Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
com
UK 2OO ANNUAL
REPORT 2010
THE COST
OF CUTTING
T
H
E
L
A
W
Y
E
R
U
K
2
0
0
A
N
N
U
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
2
0
1
0
TLS_001_UK200_cover_dis:TLS_001_UK200_cover_dis 20/8/10 14:01 Page 1
TLS_002_UK200_10_di s : TLS_002_UK200_10_di s 18/ 8/ 10 09: 06 Pa ge 1
THE UKS largest 200 law firms are toughening up. For as long as
there have been lists of revenue, profit and numbers of lawyers, firms
have claimed they are being run as efficient businesses.
In the past the sheer fat on the bone at most firms has told a
different story. But the headcount reductions seen in the past couple
of years suggest that at least some of the realities of corporate life have
finally reached a bunch of businesses used to clearing upwards of 40 per
cent profit on their activities. The measures many firms have taken to
cut costs, and the wider implications of that cost-cutting, is the theme of
this years book.
The changing profit margin is just one of the thousands of numbers
in this years The Lawyer UK 200 Annual Report. But what is even more
critical than statistics is context. For the first time we are including
individual profiles of each of the UKs top 200 firms independent editorial
that includes detail on remuneration, equity structure, geographical
locations and core practice areas.
This is by some way the most comprehensive and exhaustive round-up of
the UKs largest firms the main actors in a UK legal market that has never
been more competitive, recession or no recession.
The game is changing. These are the players.
Methodology At the start of the summer The Lawyer sent a
questionnaire requesting financial and headcount data to almost 300
firms. Most answered every question. This year we have identified firms
that refused to divulge headline total revenue and average profit figures.
Nine firms in the top 100 and just three in the second 100 refused to
divulge the key results. For the first time we have also named the barristers
chambers where figures have been estimated. We believe transparency cuts
both ways.
Headcount figures are averages of the 2009-10 financial year. Net profit is the
money available for distribution to full equity partners only, and differs from
the total profit available to all classes of partner, a proportion of which is
booked as a cost.
Matt Byrne, features editor
Contents
The Lawyer|UK 200|3
Editor Catrin Griffiths Features editor Matt Byrne News editor Margaret Taylor Senior reporters Katy Dowell , Luke McLeod-Roberts Reporters James Swift , Gavriel Hollander,
Andrew Pugh Lawyer 2B Editor Husnara Begum 020 7970 4644 Reporter Corinne McPartland Group production editor Damian Lawrence Deputy production editor Vanessa Lawrence
Senior sub-editor Stephen Godson Art editor Marion Francis Web sub-editor Kirsty Wright Recruitment advertising manager Jamie McGregor Recruitment sales Elizabeth Owen-Pam,
Shilpa Suthar, James OGorman Display sales Richard Edwards Business development Philippa Schlaefli International sales director Mark Doyle International sales manager
David Freeman CPD/events Mita Versani Lawyer 2B sales manager Mark Philbrick Senior conference producer Gareth Wilson
Publisher TheLawyer.comDavid Hall Publishing director Libby Child
Email: forename.surname@thelawyer.com
The Lawyer is published weekly by Centaur Media plc, St Giles House, 50 Poland Street, London W1F 7AX. Switchboard 020 79704000. For circulation and subscription enquiries: 020 7292 3716,
email lawcirc@centaur.co.uk. ISSN 0953-7902. THE LAWYER IS PRINTED ON 100 PER CENT RECYCLED PAPER
4 Introduction
12 The bar
18 International
Sectors
22 Corporate
24 Banking and finance
26 Real estate
28 Litigation
Profiles
30 The big four
36 Five to 100
73 101 to 200
Tables
89 Profit per equity partner
90 Net profit
93 Cost per lawyer
94 Revenue per partner
97 Revenue per lawyer
100 UK 200 100 to 200
102 UK 200 one to 100
UK 2OO ANNUAL
REPORT 2010
TLS_003_a ug_uk200_c ont e nt s _e d 26/ 8/ 10 14: 56 Pa ge 3
Introduction
4|The Lawyer|UK 200
FIRST, a surprise. Although the total revenue generated by the UKs
200 largest law firms fell by 676m last year, a 4 per cent drop to
14.94bn, these firms still generated more fees last year than they
did at the height of the boom in 2007-08.
That year the top 200 posted a total turnover of 14.84bn. The
year before, the first year that The Lawyer began tracking the top
200, the total was just 13.53bn, nearly 10 per cent lower than it
was at the end of 2009-10. Indeed, the five-year increase since
2005-06 was 10.4 per cent.
It is a similar story when the focus shifts to the top 100 largest
firms. Last years total revenue was 13.73bn, 667m and 4.6 per
cent down on 2008-09. Compared with the boom year of 2007-08,
however, there is virtually no difference (94m or 0.6 per cent)
between the two totals. For all the talk of the dire straits facing the
UK legal market, that is some performance.
Over five years the story of the UKs top 100 is even more
dramatic. In 2005-06, a year after The Lawyer christened the term
silver circle to describe a bunch of high-rolling, high-earning
private equity-led firms capitalising on the corporate boom, such as
Ashurst, Macfarlanes and SJ Berwin, the top 100 generated
10.88bn. Since then, despite the recession, the total has grown by
26 per cent (and if it is truly surprising statistics you are after, then
how about this: the firm that put on most revenue over the past five
years was DWF, which posted an 111 per cent bump, from 33.9m
to 71.5m, closely followed by Bird & Bird, up by 109 per cent, from
96.7m to 201.8m).
So the demise of Halliwells notwithstanding it is by no means
all doom and gloom out there. But as readers of The Lawyer often
like to point out, building revenue is not usually the problem. Profit
is what counts.
Profit of doom
Here there are signs of stress. The total net profit among the top
100 shrank significantly last year when compared with the height
of the boom. That year, 2007-08, the top 100 generated a total
profit of 4.79bn. Last year that had dropped by 13.4 per cent to
4.15bn, a figure that was also down on 2008-09 (4.16bn) and
2006-07 (4.26bn). You would have to go all the way back to 2005-
06 (3.57bn) to find a year when the top 100 made less profit than
it did last year.
Indeed, a snapshot of the top 100s average profit per equity
partner (PEP), that oft-disparaged metric, is even more illustrative.
Although it rose by 3.7 per cent last year, from 402,000 to
417,000, PEP at the largest 100 UK firms remained some way
short of the boom years 497,000 and also a way off the figure in
2006, when it was 482,000.
But then, if ever there was a year in which the value of PEP as a
guide to a firms financial health was undermined, it was surely
2009-10. This was the year of the double-digit bounce, largely the
result of it reflecting a recovery from the lowest of low ebbs.
At times during this years financial reporting season it seemed
that, if you were not posting hefty PEP increases, you were either in
the wrong market or you were Halliwells.
This summer a succession of firms posted PEP increases that
bordered on the farcical. One after another firms including LG,
Shoosmiths, Blake Lapthorn and Travers Smith queued up to
trumpet rises of 50, 60 and even 70 per cent (the highest The
Lawyer spotted was Scottish firm Burness, where PEP was up by
94 per cent).
These results provided plenty of ammunition for those who claim
it is a devalued indicator. As more than one law firm partner and
legal market commentator pointed out, the astronomical rises in
PEP figures were more often than not due to nothing more than the
fact that said figures had been so dire the year before.
The final cuts
But they were also due to the extreme measures firms had been
taking to get back on track, namely cutting costs. This is the flip side
to these, at first sight, impressive returns to form.
