Advice for Law Students

[Siapi]

Hey Arrowhead and TykeDragon!

 

Thank you for your advice earlier, it made things clearer.

 

I've been reading up on a UK Law degree and spoken to a friend of mine who is currently doing a Law degree at King's to ask her opinion of things. The more and more I think about it, the more I feel that I would enjoy the study of law. I'm still not sure if I want to be a lawyer, though...

 

I just have a few more questions:

 

Do you think UK Law universities will prefer me less if I don't gush about how much I want to be a lawyer?

My friend at King's sent me some of her readings for law school and I'm finding it interesting, I know this thread is about giving advice to law students, but could I ask you some questions about my readings?

Also, how do universities go about teaching you law? What's the process like?

Is there a lot of emphasis on cases and legislation? I mean, I know that it's a Law degree, so obviously there's going to be cases and legislation, but are they going to test us on specific legislation and ask stuff about, 'what did section 5 of the Act say?' How does that work?

What do you think you got from your Law degree that you feel is unique to it and made you glad you did it over all the other humanities subjects?

 

Thank you!

Edited April 1, 2015 by Siapi

[Arrowhead]

x

 

Hey Sia, glad to help!

 

To answer your questions:

 

Do you think UK Law universities will prefer me less if I don't gush about how much I want to be a lawyer?

Definitely not! UK Law tutors are legal academics, they will be overjoyed that you're interested in legal academia and the study of law and not its practice. These are people who have all decided not to be lawyers themselves but to teach it, you're not going to get a more sympathetic group of people if you mention not wanting to be a lawyer. In any case though, when you write your Personal Statement, if you keep it focused on your legal academic discussions, they will love you for it!

 

My friend at King's sent me some of her readings for law school and I'm finding it interesting, I know this thread is about giving advice to law students, but could I ask you some questions about my readings?

I don't know if this is the appropriate place to have that kind of chat. But meh, go ahead, I think it might be interesting. If the mods tell us off, which I don't think they will (cause I'm technically a legacy member and they love me too much ), we'll move the discussion elsewhere.

 

Also, how do universities go about teaching you law? What's the process like?

Different universities operate differently. Places like Oxford, Cambridge and Durham have a tutorial system whereby you have some lectures and then you have small group discussions with two to three students and a tutor where you discuss your week's reading in a lot of detail. It is very much a discourse to help inform you. Most other universities have a more lecture and class approach, with classes consisting of 6-10 people...where you essentially do the same thing. But basically, it's a lot of learning by talking and talking and talking.

 

Is there a lot of emphasis on cases and legislation? I mean, I know that it's a Law degree, so obviously there's going to be cases and legislation, but are they going to test us on specific legislation and ask stuff about, 'what did section 5 of the Act say?' How does that work?

No, they would never ask you to quote section 5 of an Act. Law degree exams are based on essays where you discuss the law more generally. You get an essay prompt and then go into a certain level of detailed discussion around that topic. The prompt is usually vague enough to allow you pick up multiple points of argument and go about them in whatever way you see fit. You will draw on case law, legislation and academic commentary to help surpport your thesis. Think IB History essays but with a lot more detail.

 

What do you think you got from your Law degree that you feel is unique to it and made you glad you did it over all the other humanities subjects?

Nothing really. Legal study is quite similar to other humanities, if sometimes a little more tedious. There is no special skill or ability you gain from a law degree that you couldn't obtain from a history or anthropology degree. The content can be quite interesting if you give it a chance and take a shine to it, that's a plus. Also, well, no other degree is going to allow you to rant about copyrights in a digital environment as a law degree could, at least that was one of my favourite moments during my degree.

 

Arrowhead.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Arrowhead

[Just Jean]

Thank you Arrowhead!

 

Still extremely nervous about the process and everything coming up.

Reading some of your most recent posts, I was reminded of the C I had gotten for IGCSE History. Really hope the universities don't take that into account when judging my application! ...Do you think there's a possibility of that happening?

[Arrowhead]

Thank you Arrowhead!

 

Still extremely nervous about the process and everything coming up.

Reading some of your most recent posts, I was reminded of the C I had gotten for IGCSE History. Really hope the universities don't take that into account when judging my application! ...Do you think there's a possibility of that happening?

 

Well, I mean, there's no doubt in my mind that they will take it into account. Especially at places like Oxford/LSE/UCL, IGCSEs play a pretty big role in determining whether they would want to move forward with your application.

