Posted on

Sweden’s ‘one-stop-shop’ versus the ‘best-of-breed’

Senior partner departures, lateral team hires, boutique firm establishments – these are all gold dust for Legal 500 researchers seeking to determine which are the serious players in any given legal market. I have covered some countries – such as India, Malta, and Nigeria – where these changes are few and far between. On the other hand, recent developments on the Swedish legal scene have been marked by more twists and turns than a finely crafted kannebulle.

Following 2019’s establishment of intellectual property boutique Westerberg & Partners and corporate outfit Cirio Advokatbyrå – a spin-off of MAQS Advokatbyrå’s Stockholm office – 2020 kicked off with a market first. Advokatfirmaet Schjødt, one of the leading commercial firms in Norway, has entered the Swedish market by way of acquiring the mid-sized, full-service firm Hamilton Advokatbyrå.

“While Sweden and her Nordic neighbours share similar legislative frameworks, any market-entry strategy is bound to encounter some roadblocks along the way”

On the face of it, the advantages for an international firm in establishing a Stockholm office are obvious. The thriving capital markets are considered the de facto Nordic hub for international investors and, despite talks of a recession, industry remains strong with more unicorns produced per capita in Sweden than anywhere else barring Silicone Valley. The dynamic, forward-thinking economy has brought global firms from London, the US, and other parts of northern Europe (most notably Finland’s Roschier and Hannes Snellman) to the fold. So why have we waited until now to witness an entrance to the market from Sweden’s important cultural and economic neighbour, and will the Schjødt in the dark pay off?

On the face of it, one potential difficulty will be managing Schjødt’s transition from a collaborative cross-border counsel to direct market competitor. Since Swedish firms and their clients benefit from affiliations with others across the Nordics (and vice versa), could Schjødt be taking the risk of burning bridges with the already established names on the market which will now see it as a direct competitor? According to Johan Kahn, co-founder of Kahn Pedersen, that could be the case.

‘I believe this would be a natural consequence of a cross-border merger of this type,’ he says. ‘If I were a client I would consider it a benefit to have seamless services in day-to-day multijurisdictional matters. If, however, a matter is really important I would definitely prefer the “best-of-breed” approach coordinated by a lead counsel I know and trust.’

While Sweden and her Nordic neighbours share similar legislative frameworks, any market-entry strategy is bound to encounter some roadblocks along the way. I ask Kahn, what are the primary issues a new player on the scene faces when it comes to understanding the Swedish client and how a domestic transaction works?

‘I think the Swedish buyers of legal services are less “transactional” and more “relationship” oriented in their view of legal advisors,’ he replies. ‘This is in many ways great for both parties involved but would require more thought when it comes to client management. I also believe that few qualified Swedish buyers of legal services appreciate junior staffing and partners who are simply overlooking the work. Partner time and top-tier skill is required.’

“Few qualified buyers of legal services would value the ‘one-stop-shop’ higher than the ‘best-of-breed’ for important matters”

The partner loyalty of Swedish clients is evident through the extremely high level of client retention when it comes to lateral movement; the successful recent establishment of boutique firm Westerberg & Partners is partly due to that loyalty. This may well be the exception to the rule though – while client loyalty is evident, numerous voices have also suggested that it’s becoming increasingly important to be a ‘one-stop-shop’ in the Swedish scene. So what does the future hold for Swedish boutiques?

‘I think there is a fair amount of wishful thinking in this viewpoint,’ says Khan. ‘Few qualified buyers of legal services would value the “one-stop-shop” higher than the “best-of-breed” for important matters. I think most peers and clients agree that the firms facing the real existential challenge would be the large number of mid-sized and smaller large firms that indeed provide a one-stop-shop but that are not top tier in any area of practice. I would guess only a smaller number of clients would find such an offer attractive in any other way than related to specific individuals or lowest-bidder fees.

‘None of these motives are sustainable. At the end of the day it is all about the founding individuals. Their standing in the market is of course an important factor, but equally also is the ability to build a new business which requires quite a complex set of skills.’

This mid-market squeeze is likely a primary motivator for Hamilton’s merger with Schjødt, with the key to success hinging on client and senior talent retention. And bearing in mind the level of senior talent remains the same, regardless of how many new players set up shop, retention strategy looks set to become more competitive down the line. But what are other typical cultural or economic hurdles that must be dealt when it comes to a merger in the Swedish legal market?

‘Any differences in profit per partner, client acquisition, and the amount of billable partner hours must be dealt with. This is of course quite similar to the situation where firms in the same jurisdiction merge and it is evident that it could be a real challenge. I am sure any merger would draw some blood since not all partners would be willing to accept the results of the compromises that have to be made.’

On that note, I asked Eric Halvarsson, banking and finance partner at Schjødt’s Stockholm (hear that Champagne pop) office, what the biggest challenges going forward will be in terms of recruiting and retaining talent. From my observation, Swedish clients are particularly loyal to the individual, with ‘brand power’ not having the gravitas it perhaps has in London or elsewhere. So will it further become an employee market down the line?

‘The Swedish legal market has indeed traditionally been driven to a large extent by personal relations between clients and individual lawyers while brand recognition has been of more limited value, although not insignificant,’ says Halvarsson. ‘That is a situation that we see changing, with clients taking a more institutional approach to allocating its external legal work, more akin to the approach in the UK and parts of continental Europe.

 

‘With the significant footprint in the Nordic region of our combined firm, we believe that we are well positioned to capitalise on these changes in the market. Similarly, we believe the size of the firm and the strength of the brand in multiple markets will make us very attractive in the recruitment market. It is encouraging that we have already seen an uptick in the number of applications from law students and unsolicited approaches from talent wanting to join us.’

 

One certainty is that other firms throughout Sweden and Norway will be following the pioneering work of the Hamilton/Schjødt merger as an indication for whether others will follow suit. As Schjødt’s head of dispute resolution, Per M. Ristvedt, recently mentioned in an interview with The Legal 500’s Caribbean and Nordics editor, Amy Ulliott, (fivehundred, November 2019), ‘we know that other law firms have contemplated this, but none have had the guts to try it. When the merger was announced several other firms in Norway complemented us and actually told us: “This is impressive, only Schjødt could do this!”’ So, in short, watch this space.

Posted on

Estonia’s legal market – serene despite economic uncertainty

Estonia has maintained its strong transactional environment despite concerns over an economic downturn, with the country’s favourable regulatory environment remaining attractive for foreign and domestic businesses. Estonia’s long-standing record of low taxes and favourable regulation, combined with the country’s innovative approaches to attracting investment, such as the nation’s e-residency scheme, has long seen the Baltic state as a bastion of safety for business and a reliable source of work for law firms engaged in transactions and technology.

Prime Minister Jüri Ratas has held power since 2016, initially in a coalition between his own Centre Party, the centre-right Pro Patria, and the centre-left Social Democrats. The Centre Party finished second in the parliamentary election held in March 2019. Despite expectations that Ratas would cede the premiership and form a government with the election’s victor, the market-liberal Reform Party, the leader bucked expectations and instead formed a three-party coalition with the conservative Isamaa and national-conservative EKRE. The inclusion of EKRE, labelled far-right by many observers, attracted criticism, amplified by the appointment of the party’s Martin Helme as finance minister. Helme has previously expressed criticism of the European Union, particularly Estonia’s participation within the Eurozone. This has sparked concerns that Estonia’s light-touch approach to regulation and business affairs may change, though no major alterations have been made at present.

M&A and real estate transactions have somewhat decreased after a boom last year, though investors remain optimistic, with a notable increase in outside investment from Asia. Blackstone’s acquisition of a majority share in Luminor Bank is now complete, with the fund now tipped to play a leading role in banking and financing work in the future. The downturn in real estate transactions can be traced to a drying up of supply following a steady stream of purchases in past years, with infrastructure and construction projects now taking up much of the market, in particular the estimated €15bn construction of a Tallinn-to-Helsinki train tunnel.

Following the money-laundering scandal, Danske Bank has dissolved its Estonian operations, with its assets purchased by several former competitors. This has produced some major opportunities for domestic firms, with the transaction-focused FORT benefitting especially, advising LHV Pank on the acquisition of Danske’s private loan portfolio for an estimated €410m.

“M&A and real estate transactions have somewhat decreased after a boom last year, though investors remain optimistic, with a notable increase in outside investment from Asia”

The after-effects of the money-laundering scandal, notably a tightening of residency requirements for new bank accounts alongside renewed due diligence for investors, have led to a boom in alternative payment services, with many fintech companies seeking banking licences and establishing payment platforms. This innovation can also be seen in financing work, with ICOs, crypto, and crowdfunding transactions increasingly common. These developments have worked to the benefit of smaller firms focused on growth clients such as LEXTAL, NJORD Law Firm, and Hedman Partners, though traditional powerhouse firms have also seen plenty of work.

In general, the ‘big three’ of Cobalt, Ellex, and Sorainen have maintained their dominant market position, aided by connections to other Baltic and Europe-wide law firms. This has been especially apparent in transactions and banking work, with smaller firms unable to match the strong international client list of these firms, though opportunities have arisen in some cases, as seen with the LHV Pank transaction.

