Somewhat lost amid last week's hectic news schedule, a deal that boasts huge significance for the legal industry was finally confirmed: the sale of the College of Law to Montagu Private Equity.

Yet it's hard to overstate the ramifications of the sale of Europe's largest law school. The attraction for its new owners is obvious. The College has substantial resource, a commanding position in one of the world's largest legal markets and has achieved a combination of prestige and thrusting spirit rarely found in higher education. It remains one of the few UK education institutions that could conceivably assert itself globally and challenge the orthodoxies of academia, especially now that it has won more freedom to move and increased access to investment.

The sale is also a triumph for the College after a torrid patch in the 1990s and must be seen as a personal vindication for its no-nonsense chief executive Nigel Savage, who led the school's commercial fight-back. Given the College's performance, I always found sniping about his generous pay deal slightly mystifying.

With all this to recommend the sale, what is it that gives me pause for thought? For one, the College shouldn't kid itself about the realities of getting into bed with private equity. While Montagu looks a good match given its reputation as a conservative buy-and-build investor, it will be a robustly commercial owner. There could also be strains in a leveraged takeover, given the current pressure on the College's core vocational training business.

But a more fundamental concern is the potential long-term impact on the College's reputation of taking the private equity shilling. Five years ago, Legal Week commented on the extent to which the dominance and growth of the College and arch-rival BPP were attracting controversy. Many resent their influence, commerciality and the charging of high fees to aspiring lawyers with little chance of a career in law (far more justifiably for barrister training than solicitors).

Such controversies have only grown since then. At times, the leading law schools have shown a lack of sensitivity to such concerns. They should be more careful. For big institutions, brand isn't a problem until it is; once a tipping point is reached, severe reputational damage can quickly ensue. Law schools are particularly vulnerable because a vibrant online community will quickly punish educational shortcomings or harsh treatment of students. If I were running a major law school, I'd make sure I was being suitably generous on scholarships and widening access because, in hard-nosed terms, the brand will probably need the 'insurance'.

I hope the College manages to navigate such obstacles. Despite a few PR own goals it has consistently innovated and its core customers – law firms – widely believe it has raised its game over the last decade. If the College can keep its reputational house in order, national champion status surely awaits.