 

I would say that it will come down to being a judgement call. If that was your only C in your IGCSEs and you got majority A*s, As and not more than a few Bs as well as strong predicted IB scores and you've written a good Personal Statement, I definitely believe that they would be willing to overlook a C in IGCSE History.

 

I wouldn't worry about that at the moment. Just focus on the IB and your predicted scores. When the time comes to do your UCAS app, all you can do is hope for the best because a huge part of the application process is dependent on the quality and calibre of students applying in that particular year and what the average for IGCSEs and grade predictions will be among that year's applicants. So it's all up in the air in a manner of speaking.

 

If you start to worry about this kind of minutae, you will end up driving yourself spare. So put it out of your mind, focus on school and maximising your predicted scores, write the best possible PS imaginable, cross your fingers and hope for the best.

 

[flinquinnster]

Thank you Arrowhead!

 

Still extremely nervous about the process and everything coming up.

Reading some of your most recent posts, I was reminded of the C I had gotten for IGCSE History. Really hope the universities don't take that into account when judging my application! ...Do you think there's a possibility of that happening?

 

 

The admissions advice from my Cambridge college is that GCSE results matter less than IB results at Cambridge than Oxford - so, if you were considering between Cambridge and Oxford, that might make a marginal difference. But as Arrowhead has excellently explained, it depends on a variety of other things!

[Siapi]

Thank you Arrowhead! You have shined a lot of light on this whole thing and the more and more I read about the law, the more I find it interesting.

 

I am reading this article about the potential consequences of new legislation in sections 89 and 90 of the Financial Conduct Act, which criminalises making misleading statements and giving misleading impressions when public company sales are involved. I sort of understand that this was in response to the financial crisis and trying to find more ways to hold people accountable. But if the banks lied to the buyers whom they sold the bad debts to on false pretences, why this additional law? I mean like, shouldn't something like fraud law already cover this? Isn't making untested new legislation counterproductive if you want to make things more efficient?

 

The article went into a lot of detail talking about the rules and standards for public companies and how they are much higher than for private companies. So if the standards are so high and companies go through so much crap to become public, how could the regulators let something like the housing crisis just slip under the radar? What were the circumstances that led to regulators becoming so lax about their duties?

 

I am also having trouble fully understanding what the effect of the new law will be? Like, so, what if a seller advertised that his company was worth 10 million pounds, and at that time when he advertised it, it was. But a few days later it fell to 8 million? Can he still be sued for making a misleading statement? Obviously this is not the best example, but I'm wondering the test takes into account, you know, degrees of statements being 'misleading'?

 

What do you think?

[mtrip22]

hi..i have a query...if i have a UK law degree and i want to practise in US..then what qualifying exam will i need to pass? 

Edited July 21, 2015 by mtrip22

[signore]

I would suggest 

 

English HL

History HL

Economics/ Business HL (in case you wanna do corporate law)

ESS

Math studies would do 

Spanish would be a good second language option

[TykeDragon]

hi..i have a query...if i have a UK law degree and i want to practise in US..then what qualifying exam will i need to pass? 

 

I believe it is the JD that you will need to do. Look up the Bar website for the State that you would like to practice in, eg if you want to be in Wall Street I believe you'll need to look into the New York Bar (sorry if I'm wrong, my geography of America is not very good!) But I believe it is a JD you would need.

 

Have a look at this site, it may help as well - http://www.aspiringsolicitors.co.uk/interested-new-york-bar/

 

 

@American Author, whilst that is a good set of subjects for law... who exactly are you talking to?

[matbla]

Hi, I got a few questions and would appreciate an answer.

1. I am not sure what branch of law i would like to do. Even though everybody in my family do law, i am not that attracted to any of the specific branches. Since i am interested in political philosophy, and have spotted that there are some seductive ; )  degrees combining law with political philosophy or economics (the one in KCL: called PoliticsPhilosophyLaw) and award a llb diploma, they seem tempting but simultaneously im kind of afraid to apply there. What I am trying to say is, i am not sure what law firms, companies etc. think of them- are the graduates of PPL in a way underprivileged, less attractive to the companies?

2. I am not an excellent student- i predict having about 38 points  (im in the middle of the first grade ),what universities would you recommend? Ive been thinking of these, but now, i dont really know what to choose, since i want to be honest with myself about the possible grades: KCL, LSE, Edinburgh, Nottingham, Bristol. All seem to be decent, and relatively possible to get into but y'know ...