The slight downturn in M&A transactions has led to an increase in disputes, with many businesses seeking to consolidate, while real estate-related disputes are also on the rise for similar reasons. Additionally, actions against state authorities have increased thanks to new policies on tax and public transport pricing.

“The slight downturn in M&A transactions has led to an increase in disputes, with many businesses seeking to consolidate, while real estate-related disputes are also on the rise for similar reasons”

Arbitration has become more popular as a dispute resolution mechanism, something previously less common in Estonia. Other prominent pieces of litigation include anti-money laundering (AML), corporate malfeasance, and public corruption cases, with the Edgar Sarvisaar and Port of Tallinn cases particularly prominent on the latter front. A former prime minister and mayor of Tallinn, Sarvisaar stands accused of multiple instances of bribery and corruption, though he has presently been ruled medically unfit to stand trial. The Port of Tallinn case has implicated a wide range of executives from various businesses, providing multiple opportunities for litigation-focused firms to pick up high-profile mandates.

Contentious work, particularly, and tax advice are areas where smaller domestic firms flourish alongside Cobalt, Ellex, and Sorainen, with Leadell PILV and Glikman ALVIN Levin especially impressive in both areas, while tax boutique HansaLaw has also been recognised by clients and peers alike for the strong capabilities of its partners. In the field of employment, specialist lawyer Rando Maisvee has won plaudits for his work for Nordic-wide firm Magnusson, having one of his damages proceedings aired live on Facebook by the Estonian court system as an example of the ‘Art of Justice’ (in Estonian). Maisvee has recently set up his own firm, MOSS Legal.

Major international firms present in Estonia include Eversheds Sutherland, as well as the likes of KPMG and PwC. These Estonian outposts are largely mid-market players, though KPMG and PwC are understandably strong in tax advice, while Eversheds Sutherland’s employment practice has been a market leader in politically-sensitive workplace harassment matters in the past year.

The end of the GDPR rollout has seen firms re-orient to work on data protection more broadly on behalf of corporate clients, alongside Estonia’s traditional focus on start-ups and growth companies. Additionally, the alignment of Estonia’s trade mark system with the European Union is now complete, leading to a new wave of mandates relating to trademarks and copyrights.

After several years of upheaval the legal market has remained relatively stable, with the most notable development being the creation of Cuesta Law Office by two former partners at Leadell PILV. Firms such as Derling Primus, TGS Baltic, and TARK maintain a prominent market position despite their involvement in the series of mergers and consolidations that occurred in recent years.

In a global economy increasingly subject to dire warnings of recession, Estonia remains a safe bet for international investors, aided by a legal market that features strong local counsel, Baltic-wide network firms, and three strong firms able to manage high-profile and high-value work on behalf of major multinationals.

Posted on

Anand Sharma: We are distinctly different

Given your experience in having studied mechanical engineering and then working as a space engineer at NASA, why then did you decide to study law and pursue a legal career?

Law was not a career track for me when I was an undergrad. I really did see myself working as an engineer and actually continuing on the path in engineering all the way through to a doctorate degree. However, what I found when I got into practice working at NASA was that the work was exciting, but it just wasn’t the right fit for me.

So, I looked at different options, including business school. Even then, law was not one of my considerations until I was visiting my uncle in Rochester, who worked at Xerox as one of their chief inventors, and he suggested I come into the office and meet the patent attorneys there. Talking with them and learning about how they use their science backgrounds in combination with their advocacy skills was somewhat of a revelation. I didn’t know that was a career option, and that’s what put me on the path to law school. I was at Xerox in January, sat for the last possible LSAT exam you could sit for to apply to law school, then I applied, and six or seven months later started law school.

Even through law school and up until I summered at Finnegan, I still wasn’t convinced it was the right decision for me. But at Finnegan I got to see how it worked in practice and how I could marry science and the law, and it was truly a perfect fit for me.

“We work hard to remember and remain guided by the vision of the two founders of the firm, Marc Finnegan and Doug Henderson”

You started as an associate with Finnegan in 1997 and made partner in 2006. Would you say the managing partner role or a senior firm leadership position was something you aspired to?

It’s somewhat similar to the law school example in that law firm leadership was not on my radar. When I made partner in 2006, I mostly focused on litigation in the district courts and the US International Trade Commission (ITC), and I was thoroughly enjoying my practice.

What happened was, about a year after I made partner, I spoke to our managing partner about some diversity initiatives and ideas I had about what we could do to complement our existing diversity and inclusion efforts. When I had that conversation, I thought I was passing those ideas on to management for management to implement them. But our managing partner said he liked the ideas and wanted me to lead our efforts as the firm’s first diversity and inclusion chair. So, that was essentially my entrée into leadership.

I spent about four years in that role, and found that over time I really enjoyed creating and implementing strategies. After serving as the diversity chair, I then had the opportunity to lead the firm’s mechanical practice group. From there I transitioned to join the management committee. Each subsequent role was a three-year term and a distinct model to Finnegan’s leadership development. During that time of experiencing different areas of leadership within the firm, it really gave me a chance to learn the different aspects of the firm – including our talent and our business. It wasn’t aspirational, it was more transitional in the same way as you go from being a junior associate to being the first chair litigator.

You mention D&I so we will come back to that in more detail. First, how would you define the culture at Finnegan?

We take our culture somewhat seriously – and I am sure all firms are the same way. For us, we work hard to remember and remain guided by the vision of the two founders of the firm, Marc Finnegan and Doug Henderson. Doug would often say their goal was to create a first class, full-service intellectual property law firm that produces top quality work in a collegial and enjoyable atmosphere. So it is not just that we are recognised as a leader in intellectual property, but we want to ensure that we work in an enjoyable environment. We are equally as proud of the recognition we get within the legal industry for our expertise as we are for our quality of life and the way that the attorneys and the staff value working at the firm.

We have tried to maintain this over time as we have grown. We now have ten offices, though we try not to operate as ten separate offices – we operate as one firm and look at our clients as firm clients who have available to them the full expertise of the firm. We look to maintain the same culture and sustain an environment of high-quality work, collegiality, teamwork, and respect. Something that Doug used to talk about, and something that you really start to understand as you get more senior in your practice, is that it is a circle: you strive for good clients who give you good work, and that good work allows you to employ good attorneys, and those good attorneys again allow you to get the good clients with the good work… and the circle continues!

What are your main areas of focus as managing partner?

When I stepped into this role, I was somewhat blessed as the firm has long had a reputation as a leader in intellectual property. So, for me, one of the primary goals is to maintain and grow Finnegan’s reputation in that regard.

What I also wanted to do, even though I had the opportunity to gain management experience in previous roles before becoming managing partner, is learn all aspects of the business, particularly related to the other parts of the firm that I didn’t previously have exposure to, and I wanted to meet all of the members of the firm. I started by meeting the partners and attorneys, but then I met with all of the different departments within the firm. For example our paralegal department, our IT department, and our secretarial department. I am still going through that process of meeting the departments and introducing myself. I give them a bit of my background and we discuss the strategies the firm has implemented, and the strategies that we will implement, so that everyone can be a part of one team and work together to achieve our singular goal of ensuring we are giving our clients the best work product we can in the most efficient way.

Important to IP, we are a technology firm, and we have nearly 300 lawyers that are focused on a variety of technical issues. So, another natural area of focus for our business is to leverage technology. We are looking at continued opportunities for efficiencies in the way that we deliver our legal services, and we are using technology to better manage our existing knowledge. It is all geared towards strengthening relationships with clients so we can share that knowledge more efficiently.

In working with clients, we are looking for ways in which to continue strengthening our partnerships with them. Not just on the legal services we provide, but also in the pro bono work that we do. We are starting to look at some opportunities for joint pro bono with our clients. In the area of diversity and inclusion we are also looking for more opportunities to work with clients to improve the diversity of the legal industry as a whole and not just at our firm. Often, depending on the size of an internal legal group, you may not have the bandwidth to manage a pro bono programme, or to manage some of the diversity and inclusion initiatives, but if these are things we are already doing as a firm then it is a natural fit to invite our clients to join us in these opportunities. If we have the infrastructure set up, it just makes sense to include our clients as we know these are efforts that are important to them as well.

“Overall, it is a balance of ensuring the consistency and stability that has allowed us to stay at the top, while looking for opportunities to create improvements along the way”

In the months since you have taken on the managing partner role, what changes have you made already, or what changes do you plan to make?

I am trying to balance the consistency and stability of the firm, which has helped us enjoy the reputation that we have had for many years, with introducing opportunities and ways to improve. We have implemented some changes already and many of these deal with the evolution in the industry in general, as well as feedback we get from our clients. They tend to revolve around improving the client service experience, which may include delivering some of our services through the use of technology, creating different formats for client engagement and communication, and knowing our client’s business to stay ahead of emerging client needs.

Management has tried to provide different tools within the firm to achieve these goals in terms of creating a knowledge management team, a pricing and budgeting team, and different platforms to partner with clients on the D&I or pro bono initiatives of the firm.