So how to judge a firms performance in this most turbulent of
periods? And what has been the impact on a battered profession of
the most ruthless period of cost-cutting in living memory?
It is widely accepted that the only way to assess a firms
performance accurately is to consider a range of indicators. Or, as
Clifford Chance managing partner David Childs memorably
put it earlier this year: Use a dashboard of metrics to review
performance, including revenue, PEP, RPL [revenue per lawyer]
and RPP [revenue per partner], and other important measures,
such as client retention, client wins and so on.
But if anything can be relied upon as predictable and certain at law
firms, it is costs. Costs are harder to fudge than PEP. They are even
harder to change. They are all but fixed except for headcount, the only
variable that can be adjusted with any degree of rapidity and one that
at most firms accounts for around 60 per cent of total overheads.
Consequently, over the past couple of years most firms have been
taking full advantage of that fact.
Even so, only 60 of the 93 firms for which The Lawyer has costs data
stretching back five years posted reductions in their total costs last
year. Over five years 81 of the 93 saw their costs increase in line with
the overall growth of their businesses, with the expansionist DWF and
Bird & Bird seeing the greatest increases in costs (127 per cent and 122
per cent respectively) out of the top 50.
Clifford Chances total partner count down
by 75; PEP up by 27 per cent
Chopping
and changing
Despite excelling in
fee generation, a tough
recession has been
characterised by client
power and law firms clawing
their way into the black
via outsourcing, merging
and squeezing their staff to
the max. By Matt Byrne
TLS_004_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 26/ 8/ 10 14: 59 Pa ge 4
Only Hammonds from the top 50 saw a costs reduction over five
years, with total overheads dropping by 6 per cent, from 101.4m in
2006 to 95.4m last year. Good news perhaps for its prospective
merger partner Squire Sanders & Dempsey.
But what is astonishing is the firm that has reduced its costs the
most Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. The magic circle firm,
which last year generated 3.1m per day, slashed 132m out of its
overheads during 2009-10, from 684m to 552m.
Of course, what really matters is which firm saw the biggest
reduction in total cost proportionately. And that firm, slashing its
costs bill by 19 per cent, is Freshfields.
According to the firms chief executive Ted Burke, this stunning
performance was helped in part by Freshfields disproportionately
large European practice and the depreciation of the euro.
Around half of our revenue and costs are in euros, Burke says.
Other than that Burke struggles to pinpoint a single silver bullet
solution to his firms record cost-cutting.
Weve outsourced some services and looked hard at our internal
spend, and we were very careful about new hiring, Burke adds.
Like all firms weve been pressured to be more efficient and to
adjust to difficult conditions. But we started preparing for the
downturn well in advance, as early as 2007, and that helped a lot.
As part of that Freshfields formed an 10-member operations
executive two years ago chaired by Burke, which monitors and
manages any capital expenditure above 200,000.
This growth has been really helpful in bringing a more disciplined
approach to major expenditures, explains Burke.
The Lawyer tracked the UKs four largest firms performances over
five years, monitoring costs growth versus turnover and headcount.
Three statistics immediately leap out: the 15 per cent and 19.6 per
cent reduction in partners and equity partners respectively at
Freshfields since 2005-06; and the 25 per cent increase in equity
partners at Linklaters over the same period, the result of the latters
decision to head back towards an all-equity partnership.
What is also remarkable about Freshfields figures is that last year
it was the firm that reduced headcount the least of the four.
Freshfields cut total lawyer numbers by just 5 per cent, in contrast
with 7 per cent at Allen & Overy (A&O), 8.5 per cent at Linklaters
and 11 per cent at Clifford Chance (the latter firm reduced its total
partner numbers by a similar proportion, again the highest of the
quartet).
Almost as surprising as Freshfields posting the biggest reduction
in costs last year is the gap between it and the firm that posted the
smallest change, A&O. Between 2008-09 A&O managed a costs
reduction of just 39m.
So while all four have improved, A&O reduced its costs as a
proportion of turnover by just one percentage point last year despite
its restructuring.
In contrast, Freshfields and Clifford Chance both cut proportional
costs by five percentage points between 2008-09 and last year, the
former without the benefit of any major restructuring during the
past two years.
Clifford Chances figures, like Linklaters, show that both firms
took the hit of the restructuring, but also managed to improve the
bottom line by reducing costs in spite of a reduction in overall
turnover at both firms.
Super savers
A&O global senior partner David Morley defends his firms position
by pointing out a few other headline stats.
Introduction
The Lawyer|UK 200|5
8 per cent total headcount reduction
at Freshfields, from 5,038 to 4,653;
partner numbers remained static at 444
111 per cent five-year turnover growth
at DWF, from 33.9mto 71.5m
The table on page 10 shows the
firms with the top 30 margins in
the UK. These are the firms that
were most successful last year in
keeping a lid on costs.
Everyones favourite pensions
boutique Sacker & Partners
heads this years top 100 margins
list at 53 per cent, one place and
one percentage point ahead of
Slaughter and May, which
maintained a 50 per cent-plus
margin despite a dip in average
profit per equity partner last year,
and ahead of Freshfields
Bruckhaus Deringer (although
the latters 52 per cent margin is
one off the pace, it steals the total
net profit crown with 589m,
81.8m ahead of Linklaters).
All 30 of these firms posted a
margin of 30 per cent or above, a
measure that has long been the
traditional mark of a top-tier
commercial practice. So far the
worst recession in living memory
appears to have done little to
affect that headline statistic.
The 30-somethings
McGrigors
headcount in Belfast
increased from 10
to 100 thanks to
its October 2009
merger with
LEstrange & Brett
177 the number of days it took Freshfields
to clear its costs in 2009-10
TLS_005_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 01 Pa ge 5
Introduction
6|The Lawyer|UK 200
We had the largest increase in turnover over the period of the four
firms [43 per cent], we have the largest number of offices [36, com-
pared with Clifford Chances 29, Freshfields 28 and Linklaters 26]
and we had the largest increase in the number of lawyers. Also our
fees per fee-earner showed the second-highest increase at
29 per cent.
Despite that growth the cost savings achieved by A&O and the rest of
the magic circle reflect the cuts that have been taking place throughout
the UK legal market over the past two to three years. Longer, if the
increased efficiencies looked for by outsourcing are factored in.
Weve been outsourcing document production to India for seven
or eight years its as old as the hills, says Morley.
Freshfields Burke agrees. Outsourcing isnt as new as some would
have you believe, he says. I remember US law firms outsourcing
cleaning, reproduction and so on as early as the 1980s. What is truly
different is the increased momentum to outsource certain types of
legal services.
Whats interesting now, agrees Morley, is that outsourcing is
beginning to lap up against the shore of legal services.
As he confirms, this recent trend towards legal process outsourcing
(LPO) is also being driven by the increasing expectations of clients
for greater efficiencies. Or to put it another way, a recognition that
the conditions that have long applied to law firms clients and the
rest of UK industry also apply to them.
Law firms have been cushioned from market forces that
apply to other industries, argues Eversheds managing partner
Lee Ranson. Until now they didnt have to do it. Look at the profit
margins there were so many firms with margins of 35 per cent or
more. Thats unheard of in the vast majority of industries.
Now those margins are attracting the attention of rivals rivals
without law firms historical hang-ups that could happily cut a
swathe through the market.