3. Is there any other country but the UK (and Ireland) in which i can study law in english? I mean, study from the very beginning, not like in the US (where it is only a postgraduate degree)?

4. Is it possible to to the undergraduate degree in the UK and then study law in America? I know that KCL, LSE and UCL have this amazing dual degree but itll be enormously hard to do it

5. Another question, and probably the most important of all of these: I do have problems with Polish HL but if i change it to polish sl, i will not do English A SL (english b hl instead ). I dont know if it is better to really know english or, to have a better grade from polish... What would you recommend? 

 

P.s. sorry for any errors, i will correct it later, now i need do study for the mocks

Edited December 13, 2016 by matbla

[Arrowhead]

On 14/12/2016 at 0:10 AM, matbla said:

QUOTE

1. I am not sure what branch of law i would like to do. Even though everybody in my family do law, i am not that attracted to any of the specific branches. Since i am interested in political philosophy, and have spotted that there are some seductive ; )  degrees combining law with political philosophy or economics (the one in KCL: called PoliticsPhilosophyLaw) and award a llb diploma, they seem tempting but simultaneously im kind of afraid to apply there. What I am trying to say is, i am not sure what law firms, companies etc. think of them- are the graduates of PPL in a way underprivileged, less attractive to the companies?

Not at all!  Since you are applying to the UK and I assume plan to practise law there one day, roughly half of incoming trainee solicitors/pupil barristers every year never studied law degrees.  They completed non-law degrees in History, Politics, Philosophy, Sciences, Maths and everything else and then completed a Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) and were then officially on the same track as straight law students.  So feel free to study Political Philosophy and do not feel pressured to even do a combined Law degree, there is no need.

It's okay to not have any specific areas of law in mind at the stage you're at.  I certainly didn't know what I wanted to do at your age.  I think I figured that out about 6 months after I started working at a law firm when I was 23!

2. I am not an excellent student- i predict having about 38 points  (im in the middle of the first grade ),what universities would you recommend? Ive been thinking of these, but now, i dont really know what to choose, since i want to be honest with myself about the possible grades: KCL, LSE, Edinburgh, Nottingham, Bristol. All seem to be decent, and relatively possible to get into but y'know ...

I was predicted 38 as well, it's enough to apply to most top law schools in the UK.

3. Is there any other country but the UK (and Ireland) in which i can study law in english? I mean, study from the very beginning, not like in the US (where it is only a postgraduate degree)?

Australia as well, it is a 5-year degree there.  You can also study Law in English in Singapore.  But really, you have to think about it pragmatically.  Where do you want to work after you're done studying?  In the UK?  EU?  US?  Middle East?  That makes a huge difference.  If you want to be a lawyer in Poland or somewhere in the EU, then your most obvious option for a Law degree taught in English is the UK.  It's also most easily transferrable.  UK and US lawyers are the ones who generally can move abroad for work if they want to, not that others cannot, just that these two qualifications seem to appear more commonly in my experience.

4. Is it possible to to the undergraduate degree in the UK and then study law in America? I know that KCL, LSE and UCL have this amazing dual degree but itll be enormously hard to do it

Usually you have to be one of the top students at the LSE to get onto the Columbia exchange and get a joint LLB/JD in 4 years, I cannot speak for KCL or UCL, but I imagine the requirements are similarly high.  It is certainly possible to do an undergraduate degree in the UK and then study Law in the US, but this is a very expensive endeavour, especially since you can just do the GDL which is enough to be eligible in the UK (although internationally the GDL is not as prestigious/recognised as a law degree would be).  If you have the money to spend and are ready and willing to dedicate 6 years of your life to university, then by all means, go for it.

5. Another question, and probably the most important of all of these: I do have problems with Polish HL but if i change it to polish sl, i will not do English A SL (english b hl instead ). I dont know if it is better to really know english or, to have a better grade from polish... What would you recommend? 

Doesn't really matter.  As far as UK universities are concerned, English B is enough to meet entry standards as far as I know, so you can be exempted from sitting the IELTS exam.  You should take an IB subject combination that maximises your chances to get the highest scores possible.

My advice

You seem to be worried about a lot of smaller, irrelevant details.  If you go back and read this thread from the beginning you will find a lot of useful information on how law degrees and legal practice work that I think should clear up the majority of your doubts.

The biggest thing for you to decide is if you can commit to a three-year law degree, especially in the UK at undergraduate level.  It is not an easy degree and is very challenging and demanding, speaking from experience, you have to want to do it to be able to get through it.

