Have you had any experiences during your career as a lawyer that stand out as particularly unique or interesting?

Yes. One experience that stands out occurred when I applied for a position that was described as a standard in-house legal role, focused on Administrative, Corporate, and Commercial Law. However, once I joined the organisation, it became clear that the position was substantially different from what had been advertised, both in terms of responsibilities and the skills required. The role involved managing a legal area that had not previously existed within the company and that was outside my core area of specialisation.

Given that I was already hired, I took full ownership of the situation. I independently developed the required expertise from the ground, including studying the applicable regulatory framework, designing internal procedures, drafting all necessary documentation, and establishing the legal outputs expected from the role. Essentially, I built the function from zero, ensuring it aligned with both legal requirements and business needs. This experience significantly strengthened my adaptability, self-learning capacity, and ability to operate effectively in unstructured environments while delivering tangible results.

What factors influence your team’s decision to use external legal services versus handling matters in-house, and what criteria are used to evaluate their performance?

The decision to engage external legal counsel is primarily driven by efficiency and risk management considerations. Key factors include the time sensitivity of the matter, the level of complexity involved, and whether specialised expertise is required beyond the in-house team’s scope. Additionally, projects that require intensive follow-up or interaction with authorities located in different jurisdictions or cities are often better handled externally to ensure operational effectiveness.