Because we are a firm focused on virtually all areas of technology we are looking at our internal structure, which has been tied broadly to industries, and are considering sub-groups to really showcase our technical expertise as well as our legal experience across those different areas. Overall, it is a balance of ensuring the consistency and stability that has allowed us to stay at the top, while looking for opportunities to create improvements along the way.

In light of all of that, how much time do you spend on client work versus on your managing partner responsibilities? And how do you balance them?

That certainly is a balance! We are not a firm of just one attorney or a management team of just one, and that works for both my billable practice and my efforts to manage the firm.

In terms of my billable practice, I work in teams, and what I have had to do is be more selective in the matters I take on. These are matters where I am more intimately involved, creating and implementing client strategies. From a billable practice perspective, in the past, if we were to talk about litigation, I may have been involved in eight to ten litigations at one time. Now, the number may be three to four. As for balancing the management of patent prosecution portfolios, I am also looking to other team members to help at times.

That same team approach applies in terms of management of the firm. We have a lot of different management teams, and I try to work with different groups to develop strategies and manage the implementation of those strategies. It may involve a different leadership group within the firm depending on the strategy. We have a management committee, we also have our coordinating committee where practice group leads are involved, and we have industry sub-groups that have leads as well, as well as a pro bono coordinator and a diversity and inclusion chair. So depending on the initiative that I am working on, I am always working with a team.

What I find with my practice now is that balance of client work with managing partner responsibilities changes over time. In October, I had a trial in Delaware, so there was a period during the trial when I had to lean more heavily on other members of the firm who are also in management positions, including our firm chair. Typically, the managing partner transitions to chair, so the person in the chair role was recently in the managing partner role and understands the responsibilities well. While I was at trial, I was able to share responsibility with Mark Sweet, our current chair.

Then, there are also times in the year when management responsibilities become greater – whether it is partner compensation, new partner admissions, or other things – and those are situations in which I will be more involved in the management activities and leaning on members of the client teams to make sure we are continuing to implement our client strategies. It’s a balance, and there are times when it is more challenging, but so far the balance has worked out.

“My hope is that all managing partners put great emphasis and focus on D&I efforts. For me, it is in my DNA already, so it is about continuing to improve on what we have been doing and looking for opportunities to partner with industry because this is an initiative that law firms can work together on, as well as with clients”

Since becoming managing partner, what (if anything) has surprised you the most within the firm itself and/or externally in the wider legal market?

Internally at the firm I’ve always known we had a great staff – something we have prided ourselves on over the years is not just hiring the best lawyers but hiring the best staff as well – but in the role I have now, the opportunity to work with the different chiefs and directors within the firm has increased, and I have been truly amazed by the talent that we have in all of our different departments. Working with them has really been a pleasure because they also understand the culture we talked about earlier and our business model, and when we meet one-on-one or have larger chief or director meetings it has been amazing to be more immersed in the creativity, solutions, and approach from those groups. I knew we had a great staff, but it has still been enlightening to work with them.

Externally, because I have had different management positions, I have been attuned to what is happening in the legal industry over the past few years. I try to stay abreast of the different trends in the industry either on the client side or the law firm side. I am now spending more time in that area. I think the surprise for me was when I went to my first managing partner meeting at the national scale. It really reminded me that you can sometimes live in a bubble. Within Finnegan, our management team is diverse. I am sitting here as the managing partner and our management committee is 66% diverse in terms of attorneys of colour and women attorneys. But going to that first national managing partner meeting was a quick reminder that, at least at this level of managing partner, there is not that same diversity. In a large conference room of AmLaw 100 or AmLaw 200 firms, I could quickly and easily pick out the partners of colour. I knew this was the case, but to see it was something different.

That leads well to the next question I was going to ask, which is what significance do you place on the fact that you are the first managing partner of colour within Finnegan?

I would refer back again to that national managing partner conference because that is where it really hit home. You really start to recognise that it is rare for an attorney of colour at a top law firm to be serving as managing partner. For me, it shows the firm is open in creating a pipeline that supports diversity and inclusion. It is not just me as managing partner; as I mentioned, we have a diverse management committee. To achieve that requires pipelines and efforts.

Whether you are an attorney of colour, a woman, a member of the LGBTQ community, or any group that is traditionally underrepresented in the law firm space, you look around and see who is in the leadership positions. I find that the new generation of attorneys coming out of law school are much more aware of diversity as a whole and understand the value of diversity in terms of diversity of ideas and coming to better solutions as a result. I think part of the significance also is having attorneys at the firm see that there is an opportunity within the management ranks, if that is something that interests them.

I knew taking on this role was going to require me to sacrifice certain areas of my legal practice, but because of those areas of significance, I felt it was important not just for us as a firm, but also for the industry in general. The hope is, in years from now at that national managing partner meeting, the room will look a little different.

So, to add to that, what do you think your role is in furthering the firm’s D&I efforts? And do you think you have more responsibility for this as managing partner?

As far as my management style goes, I try to place the other leaders and attorneys within the firm in positions to succeed. For me it is more about the initiatives that get implemented and succeed instead of whether I or someone else gets credit for them.

We have an excellent diversity and inclusion chair who just stepped into the role in July 2019, when I took on my current role. Her name is Mareesa Frederick, and she is one of the ITC experts at the firm. She started her career here and then went to work at the ITC for five years before returning to the firm.

Years ago, I worked with Mareesa on an initiative to try to increase the number of black attorneys in the field of intellectual property. In the area of patents, you are taking someone with a science degree, who then (in what some would call a stark shift) decides to go to law school. Like myself, that was not even known as a career path to most. Our DC office is not too far from Howard University – a historically black university – where my father studied as well as some of my uncles. We asked if we could teach a class on patent law to expose them to it. It doesn’t mean the students are necessarily going to go on to become patent attorneys, but even if they stay on their current course they will come across patent law as engineers. So, we taught that course for a number of years and there are IP attorneys in the field today that have taken that career path through the course we taught at Howard University.

Within the firm on the recruitment side, Mareesa has already had ideas for a few D&I initiatives that we have started to implement. This year we started a secondee programme for first-year law students, where a first-year summer associate will work at the firm for a number of weeks, and then they will spend another portion of the summer working in-house. We are partnering with a number of companies near a Finnegan office on this programme.

On the retention aspect, which I would say is even more important right now to ensure you are advancing people within their careers, another initiative which Mareesa proposed to the management committee, which we are going to move forward with, is for our diverse junior to mid-level attorneys to partner with members of the management committee to receive mentorship and guidance in the areas of law firm leadership.

Those are a couple of the things we are doing now, and I look forward to more initiatives coming through D&I and pro bono, as well as through pricing and knowledge management, and giving different leaders at the firm the opportunity to succeed and support them.

As far as having more responsibility as managing partner goes, my hope is that all managing partners put great emphasis and focus on D&I efforts. For me, it is in my DNA already, so it is about continuing to improve on what we have been doing and looking for opportunities to partner with industry because this is an initiative that law firms can work together on, as well as with clients. It is not something we should be competing on.

Final question: how do you think Finnegan is differentiated from your competitors?

Looking at Finnegan and who we compete against in the intellectual property space, we are distinctly different. We are a firm that is focused solely on intellectual property, and it has been our practice now for 55 years. We have nearly 350 professionals who are all focused on intellectual property, over 300 of whom have scientific degrees and most with advanced scientific degrees.

Some of our competitors may have a broader service of offerings, and intellectual property is just one of those. For Finnegan, IP is our practice. For each of the areas that fall under the intellectual property umbrella, we have been identified as leaders – whether it is litigation, prosecution, or counselling, and whether it is patents, trademarks, copyrights, or trade secrets.

One of the areas where I really feel we may be different than some of our competitors is in the types of experiences we look to give our attorneys. Because our practice is wholly IP, we make sure our attorneys have experience in the different areas of intellectual property. Often there can be separation between the prosecution side of the practice, which is the obtaining of the IP, and the enforcement side, which often results in litigation. Some firms have their attorneys choose one track over the other. We encourage our new attorneys to get experience in all areas of the litigation and transactional work. After they have experience in the different areas, we allow them to choose the kind of practice they want. For some that may be a blended practice, for others it is either as a litigator or a prosecutor.

As we see it, if you choose to become a litigator, knowledge of the process and what it takes to get a patent or trademark allows you to see things differently and become a stronger litigator. If you choose the path of prosecutor in terms of patent or trademark applications, knowing what is going to happen later to that patent or trademark really changes your approach to how you communicate with the US Patent and Trademark Office in terms of the statements you make to get that IP allowed. We believe that experience is very different from what you can get from any CLE or training class.

For us, nothing beats real-life experience. I think this has helped us to remain a leader in the intellectual property space.

Posted on

Building and sustaining a top tier litigation practice

Kirkland & Ellis benefits from a well-resourced and expert New York litigation team comprised of over 80 lawyers – including 25 partners and over 50 associates. These individuals are a key team within the overall figure of 700 Kirkland & Ellis litigators worldwide, and were described within The Legal 500’s 2019 US guide as being ‘widely regarded as leading players in the market’.