Couple that with increased competition and an oversupply of
lawyers, and the conditions are ripe for change, adds Ranson, who
insists that cost-saving was not the primary driver for his firms
decision to outsource much of its back office services to Accenture
(the Eversheds boss says international expansion and best practice
were two of the three key imperatives, along with saving money).
Cutting costs is very important, but its not the only driver,
emphasises Ranson. If it was wed have come up with another
solution. Accenture isnt cheap.
Human blights
The increasingly hard-nosed approach to the provision of legal
services the industrialisation of the law, if you like has
another cost, of course: human.
Along with the ranks of support staff fired during redundancy
programmes or cut adrift as firms outsource to the subcontinent,
hundreds of lawyers have lost their jobs during the recession. If
outsourcing, and increasingly LPO, become widely accepted as
tools to increase efficiency across the market, this is a trend that
is sure to accelerate.
DAYS TO PROFIT 2009-10
R A N K F I R M TURNOVER (M)
DAILY
REVENUE (M)
TOTAL
COSTS (M)
DAYS TO
PROFIT
Slaughter and May 439.5 1.20 211.4 176
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 1,141.0 3.13 552.0 177
Linklaters 1,183.0 3.24 675.8 209
Travers Smith 72.0 0.20 41.7 211
Macfarlanes 92.4 0.25 54.0 213
Dundas & Wilson 61.0 0.17 35.7 214
Allen & Overy 1,050.0 2.88 662.0 230
Ashurst 293.0 0.80 189.7 236
Burges Salmon 60.7 0.17 40.3 242
Reynolds Porter Chamberlain 60.0 0.16 39.7 242
Barlow Lyde & Gilbert 81.5 0.22 54.9 246
Watson Farley & Williams 80.2 0.22 54.7 249
Wragge & Co 96.2 0.26 65.8 249
Taylor Wessing 177.9 0.49 121.6 250
Ince & Co 86.3 0.24 60.4 255
Norton Rose 307.0 0.84 214.7 255
Lovells 542.0 1.49 382.0 257
Stephenson Harwood 91.9 0.25 64.6 257
Clifford Chance 1,197.0 3.28 847.0 258
LG 64.9 0.18 46.1 259
94 per cent the PEP rise at Burness,
from 157,000 to 305,000, on a turnover increase of 5 per cent
TLS_006_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 08 Pa ge 6
icaew.com/thelawyer +44 (0)1908 248 040
THE ICAEW CERTIFICATE IN INSOLVENCY
O A practical understanding of corporate and personal insolvency principles for
legal professionals.
O Study options and computer-based assessments to suit individual preferences
and business needs.
O Classroom tuition, distance learning and study materials from
BPP Professional Education (BPP).
O Formal recognition from ICAEW, the UKs largest insolvency regulator.
PRACTICAL SKILLS TO
DEAL WITH CRITICAL
BUSINESS SITUATIONS
TLS_007_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 11 Pa ge 1
The likelihood is that, over the coming months and years, more
firms will follow the lead of CMS Cameron McKenna, Eversheds,
Pinsent Masons and others that have embraced outsourcing. Throw
the implementation of the Legal Services Act (LSA) into the mix
next year, paving the way for new business structures and external
investment, and you have a market that is on the cusp of a
potentially brutal new era most of it driven by cost-saving.
Although there are currently signs of life in certain transactional
markets and recruitment levels are slowly kicking back into gear, the
widespread layoffs have left their mark. Morale among lawyers
buffeted by layoffs, frozen salaries and long hours is said to be at an
all-time low.
It is a situation not helped by the sky-high PEP increases posted
by several firms this year. Mark Brandon of Motive Legal
Consulting says the true impact of the volatility has not yet
been felt.
Theres a feeling that bridges have been burnt and that partners
Introduction
8|The Lawyer|UK 200
R
a
n
k
F
i
r
m
G
r
o
s
s
f
e
e
s
2
0
0
9
-
1
0
(
m
)
C
o
s
t
s
2
0
0
9
-
1
0
(
m
)
C
o
s
t
s
2
0
0
8
-
0
9
(
m
)
C
o
s
t
s
2
0
0
7
-
0
8
(
m
)
C
o
s
t
s
2
0
0
6
-
0
7
(
m
)
C
o
s
t
s
2
0
0
5
-
0
6
(
m
)
O
n
e
-
y
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
(
m
)
O
n
e
-
y
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
(
%
)
F
i
v
e
-
y
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
(
m
)
F
i
v
e
-
y
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
(
%
)
1 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 1,141.0 552.0 684.0 583.0 496.0 449.0 -132.0 -19.30 103.0 22.93
2 Shoosmiths 90.0 79.0 93.4 91.0 78.7 60.9 -14.4 -15.42 18.1 29.72
3 Dundas & Wilson 61.0 35.7 41.7 44.5 38.4 31.8 -6.0 -14.39 3.9 12.26
5 Linklaters 1,183.0 675.8 784.4 729.0 631.0 560.0 -108.6 -13.84 115.8 20.67
6 Simmons & Simmons 251.0 192.5 221.8 196.2 172.7 159.0 -29.3 -13.21 33.5 21.06
7 Charles Russell 63.2 51.8 58.9 53.5 46.5 42.4 -7.1 -12.05 9.4 22.16
8 Clifford Chance 1,197.0 847.0 955.0 868.0 796.1 720.6 -108.0 -11.31 126.4 17.54
9 Pinsent Masons 206.0 160.0 179.0 159.0 143.0 126.8 -19.0 -10.61 33.2 26.18
10 Hammonds 118.0 95.4 106.1 104.7 98.3 101.4 -10.7 -10.08 -6.0 -5.91
11 Withers 92.7 72.0 79.7 69.8 60.4 51.6 -7.7 -9.66 20.5 39.67
12 Barlow Lyde & Gilbert 81.5 54.9 60.0 55.1 49.2 52.0 -5.1 -8.50 2.9 5.57
13 Nabarro 113.8 83.3 91.0 86.9 74.8 70.3 -7.7 -8.46 13.0 18.49
14 SJ Berwin 171.0 132.0 144.0 141.7 121.0 96.0 -12.0 -8.33 36.0 37.5
15 Taylor Wessing 177.9 121.6 132.4 120.4 102.0 90.4 -10.8 -8.16 31.3 34.58
16 Wragge & Co 96.2 65.8 71.1 74.6 67.3 60.3 -5.3 -7.45 5.5 9.12
17 Burges Salmon 60.7 40.3 43.5 43.4 38.8 33.7 -3.2 -7.36 6.6 19.44
18 Ashurst 293.0 189.7 204.1 187.8 148.8 122.9 -14.4 -7.06 66.8 54.3
19 Eversheds 355.2 285.1 305.4 310.0 280.8 257.0 -20.3 -6.65 28.1 10.93
20 Halliwells 67.0 67.0 71.2 67.0 58.6 42.4 -4.2 -5.90 24.6 58.01
21 Allen & Overy 1,050.0 662.0 701.0 569.0 523.8 466.0 -39.0 -5.56 196.0 42.06
22 Denton Wilde Sapte 167.5 136.1 144.0 124.0 118.9 114.6 -7.9 -5.49 21.5 18.76
23 Slaughter and May 439.5 211.4 222.7 196.1 209.1 185.5 -11.3 -5.07 25.9 13.96
24 Norton Rose 307.0 214.7 225.6 198.3 156.7 147.7 -10.9 -4.83 67.0 45.36
25 Travers Smith 72.0 41.7 43.5 44.8 40.1 35.0 -1.8 -4.14 6.7 19.14
26 Trowers & Hamlins 89.4 75.0 77.6 64.2 55.8 45.5 -2.6 -3.35 29.5 64.83
27 LG 64.9 46.1 47.5 46.5 43.2 42.3 -1.4 -2.95 3.8 8.98
28 Lovells 542.0 382.0 390.4 326.3 289.0 263.3 -8.4 -2.15 118.7 45.08
29 Macfarlanes 92.4 54.0 55.1 57.2 50.2 44.7 -1.1 -2.00 9.3 20.80
30 CMS Cameron McKenna 214.4 168.7 172.0 152.8 133.0 119.1 -3.3 -1.92 49.6 41.64
Top 30 firms by per cent cost reduction, 2009-10
14,938m
total revenue of UK 200
13,728m
total revenue of UK 100
4,150m
total profit of UK 100
30.2 per cent
average margin of UK 100
417,000
average PEP of UK 100
TLS_008_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 09 Pa ge 8
Introduction
The Lawyer|UK 200|9
dont get it, claims Brandon. They see their assistant resource base
as being infinitely malleable. But theres been a step change in morale,
the glue is going, and although firms have kept the utilisation rates
high, assistants are saying theyre suffering because theyre working
weekends with a pay freeze while partner profits are back up.
