Team size: Six

How do you approach managing legal aspects during periods of instability or crises, and how does your legal strategy align with the broader business strategy to ensure organisational resilience?

Periods of instability require the legal function to be proactive and closely aligned with the business. When things become unstable, the first thing I do is work out where the real exposure is: which contracts are affected, what the regulatory position is, where we might have a reputational problem, and what needs attention today versus what can wait until next week.

In a crisis, speed and clarity are equally important. Senior management needs to know what the risk is, what the options are and what each option means for the business in practice. We therefore focus on presenting the risks, available options and practical consequences so that decisions can be taken quickly and on an informed basis.

Shipping often makes this more complicated because so many things can happen at once. A change in sanctions, a geopolitical event, a market shift and an operational incident can all land in the same week. That only works if legal is talking and cooperating with commercial, finance and operations.

That said, I think most of the work needs to happen before the crisis. Strong contractual protection, clear internal procedures, effective governance and established communication channels enable an organisation to respond decisively when conditions change. Ultimately, the General Counsel’s role is not simply to manage legal exposure, but to help the organisation remain flexible, protect its reputation and continue pursuing its strategic objectives.

How do you balance being a legal risk manager with being a strategic business enabler, and where do you see the biggest tensions?

I do not see legal risk management and business enablement as competing objectives. The role of the General Counsel is not to eliminate risk, which would be neither realistic nor commercially desirable, but to help the business understand which risks are acceptable, which should be mitigated and which should not be taken.

I always start by trying to understand what the business wants to achieve. Once I know that, I can look at how to get there within a sensible legal and risk framework. Particularly in shipping, where decisions are influenced by market conditions, financing considerations, regulation and geopolitical developments, legal advice must be both technically robust and commercially practical.

The greatest tension arises when the business needs to move quickly while the legal or regulatory position remains uncertain. In those circumstances, a General Counsel needs to communicate the risks clearly and propose workable alternatives to management. The greatest value of an in-house legal team lies in protecting the organisation without unnecessarily restricting its ability to pursue opportunities.

If you could change one thing about how businesses engage with their legal teams, what would it be and why?

I would encourage businesses to bring in their legal teams earlier in the decision-making process. Too often, lawyers are consulted once the commercial structure has largely been decided and are asked to document it or resolve issues that have already arisen.

Like in our organisation, when legal teams are involved from the start, they can contribute much more than legal documentation and compliance advice. In-house lawyers understand their companies, their risk profile and their commercial priorities, and therefore help shape a transaction in a way that works both commercially and legally over the long term.

The strongest relationship between management and the legal function is one based on early engagement, trust and open communication.