Hope that helps and let me know if you have any other questions.

Cheers

Arrowhead.

Edited December 20, 2016 by Arrowhead

[Richard Stifler]

Hey there Arrow Head,

I am on my 2nd year and I am planning to go study English and American Literature and Creative Writing. Writing is my passion and despite not being a safe option I think i have to take it otherwise i would be frustrated and feeling guilty. However, law is also on of my main interests and an area which, like the arts and literature, I also reveal some appetence (I could choose basically most humanities-oriented degrees). The thing is I thought about after taking a lit degree, i could take law just to reconcile it with lit. the lit course encompasses an year abroad In the us, which is a place I would gladly like to live. Do you think it would be possible for me to then take law there or do a conversion course if i decide to take it somewhere else and then live in the us? 

[Arrowhead]

On 24/12/2016 at 5:56 PM, Richard Stifler said:

Hey there Arrow Head,

I am on my 2nd year and I am planning to go study English and American Literature and Creative Writing. Writing is my passion and despite not being a safe option I think i have to take it otherwise i would be frustrated and feeling guilty. However, law is also on of my main interests and an area which, like the arts and literature, I also reveal some appetence (I could choose basically most humanities-oriented degrees). The thing is I thought about after taking a lit degree, i could take law just to reconcile it with lit. the lit course encompasses an year abroad In the us, which is a place I would gladly like to live. Do you think it would be possible for me to then take law there or do a conversion course if i decide to take it somewhere else and then live in the us? 

Practising law in the US is very, very different from practising law in the UK.  If you want to practise in the US eventually, you would have to complete your undergraduate degree in Lit/Creative Writing, then study for the LSAT (US Entrance Exam for Law Schools) and get into Graduate School for Law (because Law can only be studied in the US after you have completed an undergraduate degree).

After you complete a three-year law degree in a US law school (this is called a JD), you then have to sit the Bar exam for the US State in which you want to live/practise and after clearing the Bar exam you can start practising law.

It is very difficult to be a UK qualified lawyer or have a UK law degree and try to sell that to a US law firm to practise there.  If you do complete a UK law degree and then work for the London office of a US law firm and perform really well, you could, maybe, push to be moved to one of the US offices.  But this is not guaranteed and also, I would think, would depend on what area of law you want to practise in the US.  Something like mergers and acquisitions or straightforward corporate law is much more easily transferred than say litigation, which is very country-specific.

Also, if you're not a US citizen, it makes staying there long-term for work more challenging as you would need a US law firm to sponsor your visa.  So things are tricky if the US is your aim.  You would have to be very organised and high achieving in order to stand a chance with there, but if you're focused and determined that this is what you want and willing to take the financial risk, then go for it.

[matbla]

Hi, I got two more questions, and would appreciate an answer : )

I am thinking of King's college standard Law degree (not the one mentioned in my previous post) and the entry requirement is 35 points with 7,6,6 at HL. But is it really enough to be offered a place? From what I've found out, some 'worse' universities have higher requirements....

The other question (tell me if there has already been posted a similar one) is, how to prepare for the lnat exams? I know that it is extremely hard and wanted to know, how to achieve success ; )

Btw;
"The biggest thing for you to decide is if you can commit to a three-year law degree, especially in the UK at undergraduate level.  It is not an easy degree and is very challenging and demanding, speaking from experience, you have to want to do it to be able to get through it."

You know, it is hard to say a priori if  you want something or not   Maybe it is just me but those existential questions has always been too hard to answer, thus, i thought of law as the degree which opens and does not close doors.

 

 

[Arrowhead]

2 hours ago, matbla said:

Hi, I got two more questions, and would appreciate an answer : )

I am thinking of King's college standard Law degree (not the one mentioned in my previous post) and the entry requirement is 35 points with 7,6,6 at HL. But is it really enough to be offered a place? From what I've found out, some 'worse' universities have higher requirements....

The other question (tell me if there has already been posted a similar one) is, how to prepare for the lnat exams? I know that it is extremely hard and wanted to know, how to achieve success ; )

Btw;
"The biggest thing for you to decide is if you can commit to a three-year law degree, especially in the UK at undergraduate level.  It is not an easy degree and is very challenging and demanding, speaking from experience, you have to want to do it to be able to get through it."

You know, it is hard to say a priori if  you want something or not   Maybe it is just me but those existential questions has always been too hard to answer, thus, i thought of law as the degree which opens and does not close doors.

