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 involve external legal counsel versus relying on in-house legal capabilities should be guided by a structured assessment of risk, complexity, expertise, and capacity. Our in-house legal team is composed of highly qualified lawyers who, to a large extent, have gained prior experience in leading international law firms. This background equips us with strong technical legal skills while their role within the organisation gives us a deep and nuanced understanding of the company’s business model, strategic objectives, risk appetite, and operational realities.

As a result, our legal team is particularly well suited to handle company-specific matters with high complexity that require detailed knowledge of internal processes, our products, contractual frameworks, and stakeholder dynamics. In such cases, handling matters inhouse may be more effective than engaging external counsel, who, despite their expertise, may lack the same depth of understanding of the company’s specific circumstances and therefore require additional time and resources to reach an equivalent level of contextual insight. In-house lawyers can provide tailored, pragmatic advice that is closely aligned with the company’s commercial objectives and decision-making processes.

Nevertheless, there are situations where the involvement of external counsel is appropriate and/or necessary. External lawyers are typically engaged for high-risk or high-value matters, such as major transactions, as well as for issues requiring highly specialised expertise or jurisdictional coverage that exceeds in-house capabilities (e.g. if our funds are domiciled in jurisdictions other than Germany, etc.). They also provide an additional layer of independence and external credibility, which may be important for our investors and other stakeholders.

In practice, a hybrid approach is often the most effective model. Under this approach, the in-house legal team retains ownership of the matter, sets the legal and commercial strategy, and manages internal stakeholders, while external counsel is engaged selectively to provide targeted expertise, additional capacity, or formal representation where required. This ensures that the company benefits from the in-house team’s deep institutional knowledge and business alignment, while still leveraging external specialisation where it adds the greatest value.

Looking forward, what trends do you foresee in the legal landscape over the next 5–10 years that companies should prepare for?

Legal technology and AI will become core enablers of legal effectiveness and scalability. Over the next five to ten years, AI-driven tools will increasingly automate routine legal work, enhance contract and risk analysis, and provide data-driven insights, allowing legal teams to operate more efficiently, consistently, and at scale. Companies that invest early in legal tech will strengthen in-house capabilities, reduce reliance on external counsel for commoditised work, and improve speed and quality of decision-making.

The role of legal functions will shift toward strategic risk management and business partnership. As AI absorbs transactional tasks, legal teams will focus more on complex judgment, regulatory navigation, and strategic advisory roles, while also taking responsibility for the governance, ethical use, and risk management of AI itself. This evolution will require new skills, closer integration with the business, and a proactive approach to technology-driven legal risk