Helen Donegan spoke with three partners from the team – Stefan Atkinson, Aaron Marks, and Matt Solum – to find out what they attribute to the team’s successes and consistent status within the top legal rankings.

“Whether the case is to be tried before a jury in the Southern District, a NY Commercial Division judge, an arbitration panel, or a US Supreme Court special master, our lawyers are ready to take cases to trial and win.”

Strength of the NY team

With no fewer than eight partners from the team noted in the editorial for their 2019 tier 1 ranking (the highest number of partners noted in any 2019 editorial for tier 1 practices in this area), ‘the New York litigation team is a versatile group of hard-working, strategic, and skilful attorneys that has expertise in a number of key areas,’ confirms Marks.

Marks is one of a number of significant new hires for the New York team over the past couple of years, with the arrival of Sandra Goldstein and Atkinson from Cravath, Josh Greenblatt (along with Marks) from Kasowitz, Zach Brez from Ropes & Gray, and Bob Allen from the US Attorney’s Office. The newcomers have expanded the group’s focus and capabilities, building on pre-existing expertise within the team from partners such as Jay Lefkowitz, Lauren Casazza, Atif Khawaja, and Matt Solum, among others.

The team’s lawyers have expertise in M&A, securities, complex commercial, financial restructuring, and class action litigation, as well as in corporate governance and investigations. They regularly litigate in the Delaware Chancery Courts, New York’s Commercial Division, and federal and state courts around the country. ‘Whether the case is to be tried before a jury in the Southern District, a NY Commercial Division judge, an arbitration panel, or a US Supreme Court special master, our lawyers are ready to take cases to trial and win. This trial focus is key in achieving outstanding results for clients in settlements as well,’ says Solum.

When queried on the strength of the New York litigation team, and asked how they see themselves in terms of differentiation from competitors, the straight-forward response from Marks is: ‘The team is unique in a couple of ways. First, given the areas of expertise for the group, the team is accustomed to regularly taking on fast-moving, intense matters representing the most sophisticated of commercial clients (private equity firms and hedge funds, investment banks and other financial institutions, pharmaceutical giants, multinational corporations) – often when such clients are in circumstances of critical transactional time pressure or under great public and/or political scrutiny. Being a team of experienced trial lawyers who are accustomed to operating in pressured situations enables us to be the first call for clients in their hour of need.’

‘Second, the structure of the firm, with very large offices in DC, California, Chicago, Texas, London, Hong Kong, and several other major hubs, and the daily seamless work we do together, enables us to handle complicated cross-border and multi-jurisdictional matters in a highly coordinated and effective way.

Today, when so many major financial and other commercial disputes involve global interests, we readily tap other resources at the firm (both litigators and other practice area expertise) in order to provide clients with the best possible representation.’

Marks’ response leads on to two additional factors which are identified as key components in the team’s successes for their clients – two factors which are driven by firmwide capabilities: (i) scalability; and (ii) teamwork across Kirkland’s offices.

Scalability and the ability to staff effectively

With a large number of lawyers to call on, Kirkland prides itself on its ability to quickly assemble client teams, as well as the ability to scale teams effectively depending on the matter at hand.

As Atkinson illustrates: ‘Across its various offices, Kirkland operates as one firm, with lawyers in one city working closely with lawyers in others. This close collaboration and coordination among our attorneys allows the firm to staff its matters quickly and easily, on short notice and at any time, regardless of the size or complexity of the dispute. In a recent matter that arose over a holiday weekend, Kirkland quickly pulled together 30 of its lawyers (across multiple offices) to work on the case. Within hours, these attorneys were reviewing documents, researching the law, and preparing litigation materials. We are able to staff our matters with as many highly qualified attorneys as the circumstances require.’

With the mention of Kirkland’s various offices, the obvious next question was how the firm ensures effective collaboration across its offices, and how the New York team work with colleagues in different locations.

Diverse geographical expertise

“Across its various offices, Kirkland operates as one firm, with lawyers in one city working closely with lawyers in others.”

Solum notes his team’s ability to ‘work seamlessly across offices and practices’ and their experience with international as well as domestic work.

‘In addition to handling matters throughout the US, our team has significant experience worldwide, including in international arbitration, securities, and complex commercial litigation. Given this, we have been asked to represent clients overseas in numerous foreign complicated securities cases. For example, one recent matter included lawsuits throughout Europe in the UK, France, Austria, Israel, and the Netherlands, among other places. We often work with experienced co-counsel to resolve the most complicated securities and commercial cases.’

Atkinson goes on to highlight an additional benefit of Kirkland’s geographic reach in their ability to have local presence and expertise in the jurisdictions in which their clients often find themselves in litigation throughout the US: ‘We are at home in California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, Texas and Washington, DC. So, when our clients have cases before state courts in Texas or California, federal courts in New York or Chicago, or regulatory agencies in Washington, Kirkland comes armed with knowledge of the relevant norms, procedures, and decision-makers. As a result, we are able to apply our deep subject-matter expertise effectively wherever we find ourselves in a dispute.’

‘As a general matter, when Kirkland opens an office in a new market, within a relatively short period of time that office will grow to be at the top of that market’ adds Marks. When asked what he attributes this to, Marks notes the high standards expected across all of the firm’s offices, which is also a key factor in his and other Kirkland teams’ ability to place trust in colleagues and collaborate effectively across teams.

‘Having standards of uniform excellence across the board makes collaboration among offices and among practices easy to facilitate, as the participants are all able to trust they are working with the best in the field. I have countless cases where I am working with individuals or groups in other offices and in other practice areas and it is always a good experience. For example, I am currently representing a private equity client that had bid to acquire a competitor. The deal was not consummated, and the competitor has now sued the private equity client for purported trade secret misappropriation. I am working closely with the M&A team that represented the client in the bidding process and with our IP group on certain aspects of the trade secret case – all in different offices.’

When asked if they believe the culture of the firm has changed and if this has contributed to their ability to work so effectively across teams and offices, Solum confirms: ‘We have a culture of collaboration, and focus on working in teams in a collegial manner. We avoid sharp elbows and work together to achieve our clients’ goals.’

Attorney training and experience

An obvious area to ask about when reviewing the strength of the New York litigation team is attorney training. How does the New York team (and indeed the wider firm) ensure clients can rely on excellence from Kirkland attorneys at all levels? Solum notes the firm’s focus on extensive trial training for associates and the importance of trial-readiness. ‘Kirkland’s litigators are trial lawyers. For associates, we have extensive trial training programmes for first- to sixth-year associates. That prepares lawyers to be trial-ready. In New York this is a key focus as we are routinely called on to step in to handle matters heading to trial.’

As featured in the July/August 2019 edition of fivehundred, the Kirkland Institute for Trial Advocacy (KITA) is a firm-wide trial advocacy and litigation attorney training programme that prepares Kirkland associates for all a courtroom can throw at them. As highlighted within that article, KITA is ‘the largest, most comprehensive litigation training programme at any firm. It emphasises core trial skills and becomes more complex as associates advance.’

KITA fulfils a Kirkland promise to clients that their teams will always be trial-ready and well-trained. As noted within the fivehundred article, KITA ‘gives our partners confidence to put associates in on-their-feet roles, and allows partners to advocate to clients with confidence that our associates are ready for those roles… Rather than young associates getting their first trial training raw, unprepared, and on the client’s dime, Kirkland associates are getting that experience every year at the firm’s expense, with our own partners doing the work, making them ready for trial.’

“As a general matter, when Kirkland opens an office in a new market, within a relatively short period of time that office will grow to be at the top of that market.”

Independence of the practice

A further strength of the New York litigation practice is the generation of work independent of the firm’s wider corporate practice. The team does undertake client work referred from other practice areas, such as M&A, but are quick to note that they are not dependent on it.

‘Our M&A litigation practice is recognised as a best-in-class practice. Clients call on us frequently to litigate issues on deals that were handled by our firm, which has a leading M&A practice, as well as on deals that were negotiated by other law firms’ says Solum. ‘For example,’ he continues, ‘we are handling a substantial matter right now where another major law firm negotiated the underlying deal. We identified a series of additional claims that could be pursued that prior counsel overlooked and achieved great results for the client. Directors, officers, financial advisors, and others call our M&A litigators directly to represent them in matters given the depth and breadth of our experience.’

What lies ahead?

The final question for the partners concerns future challenges and where they see their team’s expertise being applied. ‘With the anticipated volatility in the economy, we are already seeing an uptick in commercial litigation and class actions,’ states Marks. ‘Companies, investment firms, and pension funds and insurers appear to have an increased willingness to take action to protect their rights and are viewing commercial litigation as an investment with a potential return. And, the courts appear to be more open to considering the possibility of class actions, and plaintiffs’ class action attorneys are accordingly filing more of these cases,’ he says.

Atkinson also weighs in on this.

‘Securities cases are on the rise,’ he says. ‘One example of this is the uptick in cases brought in state court under the federal Securities Act of 1933. Plaintiffs are allowed to bring these federal claims in state court as a result of the Supreme Court’s March 2018 decision in Cyan, Inc. v Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, which held that ’33 Act claims may be brought in state court and are not removable to federal court.