 

 

King's used to ask for 38 points from IB students (back in 2010 when I was applying).  But they reviewed their internal policies and came to a decision that 35 points is enough provided that the IB students achieve 766 at HL (which in most universities' opinions would be the equivalent of achieving an A*AA at A-Level, which is the minimum entry requirement for Law at these universities).  So King's is one of the few universities in the UK that has actually acknowledged that doing the IB is in fact more challenging than A-Levels and that poorer SL scores should not prevent a high achieving IB student from attending their law school.

As a general point, when UK universities state their minimum entry requirements, then that means that if you achieve that score, you are officially qualified enough to study their programmes.  It doesn't matter if 10 other students have 45 predicted, they will consider your application equally and give it the same amount of weight.

There are practice tests for the LNAT available on the LNAT website, google it.  There are also some practice books available, you can find them on Amazon.  A lot of students have used these in the past.  It's a test to essentially assess your ability and comfort with the English language.  Try some of the practice tests and see how well you do in the multiple choice sections.  If you're scoring 28-30/42 or higher, you're doing well.

My earlier point was simply to advise you to do your research: read some of the first-year textbooks at King's for the Law degree and see if they interest you.  If you do not find the information interesting or engaging, at least to some extent, then ask yourself if you would want to incur the financial risk of pursuing a degree you're perhaps not likely to enjoy.  A Law degree may open doors to some extent, but so would an Economics or Accounting or Science or Maths degree.  At the end of the day, you need to not only complete a Law degree, but you also need to get at least an Upper Second Class Honours in it for it to be meaningful.  It is challenging to achieve that overall grade if you find the degree uninteresting.  So, all I'm saying is: be careful, do your research, and be as sure as you can about your decision before committing to it.

[JackieDee]

Hello

I had a few questions.

1. I read the differences between solicitors and barristers post early on in this topic and I was wondering if you could tell me more about which side of the profession has more international travel opportunities in their usual line of work?

2. I know there have been various answers about using a law degree from one country and then working in another, but then is there no mobility between say the lawyers in the London office of a law firm going to maybe work in the Paris or Sydney or some other country's office?  Permanently or even temporarily?  How would that work?

3. I saw from your profile that you are nearing the end of your training with a big law firm.  Being near to the end of this long process, what would you advise students considering this route to be aware of so that they can make an informed decision about whether or not they want to go down this route?  Can this advice be applied equally regardless of the country that the students want to eventually practise law in?  How would it vary, if not?

4.  I've read in the media about how difficult entry into the profession is.  I've alread from you and in other advice forums that the people in your position say that if you have good grades, go to a good uni and check all the boxes, there is no reason you shouldn't get through.  How do you self-assess if you have in fact checked all the boxes?

5.  I've been researching online and law firms have a lot of first-year taster events and such, I plan to apply for these.  Would you maybe have time to review some of my applications or give me some general advice in application writing?  Also, does attending these sessions help when applying for training positions in the years to come?

Sorry for the long list!  I've been procrastinating on my studying and remembered a comment from you to be forewarned.  There is so much information out there that it can be overwhelming and I feel like the prospect of actually breaking into the profession is a very daunting task!

[Arrowhead]

2 hours ago, JackieDee said:

X

1. I read the differences between solicitors and barristers post early on in this topic and I was wondering if you could tell me more about which side of the profession has more international travel opportunities in their usual line of work?

Completely varies depending on the area of practice you're in.  Something like international arbitration, or corporate work for cross-border deals, involves a lot of travel, tax, on the other hand, not as much in comparison.  There are more solicitor roles in general and law firms, at least the bigger ones, offer a lot of travel opportunities to work in their foreign offices.  Barristers have to spend (usually) the first decade or so (give or take a few years), honing their skills and developing their abilities.  So you will often see them travel to different courts all over England, representing clients.  International travel tends to play in once they've become more senior and again, depending on the nature of their practice, a barrister representing small- or medium-sized companies or individuals wouldn't need to travel as much as say a barrister repsenting coca-cola.

2. I know there have been various answers about using a law degree from one country and then working in another, but then is there no mobility between say the lawyers in the London office of a law firm going to maybe work in the Paris or Sydney or some other country's office?  Permanently or even temporarily?  How would that work?