Eversheds Ranson is enough of a realist to admit that the human
cost of redundancies is significant.
Theres been a big impact, he says. This is an industry unused
to this type of scenario. Most lawyers are used to making money
and the recessions been a big cultural shock, a big impact on the
morale within the profession. But Halliwells has given the whole
market a real shock. It showed the consequences of not doing it
right are real. If you dont get it right, everybody loses their job.
Not everyone is convinced this necessarily means an all-out
embracing of new business models, however. Wragge & Co senior
partner Quentin Poole believes there is a danger that the major cost
savings generated by layoffs and outsourcing programmes may be a
knee-jerk reaction to what could be a temporary situation.
It may be that some elements of pricing or supply and demand
will never come back, agrees Poole, but you have to be careful not
to go too far down the track of sacrificing the delivery of quality in
an attempt to save costs. Were already seeing some banks bringing
some of the things theyve outsourced back on shore. I dont know if
outsourcing is high-risk, but its certainly risky.
The difference being
No one of course knows the extent to which the legal market will
change, although most agree that there are at least some elements of
change that are permanent.
Ive spoken to three general counsel in the past couple of weeks,
who each told me the genies out of the bottle, says Pinsents dispute
resolution head Nigel Kissack, the man behind his firms South
African outsourcing venture. They know they can negotiate on fees,
and theres always going to be at least one firm on their panel or in
their immediate orbit that will blink and give away good work for
stupid money. Theyre holding the whip hand. Its going to be pretty
tough to come back from that.
A&Os Morley believes the changes are a mix of cyclical and
structural. But what will not go away, he adds, is the increased
competition, and from that flows everything else.
Everythings a function of competition, adds Morley. The LSA,
non-lawyers entering the professions, Indian and Chinese law firms
coming into the UK market its all competition. I say bring it on.
All for one
In that context, here is another thought. If this years reporting season
was characterised by the double-digit PEP rise, then this year has been
Despite all that has been written
about lawyer redundancies, only
one category of headcount shows
a reduction in 2009-10 from
where it was five years ago
support staff.
In every other category
total staff, full equity partners,
fee-earners, qualified lawyers
or all classes of partner the
numbers have grown over five
years, even if the year-on-year
figure from 2008-09 shows a
reduction.
But the cuts in support staff
clearly indicate the pruning that
has been going on across the UK.
The biggest drop came last year,
when a total of 3,762 positions
disappeared (in 2006-07 there
were 994 more support staff
positions than last year).
Take Allen & Overy. The firm
has cut its lawyer to support staff
ratio over the past five years from
0.95 to 0.81.
Thats a very dramatic change
in absolute numbers, says the
firms senior partner David
Morley. If you think that there
are around 2,500 lawyers and
2,000 support staff, then that
cut means around 300 people.
Its a quiet revolution.
Pull support
Burke: Freshfields large European
offering came to the rescue David Morley, Allen & Overy
3.1m the amount
Freshfields turned over each day last year
Allen & Overy 230 days to profit in 2009-10
The average CPL among the UK top 100 dropped by
3 per cent, from 241,000 to 234,000, during 2009-10
TLS_009_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 1/ 9/ 10 10: 24 Pa ge 9
10|The Lawyer|UK 200
characterised by the transatlantic merger. Whether consummated
(Hogan Lovells) or still flirting (SJ Berwin and Proskauer Rose),
there have been more public deals and talks than in any recent year.
It is hard not to read this as another form of efficiency hunting by
firms particularly second-tier City or national players that are
under the cosh from spoilt-for-choice clients.
If I was at one of those firms Id be asking, Dear God, how am I
answering the question, whats different about us?, says one
regional managing partner. Theyve managed to get away with
being good all-rounders because theres been so much demand in
the market. Now theres far more supply than demand and prices are
appalling. Its very difficult to compete on price with the nationals
and the non-price sensitive work goes to the magic circle. Whats the
way out? I believe thats one of the reasons why youve been seeing so
much talk about US mergers, because if all else fails firms think
thats the get out of jail free card. Its not.
Structural integrity
The questions over firms futures, including new cost-saving meas-
ures, are no longer hypothetical. The story of Optima Legal Services,
which blazed a three-year trail into alternative business structure
territory until the Solicitors Regulation Authority finally put a block
on its association with Capita this summer, is sure to be repeated
legally, this time once the LSA comes fully into force next year.
Firms are already changing. But they are on the cusp of far
greater change.
R
a
n
k
F
i
r
m
G
l
o
b
a
l
g
r
o
s
s
f
e
e
s
(
m
)
M
a
r
g
i
n
2
0
0
9
-
1
0
(
%
)
M
a
r
g
i
n
2
0
0
8
-
0
9
(
%
)
M
a
r
g
i
n
2
0
0
7
-
0
8
(
%
)
M
a
r
g
i
n
2
0
0
6
-
0
7
(
%
)
M
a
r
g
i
n
2
0
0
5
-
0
6
(
%
)
=1 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 1,141.0 52 47 51 50 49
=1 Slaughter and May 439.5 52 56 59 50 42
3 Linklaters 1,183.0 43 40 44 44 40
=4 Macfarlanes 92.4 42 44 48 51 50
=4 Travers Smith 72.0 42 33 45 49 49
6 Dundas & Wilson 61.0 41 37 41 37 40
7 Allen & Overy 1,050.0 37 36 44 41 37
8 Ashurst 293.0 35 32 42 46 43
=9 Burges Salmon 60.7 34 32 36 37 38
=9 Reynolds Porter Chamberlain 60.0 34 33 33 34 35
11 Barlow Lyde & Gilbert 81.5 33 31 33 35 35
=12 Taylor Wessing 177.9 32 30 35 37 37
=12 Watson Farley & Williams 80.2 32 33 37 39 41
=12 Wragge & Co 96.2 32 31 41 40 40
=15 Ince & Co 86.3 30 30 33 36 37
=15 Lovells 542.0 30 26 32 32 34
=15 Norton Rose 307.0 30 28 33 33 30
=15 Stephenson Harwood 91.9 30 31 31 30 25
=19 Clifford Chance 1,197.0 29 24 35 33 30
=19 LG 64.9 29 21 31 35 36
=21 Clyde & Co 192.0 28 25 30 31 32
=21 Mills & Reeve 67.3 28 26 28 28 27
=21 Olswang 91.0 28 25 30 32 31
=24 Nabarro 113.8 27 28 39 39 34
=24 Speechly Bircham 58.4 27 21 26 26 27
26 Herbert Smith 449.9 26 26 35 33 34
27 Addleshaw Goddard 167.5 25 26 33 35 32
=28 Osborne Clarke 83.7 23 24 32 33 31
=28 Simmons & Simmons 251.0 23 24 32 31 30
=28 SJ Berwin 171.0 23 22 34 36 38
Margins 2006-10
240,000-1.6m Gordons equity spread
3.3m the amount Clifford Chance generated each day last year
Introduction
TLS_010_a ug_uk200_i nt r o_e d 1/ 9/ 10 10: 26 Pa ge 10
Flexible, professional courses
to enhance your career
www.law.qmul.ac.uk
M
e
e
t
A
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
s
-
P
G
O
p
e
n
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
W
e
d
n
e
s
d
a
y
2
4
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
w
w
w
.
