It might also be just your firm in particular which has a bias to certain universities. I have noticed in some of the big (in Aus) law firms there were quite a lot of Asian clerks/graduates joining, and then there's also the King of world mergers which embraces it's diverse culture? That being said, I also went to UNSW
(subtle eh?)
It wasn't really universities, they did have a pretty good spread in that sense. It was more the geographical spread of applicants which stood out to me. There is however a trend though with Asian clerks, mainly because the Asia-Pacific market is taking off and firms are looking for graduates who can speak an Asian language (which to me is fair because they are being selected based on a skill).
So would it be fair to say that if you dont have any ECs ur screwed but at the same time it won't make u stand out unless you cured cancer or something.
Anything is good on your CV
provided that it has substance and you can sell it in an interview. That being said, I found ECs to be overrated in terms of graduate roles and vastly overrated when it comes to entry level stuff. I had some decent ECs (nothing special), but most graduate programs I interviewed with seemed far more interested in my industry experience. Maybe it was because I didnt have anything too special, but I could definitely sell them well in an interview. Entry level employers have almost zero interest in ECs - relevant experience is all they care about (I know it doesn't make sense, but that's the way it is). I know that with Law graduates, ECs don't count for much at all - the focus there is primarily centred on grades and legal experience (I cant comment further, but I have seen the metrics used to grade candidates).