Different jurisdictions have different rules.  Take Singapore for example.  International lawyers (i.e. qualified to practice abroad in countries like the UK, US, etc.) are absolutely not allowed to represent clients in Singaporean courts, cannot engage in contentious litigation disputes, and cannot ever sign off on giving Singapore law-related advice to clients without having it signed off by a Singapore qualified lawyer.  However, you can still practise, as a foreign lawyer, in Singapore.  This is usually in the context of big law firms that have clients who do business in many countries all over the world.  So you can continue to advise your international clients, and when matters of Singapore law or the SIngapore courts come up, you, as a foreign lawyer, can liaise with the local lawyers to create your client's case strategy.  In such situations, you would be working in the official capacity of a 'consultant' and not a lawyer, even though you would be doing legal work as a lawyer. 

Foreign lawyers usually practise law through this means when they are working in a jurisdiction that they are not qualified in.

3. I saw from your profile that you are nearing the end of your training with a big law firm.  Being near to the end of this long process, what would you advise students considering this route to be aware of so that they can make an informed decision about whether or not they want to go down this route?  Can this advice be applied equally regardless of the country that the students want to eventually practise law in?  How would it vary, if not?

My advice would be to do as many internships as you can.  Being a lawyer is not the same kind of work across the profession.  Working for a big law firm comes with a unique set of challenges and opportunities that you wouldn't have in a smaller law firm with say only 2-5 partners and one office, and vice versa.  Work experience at different kinds of firms will give you a much better idea of what kind of work would suit you.

Many law students have aspirations to work for big law firms.  They have all seen the TV shows and what not.  The internal office politics are a real thing, you do have to deal with very different and often difficult personality types, especially when you're a junior, and that's even before you start looking at managing the egos and wishes of your big name clients.  The hours can be very, very long, but usually a long, terrible period is followed by a period of respite.  The work tends to come in waves.

Different jurisdictions have different approaches to training junior lawyers, and this again varies based on the individual culture of the particular firm that you have picked.

• Big US law firms are notoriously hardcore, they will beast you, but they will also pay you obscene amounts of money. 
• UK firms pay lesser, but the training is good, and you can maintain some semblance of a life outside of work, but again, it comes in waves. 
• Australian law firms can go one way or another.  It usually comes down to who your supervisor is and what your firm's culture tends to be like.  But from everything I have heard from Australian-trained colleagues, it is no different from the UK experience. 
• Singapore law firms have at this point become a meat market, you will be paid pennies compared to firms in the US, UK and Australia but you will still be equally beasted.
• Indian law firms are difficult to get a foothold in.  The legal market is fragmented.  There are one or two big law firms with international links and then many smaller national ones.  There is a face-showing culture (from my personal experience and that of many of my friends working in Indian law firms at present), the hierarchy also tends to be more rigid.  Again, these are generalisations, your experience need not be like this.

If there are queries you have about any other specific jurisdictions, let me know and I can tell you what I have seen or heard from colleagues who have trained there.  All of the individual jurisdiction observations above apply only to the bigger law firms.  The culture and experience of smaller, regional or boutique law firms is likely to be completely different in each of these jurisdictions.

4.  I've read in the media about how difficult entry into the profession is.  I've alread from you and in other advice forums that the people in your position say that if you have good grades, go to a good uni and check all the boxes, there is no reason you shouldn't get through.  How do you self-assess if you have in fact checked all the boxes?

The check boxes are not intangibles that are difficult to self-assess in any way.  The usual list is as follows:

• Good grades (from school all the way through uni and explanations/extenuating circumstances if the grades are not good for any reason)
• Intelligence
• Good variety of extracurricular activities
• Leadership positions
• Experience working in a team
• Demonstrated understanding that you have read up on what the law firm you're applying to is about and what they're looking for
• Experience to deal with pressuried situations/conditions and still be able to deliver
• Unafraid of long hours or hard work with a good work ethic
• Good communication skills (both written and oral)
• Strong grasp of the language (English in the UK)

The intangibles part usually adjudged at the interview stage is if you have a good personality that could mesh well with the people in the firm and an ability to get along and chill with all sorts of people.

5.  I've been researching online and law firms have a lot of first-year taster events and such, I plan to apply for these.  Would you maybe have time to review some of my applications or give me some general advice in application writing?  Also, does attending these sessions help when applying for training positions in the years to come?

Happy to help!

Attending such sessions will help you in the sense that they are an opportunity to show your face to the graduate recruitment team and make an impression.  It will usually benefit your application to have had the opportunity to present a personal touch when you eventually apply for vacation scheme (internship) or training contract positions as opposed to the opposite when you're just another name on a page.

Hope this advice is helpful and drop me a line if you have any further questions.

Cheers

Arrowhead