting type questions). There is a danger of knowing too much and consequently running out of time.
Obviously reading cases is critical for research essays or things like mooting, which is why these things are infinitely better from an academic standpoint than law exams are. Law exams are more about testing your work ethic (i.e. ability to grind practice exams) more than anything else (in my opinion at least...)
Hmm, seems completely different from VCE where it's all about depth of knowledge! Guess it's going to take some getting used to...
Another question for you guys (sorry lol) - regarding the quassi-compulsory subjects, do students that do not initially intend to practise law usually take these anyway?
-
Hmm, seems completely different from VCE where it's all about depth of knowledge! Guess it's going to take some getting used to...
Another question for you guys (sorry lol) - regarding the quassi-compulsory subjects, do students that do not initially intend to practise law usually take these anyway?
Almost always.
-
Almost always.
Ah okay~ yeah, should've guessed haha.
-
Thank you! I am considering becoming a lawyer one day, my main interests are family and criminal law, but I am excited to just give it a go and see what piques my interest.
Yes, I'll be doing the JD at Monash which was my first choice. I think I'll take your advice and give it a go. I'm prepared to give it a year and take the plunge! At the end of the day, at least I'll satisfy my curiosity. Plus, I'll change if I have to :) I think that path is easier than trying to get into law again...
Exactly what my thoughts are, though I want to be a prosecutor - a really really long road though.. but I'll give it a shot! Got accepted into the JD at Monash too, see you at orientation? :P
-
Hey Mr. Commerce,
I think most people have answered your question, I thought I'd add my 2 cents though! Investment Banking is a very lucrative but demanding career, most of my friends who graduated are working close to 10-12 hour shifts but are getting paid very handsomely for a fresh grad! Definitely focus on maximising your finance grades and apply for Internships, either at the big 4 for some basic industry experience and then into more specialised banking fields e.g. Bank of America.
Commerce degrees are particularly fun, you get a wide breadth of subjects to find out what you truly are passionate about and enjoy. I changed from a finance nerd to a law orientated student by experiencing new classes :P
All the best!