Jury Duty (2 Viewers)

[santaslayer]

I don't give advice, however I assist the solicitors who do.

To be a Student-at-Law you need to register with the Legal Profession Admission Board.

...and what does this student @ law do..?

or is it just a name/title?

 

[hfis]

...and what does this student @ law do..?

or is it just a name/title?

As far as I know, it's nothing more than a fancy title designed for Diploma in Law students (it's some kind of requirement I think). It costs money to get, and appears to be a complete waste of money for uni law students.

Unless you get your kicks out of being a condescending fuck and all. "You can't talk to me like that! I'm a student at law!"


Edit: Here we go, a bit more info. This is excerpted from the application form here, which contains a lot of information about 'student-at-law':

Who should use this form?

You should use this form if you wish to apply for registration as a Student-At-Law for the LPAB's Diploma in Law course. Registration is required prior to enrolment.

 

[erawamai]

As far as I know, it's nothing more than a fancy title designed for Diploma in Law students (it's some kind of requirement I think). It costs money to get, and appears to be a complete waste of money for uni law students.

Unless you get your kicks out of being a condescending fuck and all. "You can't talk to me like that! I'm a student at law!"


Edit: Here we go, a bit more info. This is excerpted from the application form here, which contains a lot of information about 'student-at-law':

I believe all law students are 'students at law'. If you write a paper with another academic it will say 'by Jonh Smith LLB (ANU) Terry Jones Student at law'

 

[melsc]

Thats coz Jonathan started doing the diploma before transfering into the B Laws

 

[Frigid]

honestly, the title sounds crap and pretentious.

besides, who would listen to a student? geez

 

[erawamai]

honestly, the title sounds crap and pretentious.

besides, who would listen to a student? geez

Well we are all students at law!

 

[Frigid]

i prefer law student. student-at-law sounds very bar-wannabe (no offence melsc <3)

 

[erawamai]

i prefer law student. student-at-law sounds very bar-wannabe (no offence melsc <3)

From what I gathered 'student at all' is our official title. If a judge were to ever put one of us in a judgment or if we were to write a paper the official line is

John Smith, Student at law.

 

[melsc]

i prefer law student. student-at-law sounds very bar-wannabe (no offence melsc <3)

None taken <3 Frigid

Joe Bloggs Student at Law...
reminds me of

"Lionel Hutz Attorney at law"

 

[erawamai]

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/lpab/ll_lpab.nsf/pages/lpab_pastexampapers

the LAPAB do have nice practice question exams. Smaller fact scenarios than the 4 page long ones we get. They seem good for practicing specific areas of law.

 

[pk88]

Thats coz Jonathan started doing the diploma before transfering into the B Laws

I didn't know it was possible to do that, would greatly appreciate if you could provide me with more information on the transfer process.

 

[Jonathan A]

As far as I know, it's nothing more than a fancy title designed for Diploma in Law students (it's some kind of requirement I think). It costs money to get, and appears to be a complete waste of money for uni law students.

Unless you get your kicks out of being a condescending fuck and all. "You can't talk to me like that! I'm a student at law!"


Edit: Here we go, a bit more info. This is excerpted from the application form here, which contains a lot of information about 'student-at-law':

Hfis is right. Student-at-Law is a title to Diploma in Law students. Mind you I have spoken to people in the profession and DipLaw students are very much respected. The course is more respectable among the profession than university degrees.

The title is a traditional one. Many lawyers will hold the title "Barrister-at-Law", "Reader-at-Law" and the old "Serjant-at-Law". Student-at-Law represents the old Supreme Court exams. It is a title held for life until admitted as a Legal Practitioner.

To get the title, you need to pay a processing fee (we are talking about a gov department) and be considered by the Legal Profession Admission Board.

 

[Jonathan A]

I didn't know it was possible to do that, would greatly appreciate if you could provide me with more information on the transfer process.

I started off doing the DipLaw and a BSoSc at UWS. After completing two subjects in DipLaw and completing 6 in the BSoSc I transferred. The University only took into consideration my previous social science studies. If you do a DipLaw, the advice the profession have told me is to stick with it and get a job in a firm. Practitioners highly value experience.

 

[erawamai]

Hfis is right. Student-at-Law is a title to Diploma in Law students. Mind you I have spoken to people in the profession and DipLaw students are very much respected. The course is more respectable among the profession than university degrees.

Why are you doing both? Also I was under the impression that Student-at-law applies to all students who happen to be studying a degree than can lead to admission to practice as a solicitor or barrister.