q
m
u
l
.
a
c
.
u
k
/
v
i
s
i
t
u
s
/
o
p
e
n
d
a
y
s
/
p
g
o
p
e
n
e
v
e
n
i
n
g
/
CPD accredited classes taught by leading academics,
visiting practitioners and industry experts
Centre for Commercial Law Studies (CCLS) established
in 1980 first in UK
Classes held in Lincoln's Inn Fields, Russell Square
and Barbican
Authorized CPD provider for SRA & BSB.
American Bar Association (ABA)
accreditation (LLM modules)
Wide range of 6-8pm commercially focused
LLM/Diploma classes including:
Arbitration and Dispute Settlement Banking Law Competition Law
Computer Law Corporate Insolvency Int.Merger Control Int. Trade and
Investment Legal Aspects of Int.Finance Tax -Business/EU
General LLM + 18 Specialist LLMs - F/T & P/T PG Diploma - P/T only
MSc Law and Finance Programme MA Research in Law PhD
PG Diploma in International Dispute Resolution - Arbitration/ Mediation
MSc Management of Intellectual Property PG Certificate in Intellectual
Property Law PG Certificate in Trade Mark Law and Practice
Distance Learning
Diploma/LLM in Computer and Communications Law Diploma in
International Commercial Arbitration Diploma in International Mediation
James Freeman
Senior Associate, Litigation,
Allen & Overy LLP
Current Student, PG Diploma
in International Dispute
Resolution-Arbitration
Chambers of
Philip Havers QC
1 Crown Office Row, Temple, London EC4Y 7HH Contact: Senior Clerk, Matthew Phipps
T 020 7797 7500 F 020 7797 7550 E mail@1cor.com
Crown Office Row, 119 Church Street, Brighton BN1 1UD Contact: Senior Clerk, David Bingham
T 01273 625 625 F 01273 698 888 E clerks@1cor.com
www.1cor.com
1
Excellence across a
wide area of civil & common law...
Its top flight performers amass between them an enviable bank of
knowledge of medical and regulatory issues all of which is seasoned
with efficient case management and excellent responsiveness. It also
proves surprisingly versatile. Experts in family, environment, personal
injury and general public law abound at an outfit that forms a whole that
is very much greater than the sum of its parts.
(Chambers & Partners)
Specialisms: clinical negligence, professional disciplinary, public and administrative law,
human rights, judicial review and public inquiries, inquests, personal injury including child
abuse compensation law and other torts, medical and health, environmental law,
professional negligence, employment, technology and construction, tax, costs, matrimonial
finance and sports law.
TLS_011_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 11: 05 Pa ge 1
The Bar
12|The Lawyer|UK 200
OVER the past decade the bar has successfully rid itself of its
slightly fusty image, emerging from the wilderness years when the
economy boomed and litigants were few and far between with
renewed professional direction.
So, having dusted themselves down, the UKs top 30 chambers are
using the countercyclical revenue they have raised in the past couple
of years to invest in new talent and help secure their futures. They
are also examining how best to compete in a post-Legal Services Act
(LSA) environment.
The question now for the bar is how to embrace the next decade
of change without losing the traditions that have helped to make it
unique and keep clients coming back.
Attracting talent
In 2009-10 the total revenue generated by The Lawyers bar top 30
increased by 6 per cent, from 750.6m to 797m. This is a slower
rate of growth than in the previous year, when revenue grew by 13.6
per cent from 661m to 750.6m. But this slower growth disguises
the fact that many sets are using their increased revenues to invest
in people and processes.
In July, The Lawyer reported that Blackstone Chambers, Essex
Court, Maitland Chambers, One Essex Court, 3 Verulam
Buildings and Wilberforce Chambers, all sets that have seen
revenue increase, posted 100 per cent retention rates for their newly
qualified (NQ) barristers (The Lawyer, 15 July).
Leading sets have been busy gearing up for a whole new
series of challenges, varying from law firms seducing
the best talent to making the most of the opportunities
presented by the Legal Services Act. By Katy Dowell
Barometric pressure
Rank
2009-10
Rank
2008-09 Chambers
2009-10
turnover (m)
2008-09
turnover (m)
Per cent
change
Revenue per
barrister (k)
Chambers
contributions (%)
1 1 Brick Court Chambers* 42.5 41.5 2.4 598 10.00-11.00
2 3 One Essex Court* 41.5 38.5 7.8 610 11.00
3 2 Essex Court Chambers* 40.4 38.8 4.1 531 11.00
4 4 Fountain Court* 40.1 36.8 8.9 636 13.00
5 6 Blackstone Chambers* 38.5 33.0 16.7 464 16.00-17.00
6 6 Wilberforce Chambers* 37.6 33.0 13.9 767 **13.5
7 5 No5 Chambers 36.3 36.1 0.5 197 0.5-15.00
8 9 3 Verulam Buildings* 34.1 29.9 14.0 568 9.00
9 8 39 Essex Street 33.6 30.4 10.5 430 22.00
10 11 7 Kings Bench Walk* 31.7 27.8 14.0 674 10.00-12.00
11 10 Maitland Chambers* 30.1 28.5 5.6 485 13.5
12 12 20 Essex Street* 27.2 25.7 5.8 544 11.00-12.00
13 13 3-4 South Square* 27.0 25.0 8.0 600 11.00-12.00
14 15 4 Pump Court* 24.8 23.7 4.6 468 14.00
15 16 Keating Chambers* 24.7 23.5 5.1 484 16.00
16 20 Quadrant Chambers 24.4 21.9 11.4 497 13.4
17 17 Serle Court* 23.8 22.7 4.9 466 17.00
18 18 4 New Square 22.5 22.4 0.4 321 11.00
19 19 Landmark Chambers 22.0 22.2 -0.9 314 16.00
20 22 Exchange Chambers 21.7 18.8 15.4 160 12.00
21 21 Kings Chambers 20.1 19.1 5.2 225 10.45
22 24 One Crown Office Row* 19.1 17.4 9.7 192 16.00
23 23 Outer Temple Chambers 18.2 18.0 1.1 252 15.00
=24 30 Matrix Chambers 17.2 13.6 26.5 257 17.5
=24 27 7 Bedford Row 17.2 15.8 8.9 202 16.00
26 25 Monckton Chambers 17.0 17.2 -1.1 340 14.00
27 26 11KBW 16.7 16.3 2.3 354 16.00
28 28 4-5 Grays Inn Square 16.0 14.6 9.5 296 14.00
29 NE*** 3 Paper Buildings 15.9 13.5 17.8 118 20.5
30 29 Hardwicke 15.8 13.9 14.0 190 18.25
* Estimated figures; **Includes payment of members professional in
Bar top 30 by turnover, 2009-10
TLS_012_a ug_uk200_ba r _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 18 Pa ge 12
The Bar
The Lawyer|UK 200|13
Number
of tenants
(silks)
Number of
female
tenants (silks)
Total
number
of clerks
Total
number
of staff
71 (35) 11 (3) 13 22
68 (24) 12 (1) 11 15
76 (35) 8 (2) 14 22
63 (29) 13 (2) 9 12
83 (32) 22 (4) 8 30
49 (23) 10 (2) 10 8
184(21) 60 (1) 27 38
60 (18) 11(0) 11 11
78 (27) 23(2) 15 26
47 (19) 10 (2) 15 8
62 (18) 11(2) 8 22
50 (17) 10(0) 9 9
45 (19) 7 (1) 4 20
53 (19) 9 (0) 8 19
51 (20) 14 (4) 9 22
49 (12) 9 (0) 14 8
51 (15) 7 (1) 8 12
70 (19) 19 (2) 7 28
70 (20) 12 (2) 10 10
135 (16) 31 (1) 11 32
89 (10) 19 (1) 10 14
99 (21) 38 (7) 13 23
72 (14) 16 (0) 10 22
67 (17) 22 (4) 12 32
85 (18) 22 (3) 15 7
50 (10) 12 (1) 6 16
47 (17) 15(1) 10 14
54 (15) 11 (1) 8 17
134 (10) 43 (0) 26 9
83 (5) 27 (0) 17 28
onal indemnity insurance premiums up to 5m from central expenditure; ***New entry
With fewer students looking for seats at the bar, sets are keen to
invest in the next generation to help secure their futures. One Essex
Court demonstrated this when in August 2009 it set a precedent at
the Inns of Court by raising pupillage salaries to 60,000 for the
October 2010 intake. The announcement started a trend, with
Wilberforce raising pupillage salaries to 48,000 from 40,000
and Essex Court upping salaries to 55,000.