‘Separately, we’re seeing (and have been seeing for years) securities cases arising from disclosures of “bad news” that have nothing to do with the securities laws. For example, government investigations, news reports of unfair business practices, and accusations made in litigation – all having no connection to the company’s disclosures – have become harbingers of securities litigation. The plaintiff’s theory in these cases is that the company misled investors by not sufficiently informing them sooner of the bad news, thereby committing securities fraud. We’re seeing companies become more and more vigilant about their level of risk under the securities laws.’

The team have been successful thus far (up to and including the 2019 US guide) in retaining a consistent tier 1 standing in The Legal 500 rankings. From speaking with Atkinson, Marks, and Solum it is clear, in summary, that they attribute this (and anticipated future success) to the expertise within the team, collaboration, the firm’s investment in preparing trial-ready lawyers, and their independent standing with clients.

Stefan Atkinson handles a range of complex litigation matters in the United States and abroad, including securities, M&A, and antitrust suits. He also regularly counsels companies and their directors on issues of corporate governance and litigation, often in connection with major strategic transactions.

Aaron Marks is an accomplished trial lawyer focusing on complex commercial litigation relating to securities, financial products, real estate, entertainment, mass torts and trade secrets. He routinely ranks among the best trial lawyers and commercial litigators in the country by industry surveys.

Matthew Solum is a senior litigation partner. Having tried more than twenty cases to decision, he is a go-to trial lawyer for high stakes disputes, including in the securities, M&A, and complex commercial arenas.

Posted on

Peter Clucas: When running a firm, expect the unexpected

How would you define Cains’ culture and how important is that culture to you?

Although Cains is one of the longest established law firms on the Isle of Man, we are a modern and progressive firm and our culture, which I believe is unique and sets us apart from other Isle of Man law firms, is one of our key defining features. We pride ourselves on having an informal, yet highly collaborative, open-door culture in which every member of staff, from business support right through to our directors, has a voice and is able to make a valuable contribution to the business and strategy of our firm.

What’s the biggest change or innovation you’ve made in the firm of late that will benefit clients?

Cains is currently in growth mode and we have recently made a number of strategic hires all of which are complementing and enhancing our service offering. We have also recently re-entered the TCSP sector with the launch of our new fiduciary business, Cains Corporate Services Limited, which enables us to provide both our international and local clients with a ‘one-stop shop’ for integrated legal, regulatory and fiduciary services.

Are there any particular challenges or opportunities to running a law firm in a smaller community?

Recruiting new talent can be a challenge, given the relatively small pool of lawyers on the island. However, the offer of high-quality, varied, and challenging work, combined with an active and balanced lifestyle, can be an attractive proposition. Smaller communities such as the Isle of Man can, however, provide many opportunities to build closer relationships and partnerships with both our clients and industry stakeholders. As a leading Isle of Man law firm, we seek to make a meaningful contribution to policy and legislative developments in the jurisdiction and regularly participate in public private sector initiatives with the aim of benefiting both our clients and the wider Isle of Man economy.

“Our aim is to be an employer of choice, attracting and retaining the most talented people to provide clients with the best service”

What are your firm’s policies on diversity and inclusion and wellbeing?

Our aim is to be an employer of choice, attracting and retaining the most talented people in order to provide our clients with the best service. Diversity and inclusion are, therefore, key priorities for the firm. The health and wellbeing of our staff is also key to our success and we offer our staff a varied programme of wellbeing events throughout the year.

What are the biggest challenges facing you in the Isle of Man, as distinct from in other Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories?

By all accounts, other than the macro-economic situation the whole world is facing, there are no distinct challenges faced by the Isle of Man which are materially different to those being faced by the other Crown Dependencies. However, the Isle of Man’s focus on a diversified economy over 12 or more key sectors is seen as a significant factor in our continued growth and is reflected across our diverse client base, both in terms of industry sectors and geographical spread.

What key market trends in the Isle of Man should lawyers from other jurisdictions be made aware of?

In common with many other jurisdictions, we live in times of an ever-changing regulatory landscape which continues to evolve at a rapid pace. This has created a challenging and sometimes complex environment for businesses across all regulated sectors. As a result, I am of the view that we will see a significant increase in regulatory and compliance advisory and enforcement instructions, in the coming years. On the back of recent strategic hires, Cains now has a multi-disciplinary team of regulatory specialists who regularly advise our clients on the full spectrum of regulatory and compliance matters relevant to businesses operating in or from the Isle of Man.

What are the top things most clients want and why? Have these changed over time?

Our clients ultimately look to us to provide commercially focused and technically correct legal advice that is tailored to their legal and commercial needs. That is why we always endeavour to develop an in-depth understanding of our clients’ businesses so that we can add real value as a trusted business partner. We also frequently act in conjunction with international law firms on cross-jurisdictional matters and are accustomed to providing a responsive service that meets the often fast paced and demanding expectations of our international clients.

By the jurisdiction’s nature, you will of course be sourcing many clients from outside the Isle of Man. Have recent geopolitical events made you look to fresh parts of the world?

Our clients, who are spread across the globe, use the Isle of Man due to its political stability, strong economy, and well-regulated business environment. We do, of course, have a significant number of clients in the UK and other EU countries and the impact of Brexit, if it happens, is difficult to predict. However, I remain optimistic that whatever happens, Cains is well positioned to react to our clients’ needs and the Isle of Man is well positioned to take advantage of any new opportunities that may present themselves.

As a firm, you have undergone a rebrand of late. What are the key opportunities you see in this?

Yes, it’s an exciting time. Rebranding was important, not only to reflect the ethos and values of the firm in a more modern way, but also to showcase the talent and vitality of all those working in our business. I feel that the new brand image (our new website launched in early December) better reflects who we are, what it means to work for Cains and emphasises our wide-ranging and skilled service offering. The rebranding has undoubtedly given the firm a sense of renewed energy and purpose.

What have you found is the best way to recruit and retain talent – both at partner and associate levels?

The Isle of Man may not be the most obvious location for a lawyer considering a move offshore. There are, indeed, sunnier locations! However, with its stunning countryside, extensive leisure opportunities, good schools, and excellent transport links, the island is a unique and wonderful place to live and work.

Our lawyers, who are our best ambassadors (and recruitment agents!), many of whom have worked in the City or other international financial centres, are able to enjoy challenging and interesting work while benefitting from all that the island has to offer. We find that recruitment ‘by word of mouth’ is usually the most successful way to recruit. However, we also work with international recruitment agents when necessary.

In terms of retaining talent, all I can say is that we are never complacent and are always striving to ensure that our lawyers are engaged, feel valued, and well supported and are afforded genuine opportunities for career progression.

What’s surprised you most about running a law firm?

I have been a partner with the firm for more than 20 years and worked closely with the previous heads of the firm. Taking on the role of managing director has not particularly changed my perspective of the challenges of running a law firm. That said the old adage to expect the unexpected still has the ability to throw up the odd surprise! We now have a relatively flat management structure where management responsibilities are shared between the firm’s directors. I am, therefore, able to maintain my litigation practice and oversee the firm’s litigation practice.

What advice would you give to the next generation of partners and law firm leaders?

Good communication, including listening, is very important. In my experience good decisions are often not recognised as such due to poor understanding of why they are being made. Good communication is perhaps one of the most important skills to demonstrate when trying to bring the firm’s stakeholders with you. It is equally important to have regular and honest communication with clients. They will let you know what they want and, more importantly, often tell you what could be done differently to improve your service offering.

Posted on

Staying ahead of the curve in the Gulf

The Middle East business world moves into the 2020s with a number of tantalising possibilities as to how it will develop. Saudi Arabia has already set its stall out as a potentially disruptive force to the status quo, with a number of major economic and infrastructure projects planned – the vast King Abdullah Economic City project is an excellent example of this – which could see talent in the region moving across borders in the future, and the region’s geopolitical volatility, richness of natural resources and monetary wealth and rapidly diversifying economies add further uncertainty to future development.

So much for the big picture, but how do Middle East-based in-house lawyers ‘at the coalface’ see the future panning out, and what can law firms do to ensure they are effectively catering to these needs? While travelling to Dubai for The Legal 500 GC Powerlist: Middle East 2019 launch event I sat down with a number of locally based senior in-house counsel to talk about business in the Gulf.

Regulation

Unsurprisingly, regulation and its effects featured heavily in our discussions. When it comes to new business requirements and legislation, staying ahead of the curve is a key consideration for any responsible Gulf GC, as new requirements can come into practice rapidly.

For Dubai-based Citi’s Fauzia Kehar, seeking advice from a diverse set of firms, rather than a few preferred ones, has proved extremely successful. As well as keeping costs low and the quality of advice high, it has had the more subtle benefit of acting as an early warning system for new regulations that may affect the company’s bottom line in indirect ways.

