Application

 Oxford

 Pembroke

 Law

 2007

 offer made

Applicant

 A-levels

 pre-qualification

 home

 United Kingdom

 Independent – selective

 yes (8 A*,2 A)

A-levels

(A at AS)

(A at AS)

(A at AS)

(A at AS)

Details about the offer

 conditional

AAA, Offered three “A”s – no specified subjects

yes

no

 offer met

Decisions about the application

Well, rightly or wrongly, it’s supposed to be the best particularly for law.

Oxford as a city appeals more and, again rightly or wrongly, I had this feeling that Oxford was better for law.

Always wanted to do law – no epiphany, no “sudden realisation” just always wanted to do it. Oddly, my school was not encouraging. They said do English and then do a law conversion. Seems to be common advice these days. Don’t know why.

Compact, geographically small, strong for law, very friendly. Accommodation not the cheapest. Went to the open day and loved it. Went round lots of other colleges, but settled on Pembroke. The law tutors were very friendly.

Preparation

no

No help from school. They tried to talk me out of doing law. Read “Letters to a law student” (excellent, excellent, essential reading for anyone considering law. Had a couple of “legal problem mock interviews” with a barrister friend of the family. This was very helpful.

Read “Letters to a law student” – essential. Then find a lawyer who has been to Oxbridge and get him/her to take you through legal problems. That is what you will get in the interview.

Interview

yes

yes, did LNAT. Hated it. Messed it up. 18/30

no

No.

no

No

Two interviews, each with two of the Pembroke lawyers. They were tough interviews but all four of the tutors were incredibly friendly and polite. Absolutely no intimidation at all. After the interviews, I was even more keen to go to Pembroke because I thought I really wanted to be taught by these people.

I was asked NOTHING about my personal life, sport, music, etc etc. It was all about law and legal problems. For the first interview I had half an hour or so to read an article on the meaning of “intent”. It was complicated but there was enough time to read it thoroughly. The first part of the interview was on the article, and then some questions about intent as applied to murder. As I said, the interviewers were incredibly polite and friendly, but pushed me very very hard. After murder, I was asked questions about when you might/might not be obliged to pay someone who washed your car in a supermarket car park.

Second interview was more general. Questions about how I might make laws about drug abuse if I was a dictator and then questions about the law and morality. Should the law enforce morals. They tied me up in knots.

Smart casual, because that was how I felt most comfortable. But it really really does not matter. I am now certain that they do not care a jot what you wear.

Impressions

Really friendly. Fell in love with it. Desperate to go back!

Huge room with ensuite. (Others not so lucky). The furniture was seriously tatty. But who cares?

OK.

They were so kind and friendly. They made me even more desperate to go.

Yes, fine. Welcoming.

Final stage

Awful. I kept reliving the interviews and was plagued with “L’esprit d’escalier” and convinced myself I was not going to get an offer.

It was a thick envelope, so that boded well. I new it was going to arrive that morning. I waited for the postman. Took me a while to summon up the nerve to open it and didn’t really read it coherently. Then I phoned my parents who were both at work.

Looking back

Yes.

If you want to read law, don’t let your school talk you out of it. And read “Letters to a law student”