With increased competition for talent, chambers fear losing future
stars of the bar to higher-paying law firms. US firms in particular
have set new standards in NQ salaries, with Bingham promising
100,000 to new lawyers and Debevoise & Plimpton, a firm
known for preferring its in-house advocacy team to the bar, offering
93,250.
What those at the top of the commercial and chancery hierarchy
want to attract is an excellent set of junior advocates who will
produce the next Jonathan Sumption QC (Brick Court Chambers),
Lord Pannick QC (Blackstone) or Lord Grabiner QC (One Essex
Court).
We see ourselves as being at the top of the market, recruiting the
best people year-on-year, and we understand what they refuse when
they come here, One Essex Court senior clerk Darren Burrows tells
Turnover: 42.5m
Tenants (silks): 71 (35)
Chambers contributions: 10-11 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 598,000
Leading cases:
#Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National & Ors (Bank
charges litigation)
Jonathan Sumption QC, Mark Hoskins QC, Jemima Stratford
QC and Sarah Love
#Colour Quest v Total/Chevron (Buncefield litigation)
Jonathan Sumption QC and Alan McLean QC
#Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation & Ors v Yuri Privalov
& Ors (Fiona Trust litigation)
Andrew Popplewell QC
#Boris Berezovsky v Roman Abramovich
Helen Davies QC
#BSkyB v Ofcom
James Flynn QC, David Anderson QC, Helen Davies QC and
Mark Hoskins QC
Turnover: 41.5m
Tenants (silks): 68 (24)
Chambers contributions: 11 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 610,000
Leading cases:
#Digicel & Ors v Cable & Wireless
Lord Grabiner QC, Edmund Nourse and Cornall Patton
#Boris Berezovsky v Roman Abramovich
Laurence Rabinowitz QC, Richard Gillis QC, Simon Colton,
Sebastian Isaac, James Edelma and Nahali Shah
#Colour Quest v Total/Chevron (Buncefield litigation)
Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Lord Grabiner QC
#Tullet Prebon plc & Ors v BGC Brokers & Ors
Jeffrey Onions QC
#CPC Group Ltd v Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment
Company (Chelsea Barracks litigation)
Lord Grabiner QC, Neil Kitchener QC and Alexander Polley
2 One Essex Court
1 Brick Court Chambers
Top 10 sets
Sumption
TLS_013_a ug_uk200_ba r _e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 44 Pa ge 13
The Bar
The Lawyer. Theres increasing competition for those people.
Leading silks accept that having a top-heavy set with too few
juniors can have an adverse effect on the mix of work coming into
chambers.
For example, Fountain Court recognises that a broader mix of
instructions is important to give junior members exposure to the
courts. That mix of work is essential to help keep the coffers topped
up in quieter times.
People look at us and see us on the top cases, but we cant survive
on that alone we need the other work too, comments Fountain
Court director of clerking Alex Taylor.
Fountain Court has just had its most successful year to date,
with the set posting a revenue of 40.1m. In recent years it has
overhauled its clerking function in an effort to shrug off its stuffy
image and build a reputation in the City for being businesslike.
The top four sets all broke through the 40m barrier last year.
Brick Court increased its member count from 68 to 71 as revenue
increased by 2.4 per cent to 42.5m; One Essex Court added two
members over the year as revenue increased by 7.8 per cent to
41.5m; while Essex Court, which kept its membership steady at 76,
increased revenue by 4.1 per cent, from 38.8m to 40.4m.
Outside the magic circle the top 10 sets have seen greater revenue
growth, reflecting increased demand for skilled advocates from a
broader range of chambers.
For example, Wilberforce celebrated a record year, finding its
expertise in pensions litigation well sought after. With a turnover of
37.6m and 49 tenants (including 23 silks) the set recorded the
highest average revenue per barrister (RPB) of 767,000.
There are plans for Wilberforce to grow over the next 12 months,
including the opening of an overseas base to accommodate demand
for offshore advocacy skills.
Getting in on the act
While those at the top of the pile are sticking to their traditional
frameworks, others are considering the implementation of the LSA
and how best to move forward.
One innovation is the introduction of the ProcureCo model, a
structure intended to provide the bar with an effective method of
responding to cuts in public spending and increased competition.
The ProcureCo model has been described by the chair of the Bar
Council Nick Green QC as a model procurement company for the
bar that can be used now, giving sets increased flexibility in bidding
for work in new and existing areas of practice as well as in areas
where they face increased competition.
Outer Temple Chambers, which posted a revenue increase of 1.1
per cent, from 18m to 18.2m, went live with an international
ProcureCo mode branded Outer Temple International (OTI) in
February (The Lawyer, 22 February). Initially OTI will operate as a
not-for-profit company, but the aim is for the set to turn it into a
shareholding organisation.
Weve had to seek legal advice, draw up documents, work out the
relationship between OTI and Outer Temple and agree new roles
and responsibilities, says practice director Christine Kings. This is
useful for other business structures we may want to set up. It also
allows those who want to expand and develop international
practices to make decisions and allocate funding without having
to get agreement from the rest of chambers, which reduces the
likelihood of tensions.
According to Outer Temple, the biggest challenge is moving
chambers forward in unison when not all members are benefiting
from ProcureCo. This is a problem facing all sets wanting to invest
in new structures.
There is though a degree of scepticism surrounding the new
framework.