‘There are a lot of regulatory actors, and the UAE has recently seen a lot of different rules come online – it pays to have someone with a fresh pair of eyes and with their finger on the pulse of the regulator,’ she says. ‘This is another advantage of the diversification of law firms that we instruct. You can get feedback not only on major regulation but also more subtle ones that can affect you in a lesser way. This can be very, very useful.’

There was, however, agreement that changes are necessary in certain areas. Filippo Cossalter, legal director for Johnson & Johnson’s emerging markets pharmaceutical group based in Dubai, speaks of how a lack of mature and robust regulatory structures have affected his company’s operations negatively: ‘If there is no IP protection, there is no possibility for us to compete in the R&D field. Some measures put in place to protect local economies, while having an admirable aim, can create more issues in the industry over the long term.’

Diversity and inclusion

Aside from the technical world of regulatory compliance, there is something of a personnel revolution underway in the Gulf. Fadia Mubarak of GARMCO in Bahrain spoke about diversity and, while accepting that the stereotype of the male-centric Gulf workplace had some truth to it in the past, she reported that great strides have been made towards inclusivity.

‘We can see that things are changing a lot when it comes to representation of women in senior roles across the Gulf,’ says Mubarak. ‘Bahrain is a good example of this, as you can see female leaders at the top levels of a number of important companies.’

”I try to understand what’s going on to understand the potential implications to our business. This is one area that we like our external counsel to be extremely proactive in helping me to fill gaps in my knowledge” Filippo Cossalter, legal director, Johnson & Johnson

But how to retain the impetus of this movement? In Mubarak’s opinion, this is best achieved by adopting a two-pronged approach. ‘First of all – and perhaps this goes without saying – the female lawyers themselves will have to work hard. They must improve themselves and their capabilities and take any opportunity to show their case. We must also make business leaders aware of the challenge to change the mindset of limiting female participation in the workforce.’

INDEVCO Group general counsel Roger Tanios has taken matters into his own hands to create an inclusive environment for employees above and beyond what is required by law. ‘In Lebanon we are not obliged to make time for maternity leave, but in our company we have made allowances to go beyond this, and have also introduced flexible hours and have ensured a zero-tolerance policy on any sort of harassment. This gives security for the people within the business.’

Moving beyond where the legislation currently is in this regard could be an excellent way for companies in the Middle East to provide added compensation to employees beyond purely salary and other material benefits.

Attracting and retaining talent

This liberalisation of work flexibility may prove a boon to staff retention at Gulf workplaces, but what is the more general prognosis for attracting and retaining legal talent in the region? Santiago Lucero has been with Alghanim Industries of Kuwait for over a decade, earning a wealth of hiring experience in the process.

In his view, the legal department’s success in recruiting and retaining top legal candidates ‘stems from a very conscious effort to create a compelling value proposition, emphasising the company’s longstanding focus on putting people at the heart of everything it does’. Lucero continues by observing that ‘in-house practice can be a galvanising career choice and every bit as enriching as more familiar routes. As the needs of corporations continue to evolve, there remain countless opportunities for in-house lawyers of all backgrounds in the Middle East. The region offers a richness that is simply unmatched’.

Geopolitics

Our discussions also addressed the Middle East’s geopolitical volatility, and how in-house counsel in the region try to plan for the unforeseeable. Johnson & Johnson’s Cossalter, who supports the group’s external affairs agenda, explained that he ‘does not try to predict the future. With that said, I try to understand what’s going on to understand the potential implications to our business. This is one area that we like our external counsel to be extremely proactive in helping me to fill gaps in my knowledge.’ With that said, other interviewees stated that they feel the focus on geopolitical issues can be overblown and is heavily country-specific. There is perhaps a tendency from those outside the region to group Middle East countries together which in reality do not have much in common in this area.

Conclusion

The Middle East legal business scene looks well set to enter the next stage in its evolution; a majority of the in-house counsel I spoke to expect the business environment they are operating in to change markedly in medium term.

Law firms in the region have a fantastic opportunity to help in-house counsel in the Gulf through this uncertain but exciting transitional period. To do so, it is key for them to pay close attention to the signals which are coming from corporate counsel in order to provide services that pre-empt their requirements in the Gulf’s rapidly changing markets.

Posted on

The future of Arab law: The Arab Lawyers Forum 2020 – London

As founder and senior partner at Al Tamimi & Company, the largest law firm in the Middle East, Essam Al Tamimi had played a prominent role in the Arabic-speaking legal scene for the past three decades. In 2016, he turned his attention to the lack of opportunities for younger lawyers emerging from the Arab League Member States by launching the Arab Lawyers Forum (ALF).

Since the first event, held in Morocco, the forum has doubled in size, with around 200 lawyers attending from the Arab League States and internationally. In 2020, the ALF will arrive in London, bring an even greater number of legal and business leaders together to discuss the challenges and opportunities facing the Arabic-speaking world.

Ahead of the ALF’s London debut, we speak to Essam Al Tamimi about why he’s leading the initiative to develop the next generation of lawyers in the Arabic-speaking world, and the future legal and business challenges they will face.

What are some of the challenges faced by up-and-coming lawyers in the Arabic-speaking world and how is the ALF positioning itself to help them?

The first challenge faced by younger lawyers is visibility. I am often asked where all the young Arab lawyers are. The truth is, very few young lawyers have come through the ranks. At the same time, when I travel round the Middle East I see that there are a great many high-quality, ambitious young lawyers who do not know where to start. They lack a pathway to develop their careers, to show their talent and to grow beyond their home countries. With the ALF we hope to create a platform for lawyers from across the Arab League States to exchange ideas, discuss the latest developments and, most importantly, profile the advancement and growth of the Arab legal systems.

That being said, we do not exclude more established lawyers. The primary target audience for the ALF remains senior and young lawyers. Last year’s forum, held in Rome, saw general counsel invited to attend for the first time. ALF 2020 will see an even stronger focus on this increasingly important demographic. By opening the doors to GCs private practice lawyers are able to hear first-hand from the in-house community regarding the dynamics between GCs and law firms.

Why have you chosen London as the venue for a conference focusing on the future of Arabic-speaking law and lawyers?

Hosting the forum internationally exposes Arab lawyers to new and different ways of doing things, and hosting it in London presents a wonderful opportunity for lawyers from across the Middle East, particularly young lawyers, to sit side-by-side with lawyers from the UK and debate their common futures as legal professionals. There is a large Arab legal and business community in London. A number of GCC countries have been doing business with the UK for many years and many investments taking place across the [Middle East] have a nexus to the UK. English remains an extremely important language when it comes to doing business in the region, and the London legal profession has a dominant place in the Middle East, both in terms of the large number of UK-qualified lawyers operating there and the large number of UK-headquartered firms that have a presence there.

It is also a good opportunity for lawyers from the UK to meet the up-and-coming generation from the Middle East. International law firms in the region are increasingly looking to hire Arabic-speaking or bi-lingual lawyers, and hopefully through this platform we will provide people with an opportunity to make those contacts.

In what sense does the Arabic-speaking world form a coherent legal and business environment?

In some ways lawyers in the Middle East are facing very different issues from those in Europe, and within the Middle East the Levant and North African markets are facing different pressures to those in the UAE or Saudi Arabia. However, there are common issues facing all lawyers globally. For example, the disruptions that we are seeing today in artificial intelligence, in the use of IT and in the use of social media means law firms will face almost certain disruption in the next ten years. In terms of business development, marketing, and client development there will be common changes across world and therefore across the Middle East. Further, a rapidly changing landscape in the Middle East is driving a market that brings both the potential for big rewards and pitfalls for law firms in the region. It is important for young lawyers from across the Arabic-speaking world to understand the stakes here.

“Hosting the forum internationally exposes Arab lawyers to new and different ways of doing things, and hosting it in London presents a wonderful opportunity for lawyers from across the Middle East to sit side-by-side with lawyers from the UK and debate their common futures as legal professionals.”

Arab lawyers need to be prepared, to learn, and to expect what they will be seeing in the future. They will either be prepared for this or unprepared for this and they will face the consequences of either. It is very important that the Arab legal community has the opportunity to discuss areas of interest within the markets but also further afield in order to help adapt to global changes.

I also think it is important for both UK-based and Arab lawyers to take the region as a whole because high growth markets such as Egypt and Morocco will have a growing significance for lawyers and businesses across the Middle East in coming years.

It is true that more traditional markets remain strong. For example, Al Tamimi & Company has had busy practices in Saudi Arabia and the UAE dealing with both domestic and international for several years. But the Egyptian market has been an extremely busy market and our office has been very successful there in terms of work generated there and investments coming in to Egypt. Things are moving there internally and there is big interest from both GCC and non-GCC investors. With the growth of the young generation there is a need for investment in many North African countries, and we hope to help young lawyers position themselves to capitalise on this demand.

Has the initiative received any official backing from governments across the Gulf?

In my experience, anything that has official backing tends to focus too much on those in high-ranking positions and miss out on the substance. The forum has no official backing and no official status. It is run by a volunteer force of private practice lawyers and in-house counsel who are interested in learning from each other and passing on this learning to the next generation in the Middle East.

