The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Aspiring lawyers who sat the National Admissions Test for Law (LNAT) have been outraged after failing to receive their results due to a major system error.
The company in charge of administering the LNAT, Pearson Vue, allegedly offered no explanation to the students apart from an email a day later claiming results would be sent later that day (1 February).
Despite this, on receipt of the results a number of students noticed the marks were incorrect, with the score being out of 30 rather than 42, again with no explanation.
One law applicant with offers from two LNAT universities said: “Lots of students have been incredibly exasperated, and, in many cases now, extremely disappointed by Pearson’s extremely unprofessional handling of the situation, particularly as candidates were required to pay £50 to sit the aptitude test.”
Almost 40 students nationwide have contacted Lawyer2B.com, many of whom sat the exam back in November 2010, complaining about the incident, airing the uncertainty it has caused and describing it as “a day of shambles”.
Students sit the computer-based test at over 500 test centres in 165 countries around the world.
Another student who is yet to receive their result said: “I am currently in hysterics, do not know how to deal with myself, and quite frankly I am disgusted at the horrendous state of affairs of these past two days.”
A spokesman for Pearson Vue said in a statement: “Pearson VUE apologises for any inconvenience or problems caused to candidates of the LNAT test. As posted on the LNAT website homepage earlier this week, there was a short delay in the release of scores, though all scores were issued by midday on Wednesday 2 February.
All actual scores recorded by candidates were conveyed accurately to candidates at all times. A minority of candidates were sent incorrect information as to the maximum possible score; this issue was rectified as quickly as possible and all such candidates were sent a new communication with correct information as to the maximum possible score.”
LNAT was developed by a consortium of UK universities, including Birmingham, Bristol, Durham and University College London as a fair way to assess a candidate’s potential to study law at undergraduate level.