What happens when our members want to get work from another
set. How will the other members feel about that? asks one senior
practice director. And what does it mean for clerks organising
barristers work?
Nevertheless, according to the Bar Council there has been
widespread interest in alternative structures, if only to help sets
Turnover: 40.4m
Tenants (silks): 76 (35)
Chambers contributions: 11 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 531,000
Leading cases:
#Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation & Ors v Yuri
Privalov & Ors (Fiona Trust litigation)
Steven Berry QC, Graham Dunning QC, Nathan Pillow, David
Davies, Simon Bryan and Jern-Fei Ng
#The Kosovo Case
Professor Malcolm Shaw QC, Professor Vaughan Lowe QC
and Amy Sander
#CPC Group Ltd v Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment
Company (Chelsea Barracks litigation)
Joe Smouha QC and David Foxton QC
Turnover: 40.1m
Tenants (silks): 63 (29)
Chambers contributions: 13 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 636,000
Leading cases:
#Boris Berezovsky v Roman Abramovich
Michael Brindle QC
#Digicel v Cable & Wireless
Stephen Rubin QC and Rupert Allen
#Clydesdale Financial Services & Ors v Smailes & Ors
Tim Dutton QC and Bridget Lucas
#Colour Quest v Total/Chevron (Buncefield litigation)
Richard Handyside QC
#Administrators of Lehman Brothers International
(Europe) v Lehman Brothers Finance SA & Ors
Michael Brindle QC and Nick Yeo
3 Essex Court Chambers
4 Fountain Court
(l-r) Dutton, Taylor, Brindle
14|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_014_a ug_uk200_ba r _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 21 Pa ge 14
3PB is one of the largest sets in the UK with over 130 barristers offering teams of experts in a wide variety of specialist fields.
Our inclusion in this years Lawyers UK Top 30 Bar Listing affirms our pre-eminence and recognises the quality of service
we deliver to our clients. For its strength and depth and geographical spread 3PB is consistently chosen by professional clients
and by members of the Bar. Size does matter.
Our commitment and focus is on each clients particular needs, so no matter how large or small a problem, we provide an
individual advisory and advocacy service to match your specific requirements.
Specialist areas of expertise include:
Friendly, professional clerks operate from modern well-equipped offices to ensure that professional and lay clients expectations
are met. 3PBs size ensures it can arrange meetings and conferences at locations and venues to suit.
For further information please contact the appropriate Practice Group Clerk, as detailed on our website, or telephone 020 7583
8055 to speak with a clerk.
ADR, mediation and ENE Employment and discrimination
Asset Forfeiture Family
Clinical negligence Personal injury
Commercial Professional Negligence
Construction Property and Chancery
Crime Sport
DOES SIZE MATTER?
London Bournemouth Bristol Oxford Winchester
www.3pb.co.uk
Our business is complex
commercial chancery litigation,
offering cross-disciplinary and
specialist expertise as
advisors and trial lawyers
7 STONE BUI LDI NGS, LI NCOLN' S I NN, LONDON WC2A 3SZ
TELEPHONE +44 (0)20 7406 1200 FAX +44 (0)20 7406 1300
cl er ks@mai tl andchamber s. com www. mai tl andchamber s. com
For fur ther information please contact
our Senior Clerks Lee Cutler or John Wiggs
Maitland may be the leading commercial
chancery set in the country but you are just
as likely to see its members in the commercial
courts as the Chancery Division
Commercial Dispute Resolution, Chambers UK 2010
thoroughly commercial in their outlook,
very responsive and user - friendly
Leading Sets, Chambers UK 2010
TLS_015_UK200_10_di s 26/ 8/ 10 14: 38 Pa ge 1
tender for the increasing amount of block contracts that have come
onto the market.
Matrix Chambers, which has deep roots in public law work,
posted its strongest year to date, with its revenue up by 26.5 per
cent, from 13.6m to 17.2m. The sets model is aligned more
closely with that of a law firm than a traditional chambers. It sees
the LSA as an opportunity rather than a threat.
Making the most of the LSA, our model means we can have a
number of businesses, argues Matrix chief executive Lindsay Scott.
Scott suggests this could mean those working in criminal law
might be able to take block bookings and charge project fees, while
commercial barristers continue to use the hourly rate.
Each area would have its own profit margin and the overheads
might be different, she adds.
The next wave
If the past decade has been about the modernisation of the bar, the
next decade will bring about its diversification. The demand for
expertise from independent advocates will ensure the survival of
leading sets if they have the right mix of barristers.
But there are other sets that will want to change their structures
to embrace opportunities presented by the LSA, and it is this that
will drive the next wave of change in the profession.
The Bar
16|The Lawyer|UK 200
Turnover: 38.5m
Tenants (silks): 83 (32)
Chambers contributions: 16-17 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 464,000
Leading cases:
#RAB Special Situations (Master) Fund (Re Northern
Rock)/SRM Global Master Fund v Commissioners of Her
Majestys Treasury
Michael Beloff QC, Lord Pannick QC, John Howell QC,
Javan Herberg, Tom de la Mare, Claire Weir, Ben Jaffey and
Iain Steele
#R (Binyam Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign
and Commonwealth Affairs
Dinah Rose QC, Pushpinder Saini QC, Tom de la Mare, Ben
Jaffey, Tom Hickman and Tristan Jones
#National Grid plc v Gas and Electricty Markets Authority
Monica Carrs Frisk QC, Brian Kennelly and Tristan Jones
#R v Morley, Chaytor, Devine and White
Lord Pannick QC and James Segan
5 Blackstone Chambers
Rank
2009-10
Rank
2008-09 Chambers
Number
of silks
2009-10
Number
of silks
2008-09
Number
of juniors
2009-10 Silk-junior ratio
=1 2 Brick Court Chambers 35 32 36 1:1
=1 5 Essex Court Chambers 35 22 41 1:1.2
3 1 Blackstone Chambers 32 33 51 1:6
4 5 Fountain Court 29 22 34 1:2
5 3 39 Essex Street 27 25 51 1:9
6 4 One Essex Court 24 23 44 1:8
7 5 Wilberforce Chambers 23 22 26 1.1
=8 5 No5 Chambers 21 22 163 7:8
=8 5 One Crown Office Row 21 15 78 3:7
=9 6 Keating Chambers 20 20 31 1:6
=9 8 Landmark Chambers 20 18
50
2:5
Top 10 sets by number of silks, 2009-10
Rose
Scott: making the most of the LSA
TLS_016_a ug_uk200_ba r _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 23 Pa ge 16
The Bar
The Lawyer|UK 200|17
Turnover: 37.6m
Tenants (silks): 49 (23)
Chambers contributions: 14 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 767,000
Leading cases:
#PNPF Trust Company v Geoffrey Taylor & Ors (Pilots
National Pension Fund)
Michael Tennet QC, Paul Newman QC, Brian Green QC,
Robert Ham QC, Michael Furness QC, Christopher Nugee QC,
John Martin QC, Jonathan Hilliard, Jonathan Evans, James
Walmsley and Emily McKechnie
#Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Persimmon plc
Christopher Nugee QC and Julia Greenhill
#Foster Wheeler Ltd v Hanley & Ors
Brian Green QC and Jonathan Hilliard
#easyGroup IP Licensing v easyJet Airline
Michael Bloch QC and James Walmsley
Turnover: 36.4m
Tenants (silks): 184 (21)
Chambers contributions: 0.5-15 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 197,000
Leading cases:
#Vercoe & Ors v Rutland Fund Management Ltd & Ors
Richard Jones QC and David Holloway
#R (Bard Campaign) v Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government
Ian Dove QC, Anthony Crean QC, Chris Young and Tim