Among other things, ALF London will focus on the challenges facing family-owned entities in the Middle East. Why is this so significant for a younger generation of lawyers?

While regulatory regimes have evolved and developed in every sector and area, the major regional players continue to be family-owned businesses. Some of those family businesses have structured themselves extremely well, have a succession plan for the business and organise themselves along the lines of a public company with very good corporate governance policies. Many others have not. Therefore, from a legal point of view, the succession planning and continuation of these businesses could be at risk.

Family businesses are going to have to confront the issue of succession planning to survive. For the Middle East as a whole, it is vital for family-owned businesses to address how they can create stability in their management structures that allow the business to continue successfully through an event like a family dispute or the death of a founder. These are very sensitive subject to discuss but it is critically important for the Middle East that these issues are discussed and the legal implications are planned for.

Another crucial theme for young lawyers in the Middle East is the rapidly developing arbitration landscape. How will ALF address this?

There is now a total political commitment to arbitration in the Middle East. We can see this in the laws, regulations, arbitration centres and their governing rules, and also in the growing interest in the subject at university level. Governments and business have realised that they have more to lose than gain by resisting arbitration. Ultimately, awards get enforced and the resisting country or entity will get a bad reputation internationally. That has been a push factor. But the political will to support arbitration also developed because of a number of pull factors. Countries realised their court systems could not cope with complex cases or that these court systems were not strong enough to attract foreign investment. As such, the political decision made by governments of the Middle East to support arbitration is based on the belief that arbitration will attract investment and help judicial systems become stronger.

The only thing lacking in the region is skilled arbitrators. In the Middle East arbitrators are young, they are very few and tend not to be as skilled [as their counterparts in the UK]. It is not something you can build overnight. It requires time, training and commitment. With London still seen by many as the leading centre of commercial arbitration globally, the ALF will look to help address this situation by bringing some of the City’s leading arbitrators and counsel to discuss the future of arbitration in the Middle East, looking in particular at how Arab lawyers can help bridge the gap between civil and common law traditions.

Aside from supporting the ALF, what can the wider legal community can do to support the next generation of Arab lawyers?

Very few law firms in the Middle East link what happens during the education of law students to what happens in law firms. There is little communication between law firms and law faculties, apart from isolated initiatives. As a result, many law school graduates have academic skills and theoretical knowledge, but are not acquainted with a new style of law education, and some of their education is outdated.

Law schools in the Middle East need to revamp their education system, and law firms can play a big part in encouraging this. Universities need to teach students how the law has evolved and responded to modern transactions, particularly in the area of contract law, which has evolved in relation to capital markets, banking transactions, information technology, media, and intellectual property. In addition, some legal systems have bridged civil and common law principles – civil law systems have added common law principles and vice versa. The education system in the region has not grasped this development. What can lawyers do to change this situation? Lawyers can first of all create links between law faculties and their law firm. Secondly, lawyers can enhance their training of young lawyers internally.

The Arab Lawyers Forum London will take place on 23 and 24 March 2020. To register your interest please visit www.arablawyersforum.com

Posted on

Does reputation risk mean calling time on law firm drinking?

In my experience, there has never such an acute awareness among law firms of the reputational damage they and their people can suffer as a result of inappropriate workplace behaviours. The latest potential threat that law firms are having to grapple with is the excessive drinking culture associated with the business of doing law and the high-stress, high-octane environments lawyers operate in.

In the last six months alone, two high-profile investigations involving law firms have been dissected across the pages of the national newspapers and the legal press. Those press reports have revealed detailed and often disturbing accounts of excessive alcohol consumption fuelling allegations of serious misconduct.

The consequences of heavy drinking are driving law firms into taking affirmative action to curb too much booze. For example, Linklaters has launched a sober supervisors scheme to ensure its lawyers remain professional at social events. In the wider professional services sector, PwC and BDO have also enlisted booze chaperones. And in 2017, Lloyd’s of London banned drinking during working hours.

These types of actions have sparked a spectrum of responses. Many see the very notion of having to monitor people’s drinking habits as an Orwellian form of surveillance which belittles the decision-making capabilities of highly educated professionals. At the other end of the scale are those who say that a zero-tolerance approach means a much lower risk of any reputational and career hangovers following boozy workplace events.

Accepting there is a problem

First, we have to be careful not to blame alcohol for the unhealthy cultures and behaviours that already exist within many workplaces, before any drink is poured. Alcohol has long been regarded as the social glue at work-related events. And in moderation it remains an enjoyable accompaniment to networking with colleagues and clients. However, the problem comes when that social glue turns toxic and we end up with people harmed and careers and reputations ruined.

Social norms around alcohol are shifting. A large number of the population don’t drink for religious reasons and statistics show that the younger generation don’t want to drink as much, or prefer to abstain. The Junior Division of the Law Society of England and Wales has conducted research that shows young lawyers often feel pressured to drink alcohol, and have also put forward guidelines for the legal sector on social activities employees might enjoy which don’t involve drinking.

Another key issue is alcohol and mental health. Many lawyers use alcohol as a means of dealing with stress, which in some cases can lead to mental health problems. On the flipside, greater awareness of mental health issues in the workplace is also driving people to avoid or limit their alcohol consumption: we are becoming much more mental health and physical health conscious as a society.

“‘In creating inclusive cultures that align with their values, law firms are having to take a sober look at their relationships with alcohol'”

Times are changing. And, in turn, staff and client expectations and the cultures within law firms are changing. Movements like ‘MeToo’ have also encouraged people to come forward and say no to workplace behaviours that may have been put up with just a few years ago.

And, as society appears to be moving away from a culture of excess to a culture of responsibility, many more law firms are looking at detoxing their drinking cultures by asking: ‘Does this reflect our winder culture and brand values? Is it how we want to be seen?’

Moderation is key

Once they have first acknowledged that alcohol, when abused, can cause problems, law firms can then find a moderate and inclusive approach to how they address alcohol consumption at work-related events.

In practical terms, this can mean asking for input from all staff at different levels in the organisation on the makeup of social events and how they like to enjoy themselves. Building a programme of social and networking events around staff input and catering for those who drink alcohol and those who choose not to, means that staff feel included and less pressured to fit into one camp.

Other solutions could include offering staff training on how to spot and report alcohol abuses, with guidelines and reporting mechanisms which sit visibly on the firm’s intranet and other communications channels. When complaints around alcohol abuse are made, staff should feel confident that those complaints are being dealt with appropriately.

Finally, law firms can empower their people to enjoy themselves responsibly – setting clearly defined and well communicated limits. This requires leadership from senior management and a commitment at the firm-wide level that the party stops when the party stops. When too much alcohol is involved, there can be ambiguity around when the work event is over and it’s time to go home. The same principles and guidelines should apply when lawyers attend client events, particularly if they are known for being boozy affairs.

Last orders

In creating inclusive cultures that align with their values, law firms are having to take a sober look at their relationships with alcohol. In this regard, the move to moderate alcohol consumption in the workplace can be seen as part of a much broader review of how law firms wish to be perceived as responsible corporate citizens and in the context of the wider changes taking place in society.

In my view, change can take place in an emotionally intelligent way that achieves buy-in from all of the people who make-up the very fabric of their firm’s social network. Empowering staff by including them in the choice of work events and activities they might enjoy, also means empowering them to act responsibly within guidelines they themselves have helped create. Such an approach can lead to a greater diversity and choice in the types of social events that law firms arrange, more fun for those taking part, and less risk of reputational hangovers. Cheers to that.

Posted on

Making pro bono transparent

It is a truth universally acknowledged that all barristers do pro bono. Or is it? Despite the wide variety of interesting and deserving cases, the opportunity for practice development and the fact that, unlike when doing paid work, a barrister gets to choose which cases they take on, the number of barristers undertaking work through Advocate, or indeed through other channels, is lower than you might expect. It is also difficult to track.

Contrary to expectation, those doing pro bono work are often the kind of people who keep quiet about it. This leads to a situation in which Advocate is regularly asked by senior clerks and chambers’ CEOs to let them know how many cases have been taken on by members of their set, because they themselves are not aware of what’s happening, despite their best efforts. And they really do want to know – whether to make sure the entire chambers’ pro bono effort isn’t being unsustainably shouldered by one passionate individual, or just to check whether their second six pupils and junior tenants are making the most of the learning, networking, and marketing opportunities offered to them by pro bono work.

Whether it be part of a chambers social responsibility agenda, exploiting the business development benefits of pro bono, or working towards embedding a public service ethos in chambers, there is definitely a move towards greater transparency around which cases are being worked on free of charge, which brings me on to the two fascinating examples of structuring and reporting pro bono being undertaken by two sets of innovative chambers: Littleton and Radcliffe. Their experiences illustrate the same (very common) point – that communication is everything.

“The structure of the self-employed Bar does little to encourage team participation and yet pro bono work often benefits from a team approach”

Yes, we can make a difference

Liz Dux, chambers director, Littleton Chambers

The legal profession is a fortunate one in many ways. Our skills give us a unique ability to transform lives for the better or to help someone in their hour of need.