How do you think LPAB stacks up? I know most students will be browsing through the exams papers and thinking that it's a little watered down. I know its hard for you to tell because you are a first year but what do you think?

 

[Jonathan A]

Why are you doing both? Also I was under the impression that Student-at-law applies to all students who happen to be studying a degree than can lead to admission to practice as a solicitor or barrister.

How do you think LPAB stacks up? I know most students will be browsing through the exams papers and thinking that it's a little watered down. I know its hard for you to tell because you are a first year but what do you think?

I am not doing both. I discontinued the Diploma in Law, but I still technically am a student-at-law. The advantage of that is if I want to do further studies in law I can go back and do the DipLaw (later units) after my LLB.

The LPAB is MUCH harder than the LLB. There is no doubt about that. Having done both exams, there is a massive failure rate at the LPAB, with also a massive drop-out rate. The reason is because the DipLaw has a 100% weighting exam. The DipLaw is also very practical - that is it doesn't try to answer questions of jurisprudence until the end, rather it concentrates solely on the law.

 

[erawamai]

I am not doing both. I discontinued the Diploma in Law, but I still technically am a student-at-law. The advantage of that is if I want to do further studies in law I can go back and do the DipLaw (later units) after my LLB.

What would the point of doing that be? Doing the same subjects twice?

The LPAB is MUCH harder than the LLB. There is no doubt about that. Having done both exams, there is a massive failure rate at the LPAB, with also a massive drop-out rate. The reason is because the DipLaw has a 100% weighting exam.

I would auggest that the 'massive' failure rate of LPAB is because it accepts students with lower uais (66 and above). The screening process isn't as tough.

I also don't think that having 100% exams (the big law schools do too for most subjects well 80% exams) makes much of a difference in terms of diffculty. Some may feel, like me, that having one big assessment/exam is easier. Less assessment. Less Work.

The DipLaw is also very practical - that is it doesn't try to answer questions of jurisprudence until the end, rather it concentrates solely on the law.

From my observations it has more practical subjects (Conveyancing). However the problem questions in the exams seem watered down just a tad. As in there are different fact scenarios that target different sections of the law. Rather than big problems that cover everything.

Overall I don't think there is such a large difference. I wouldnt say, from looking at what has been said, that the LPAB is 'MUCH' harder than other law degrees. Others may suggest that the lack of jurisprudence is bad. Certainly all the law schools are moving away from teaching just black letter. They may not assess it but its there in the LLB courses.

 

[MiuMiu]

Guys, my dads doing the LPAB diploma in law until he retires and has the time to transfer over into Sydney Law. I can tell you now, there is little to no difference between the two, except for the fact that doing it at uni you end up with a degree. I did crim and torts at the same time as my dad was doing crim and torts and the content was exactly the same, even the weekly topics were in nearly the same order.

All I'd say that was different is you have to be much more independent because the teachers aren't accessible out of teaching hours (they come from all different universities) and you do assignments but they technically aren't worth anything--you have to pass them to take the exam, but the exam is worth 100%

The course is more designed for people who have already been exposed toand are established in some sort of corporate or legal environment (my dads an investment banker but has always been interested in doing a law degree) and just need to gain the formal recognition to actually practice as a solicitor (this course does not include bar exams, so if you wanna be a barrister you're in the same position as everyone else who has just finished uni). Also, you still have to go to the college of law after you've completed the diploma.

At the end of the day, its the same thing, except with a more independent focus and you don't have a uni degree to speak of. You're not going to get the diploma fresh out of school and get employed in a big firm without a law degree because thats just not the way this thing works.

 

[erawamai]

Guys, my dads doing the LPAB diploma in law until he retires and has the time to transfer over into Sydney Law. I can tell you now, there is little to no difference between the two, except for the fact that doing it at uni you end up with a degree. I did crim and torts at the same time as my dad was doing crim and torts and the content was exactly the same, even the weekly topics were in nearly the same order.

How interesting would that be. Doing your homework with your dad!

All I'd say that was different is you have to be much more independent because the teachers aren't accessible out of teaching hours (they come from all different universities) and you do assignments but they technically aren't worth anything--you have to pass them to take the exam, but the exam is worth 100%

I think this would be another reason why JA says there is a higher failure rate.

 

[melsc]

I was talking to my CA and Legal teacher and they all know someone doing the Diploma and suggested I dont do it

 

[MiuMiu]

Hehe my dad can read something and have it stick in his head forever, whereas I have a memory like a sieve, so its fustrating!