Take the following example: A silk from Littleton read a report in the legal press about a solicitor in Scotland who was facing serious disciplinary proceedings as a result of his reaction on social media to some vile anti-Semitic abuse he had received. Unprompted, the silk contacted the lawyer in question and offered to represent him pro bono in his disciplinary proceedings, as he was unable to afford paid representation. As a result of this silk’s intervention, the said solicitor’s career was saved and someone’s life was transformed for the better. The silk told no one about his involvement. I only found out about it via press coverage.

The above example is not an usual one at the Bar. I frequently find out about fantastic work barristers at Littleton have undertaken pro bono long after the event and normally by way of passing comment. So many barristers contribute huge amounts to society but do so under the radar, not wanting to shout out about it but recognising the positive impact they can have on society.

This is why we have introduced an initiative at Littleton whereby we encourage all our members to self-record what pro-bono or community initiatives they undertake via a points system. We hope that by doing so we are encouraging everyone to do their bit to help others less fortunate than themselves but also not to hide their good deeds under a bushel. The structure of the self-employed Bar does little to encourage team participation and yet pro bono work often benefits from a team approach, hence we felt that greater communication about what everyone was doing would facilitate a linking of efforts.

We are proud that our pro bono points collection initiative is just one of several which we have introduced over the last year or so to increase our contribution towards wider CSR initiatives. Another example is our INSPIRE sports initiative whereby we encourage athletes transitioning away from high performing sports, particularly those from less fortunate and well represented socio-economic backgrounds to develop a career in the law. This initiative includes opportunities for work experience, mentoring during academic studies, networking opportunities, interview support, and ongoing education.

Last year, on taking silk, one of our members who themselves comes from an under represented socio-economic background, visited an inner London community school to encourage them to enter the profession and follow his example. I was so moved by the responses he received in a thank you card. One read, ‘You have taught me to believe that I can make a difference in the world’. The answer to that is ‘yes we can’.

”Pro bono is not just a nice thing to do – it’s a business priority, which goes hand in hand with client collaboration, innovation, and service delivery”Fiona Fitzgerald, chief executive, Radcliffe Chambers

Creating a virtuous circle

Fiona Fitzgerald, chief executive, Radcliffe Chambers

Pro bono is important to us, our clients, and wider society. We know from the conversations that we’ve had with our clients, barristers, staff, and potential recruits that they all expect us to make a positive impact on society; it’s not just a nice thing to do – it’s a business priority, which goes hand in hand with client collaboration, innovation, and service delivery. We’ve grown a lot over the past five years and we are really proud of our progress, but we believe that its sustainability depends on us being a responsible chambers, not just in terms of our compliance and people policies, but also in terms of contributing to the society in which we operate. As a legal services organisation, we have a particular responsibility to help widen access to justice.

We are always looking for ways to do things better, across all aspects of chambers. Often this is by recognising what we are already doing and then thinking about how we could do it more efficiently or be more impactful, making the most of our growing skills and experience. Our pro bono journey is a case in point. Barristers at Radcliffe Chambers are already regularly involved in many amazing pro bono initiatives, so we had a good foundation for taking a more strategic approach to increase our positive impact.

It is a given that you can make a bigger impact when you work as a team, so the first thing we did was connect people who are working on similar initiatives via our Responsible Chambers Committee, a group of staff and barristers. Creating this wide-ranging forum for discussion helped us to really focus in on where we ought to concentrate our efforts and helped us explore different perspectives on how we might make an impact, whether it is by providing our legal expertise, our project management experience, our communications expertise, or our people skills. We all have a role to play and we can all bring something different to the table.

The committee has helped raise the profile of pro bono within chambers and led to plenty of productive conversations about what we can do better. Communication is creating a virtuous circle. We are now working to keep up that communication throughout chambers to increase engagement with and participation in pro bono, and to drive through the reporting changes that we are planning to make. Some of this has meant fairly basic changes, such as introducing a pro bono newsletter and creating a factsheet on how to get involved, but there is also a wider message to share about why we are doing this and how it fits in with our commercial objectives.

What isn’t measured, can’t be managed, so our next step was to put together a survey to capture a definitive picture of all our community and pro bono activities. We are now considering how best to track them all moving forward so that we measure our performance against specific objectives. We have seen the importance of a data driven approach when it comes to our inclusion and diversity activities. Our award-winning Student Barrister Experience Programme (a two day course for sixth formers from backgrounds that are underrepresented at the bar) came about because we looked at the diversity data for our pupillage applicants and recognised that we needed to take steps to attract a wider pool of candidates. The programme is now entering its third year and, while we still have a long way to go to becoming the diverse chambers that we aspire to be, we are pleased to have seen an improvement in our most recent recruitment round and hope to see even greater diversity in 2020, as a result of adopting Rare’s contextual recruitment system. We believe that applying the same, evidence based approach to our pro bono strategy will help us make a greater impact in the future.

Posted on

The UK Legal 500 2020 – which law firms made the best impression?

With the submissions deadline for the next Legal 500 UK guide fast approaching, and with lawyers and BD professionals across the country busy crafting their case for a move up the rankings, it seems as good a time as any to look back at the firms that were most successful last time around.

Almost 400 law firms secured one or more moves up the UK rankings last year, while more than 300 were persuasive enough to get a foot on the ladder and get their practice ranked for the first time.

But who made the biggest impact? One firm stands out about the pack with the most new additions to the UK guide – Shoosmiths, which achieved eight new rankings in the most recent guide.

This recognition was primarily a result of the firm’s continued growth in Leeds, where it launched an office in early 2017 with the hire of two employment partners from Yorkshire firm Gordons.

In the three years since, the base has rapidly expanded, and now boasts 18 partners and 43 other non-partners across a range of practice areas. This growth was recognised by the firm’s addition to the rankings for fraud, professional negligence, construction, and property litigation in the Yorkshire & Humber section, and the firm also joined the Sheffield commercial property rankings after moving into new premises in the city in early 2019.

“One of the most significant changes for the next UK guide is the introduction of a new industry focus section”

Shoosmiths CEO Simon Boss told fivehundred: ‘We’re really delighted that we did so well in last year’s rankings – this is a reflection of our ongoing investments in our people and our firm as a whole. Attracting and retaining the right talent, with deep legal expertise, helps us to continue to deliver a superb client experience.

‘The Leeds office, led by Matthew Howarth, is a great example of this, and is becoming a real powerhouse in the region – even more impressive given the relatively short amount of time we’ve been in the city.’

Just below Shoosmiths, five other firms secured seven new rankings across the UK guide – Addleshaw Goddard, Fieldfisher, Gateley, Freeths, and the newly merged Penningtons Manches Cooper, formed by the July 2019 combination of Penningtons Manches and shipping firm Thomas Cooper.

When looking at the firms that most successfully argued their case to be moved up the rankings, Shoosmiths also came out on top, securing 17 moves up across the UK guide, including a new entry in the top tier in the Thames Valley commercial litigation rankings, where the firm is carving out a strong niche for public procurement disputes.

Nine other firms achieved more than ten moves up across the UK guide – Pinsent Masons, Burges Salmon, DWF, Penningtons Manches Cooper, Womble Bond Dickinson, Addleshaws, DLA Piper, Squire Patton Boggs, and Gowling WLG.

Capital gains

In London, a clutch of five firms were among the most successful, all securing four new rankings this year – Burges Salmon, Clyde & Co, Macfarlanes, and US duo Gibson Dunn & Crutcher and Covington & Burling.

Two of the new London rankings for Macfarlanes came on the back of the firm’s 2018 launch of a corporate crime and investigations practice led by top-rated ex-Eversheds Sutherland partner Neil Blundell, with the firm entering the white-collar crime and regulatory investigations and corporate crime rankings as a result.

Gibson Dunn was another firm to benefit from targeted lateral recruitment, with its new rankings in the London oil and gas, corporate tax, and public international law sections driven in part by heavyweight hires from Allen & Overy, Herbert Smith Freehills, and Mayer Brown, including highly regarded energy partner Anna Howell.

The firms making the most progress in the capital are led by Burges Salmon, which continues to present a credible case as to how its London team works in tandem with its market-leading Bristol base. The firm this year moved up in 13 London rankings, including an elevation to tier 1 in agriculture and estates.

Other strong performers in London include Mishcon de Reya, which moved up in nine London rankings, making it to the top tier for immigration, personal tax, and commercial property: retail. Pinsents also added two new top-tier rankings among nine moves up in the London guide, making it to the highest rank for both VAT and indirect tax and insurance: insolvency and restructuring.

New year, new rankings

One of the most significant changes for the next UK guide is the introduction of a new industry focus section, which will rank the firms providing a full service to clients in six key sectors – emerging markets; energy and infrastructure; hospitality and leisure; life sciences and healthcare; retail and consumer; and TMT.

Other new categories for London this year include fund finance, international business reorganisations, and a newly divided commercial litigation section which will rank premium and mid-firms separately.

New rankings always present new questions, and we’re fielding plenty already; you can find many of the answers you’ll need on legal500.com, but please do get in touch if there’s anything you need to know – and best of luck with crafting those new submissions.