Sheppard
#Horwood v Land of Leather (in administration) & Zurich
Insurance (Toxic sofas)
Ralph Lewis QC, Gordon Wignall, Matthew Brunning, Henry
Pitchers, Richard Cooke, Katie Feeney, Jack Smyth and
Gemma Roberts
Turnover: 34.1m
Tenants (silks): 60 (18)
Chambers contributions: 9 per cent plus rent
Revenue per barrister: 568,000
Leading cases:
6 Wilberforce Chambers
7 No5 Chambers
8 3 Verulam Buildings
#Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi & Bros (AHAB) Algosaibi v
Maan Al-Sanea
Ewan McQuater QC, Stephen Phillips QC, Ali Malek QC,
Gregory Mitchell QC, Andrew Onslow QC, David Quest, Peter
Ratcliffe, Sandy Phipps, David Simpsons, Peter Cranfield and
Richard Edwards
#CRC Credit Fund & Ors v Administrators of Lehman
Brothers International (Europe) & Ors
John Jarvis QC, John Odgers and Adam Kramer
#Springwell v JPMorgan
Adrian Beltrami QC and Catherine Gibaud
Turnover: 33.6m
Tenants (silks): 78 (27)
Chambers contributions: 22 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 431,000
Leading cases:
#The Queen on the Application of London Borough of
Hillingdon & Ors v Transport for London Hillingdon & Ors
and Secretary of State for Transport (Heathrow expansion)
Nigel Pleming QC and Richard Wald
#Motto Y & Ors v Trafigura Ltd
Edwin Glasgow QC, Sean Wilken QC, Stephen Tromans QC,
Robert Jay QC, Rohan Pershad, Katherine Scott and James
Burton
#Linklaters v Sir Robert McAlpine
Richard Wilmot-Smith QC and Karim Ghaly
#Horwood v Land of Leather (in administration) & Zurich
Insurance (Toxic sofas)
Neil Block QC and Derek OSullivan
Turnover: 31.7m
Tenants (silks): 47 (19)
Chambers contributions: 14 per cent
Revenue per barrister: 674,000
Leading cases:
#Colour Quest v Total/Chevron (Buncefield litigation)
Jonathan Gaisman QC and Sioban Healy (now a QC)
#Equitas v R and Q
Alistair Schaff QC and Simon Kerr
#Wasa v Lexington
Alistair Schaff QC, Sioban Healy and Christopher Butcher QC
#American Reliance Insurance Company & Ors v Willis
Stephen Kenny QC, Gavin Kealey and Jessica Sutherland
9 39 Essex Street
10 7 Kings Bench Walk
Tony McDavid,
practice director
Ali Malek QC,
head of chambers
TLS_017_a ug_uk200_ba r _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 24 Pa ge 17
International
18|The Lawyer|UK 200
FOR A growing number of US firms, the past year has been all about
the transatlantic tie-up. When legacy firms Lovells and Hogan &
Hartson confirmed their merger plans half way through the year it
triggered a scramble on both sides of the Atlantic among firms
desperate to declare themselves the next global powerhouse.
This acceleration to consolidation has shown off the good, the bad and
the ugly side of the transatlantic merger. First the good. When Hogan
Lovells went live on 1 May it created a behemoth of more than 2,400
lawyers and 40 offices, with a combined revenue of $1.8bn (1.15bn).
Barring a catastrophe the firm is on course to overtake Allen & Overy
(A&O) in the turnover stakes in the 2010-11 year.
Teething problems
As with any marriage, the union has not been without its setbacks.
In the run-up to the merger Hogan began haemorrhaging partners
in Warsaw, Geneva and Berlin, while Lovells announced that its
Chicago office would not be part of the newly merged firm.
It has not been without its difficulties post-merger either. Since 1 May
the combined firm has been hit by several departures, including those
of former Hogan London chief Garry Pegg and ex-Beijing managing
partner Roger Peng.
But if Lovells last set of financial results is anything to go by, then joint
CEO David Harris has good grounds for optimism. In contrast with some
of its rivals in the UK top 10, global revenue for 2009-10 was up by 2 per
cent to 542m, driven largely by its success in London, while average
profit per equity partner (PEP) rose by 13 per cent to 663,000.
It is still too early to begin drawing any firm conclusions, but the
market consensus, for now at least, is that the tie-up will be a success.
And that might go some way to explaining the wave of potential mergers
subsequently mooted in recent months.
Big talks
First came the ultimately unsuccessful talks between SJ Berwin and
Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe that began in April 2010. Following a
series of meetings spread over several weeks, the talks collapsed when
the US firm said it was pulling out of the discussions, with Orrick
managing partner Ralph Baxter insisting that no single issue led to the
talks breaking down.
Days later the story took another twist when it emerged that SJ
Berwin, desperate to boost its presence in the US, had set its sights on
New York-headquartered Proskauer Rose. Talks are still ongoing and
the merger looks increasingly likely, with one source describing it as a
fait accompli although some have questioned the wisdom of such a
move. While both have strong funds practices, there appears to be few
other areas where the firms complement each other.
Next up was news that Denton Wilde Sapte and Sonnenschein
Nath & Rosenthal were in advanced discussions. Unlike similar merger
talks, however, things went well beyond the stage of clandestine
meetings, and in June both firms partnerships agreed to the deal.
The new firm, SNR Denton, is set to go live on 30 September, creating
a 1,400-lawyer firm with a turnover of around $750m. According to
Dentons chairman Martin Kitchen, the new firm has set itself an
ambitious target of raising revenue to $1bn and growing lawyer numbers
to between 1,500 and 1,600 within three years.
Less successful were the on-off discussions between Mayer Brown
and Simmons & Simmons. In June 2010 The Lawyer revealed that
Mayer Brown had been in secret talks with Simmons over a move that
would have created another 1bn global firm with more than 2,400
lawyers in the US, South America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
Talks appeared to break down days later, only to resume with a series of
discussions between the firms senior management teams. Then, in a
Here be giants
The past year has been notable for international mergers,
with the 1 May Hogan Lovells tie-up finishing the year in
style. Andrew Pugh looks at the motivations behind the
moves and highlights the successes and the non-starters
(l-r) David Harris and Warren Gorrell, Hogan Lovells
TLS_018_a ug_uk100_i nt _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 29 Pa ge 18
International
The Lawyer|UK 200|19
Top 30 US firms by London revenue, 2009
move reminiscent of the discussions between SJ Berwin and Orrick,
Mayer Brown and Simmons released a joint statement saying that a
combination between our firms is not the right option.
Brit fit
Looking at the performances of US firms London offices, it is not
difficult to see why some are so keen to tie up with a UK outfit. For
the majority of the top 30 US firms in London, last year was
characterised by plummeting revenues and profits. A total of 21 saw
their revenues fall. On average, revenue among the top 10 fell by 12
per cent and among the top 30 by 5 per cent.
In results that presaged the financial figures of the UK 200, almost half
posted an increase in PEP, although admittedly none reached the 70 per
cent hike achieved by Shoosmiths.
As with their UK counterparts, many US firms ramped up profits by
slashing lawyer numbers. A total of 22 of the top 30 firms reported falls
in fee-earners. Overall, lawyer numbers among the top 10 fell on average
by 14 per cent, and among the whole of the top 30 by 9 per cent.
By and large there was very little movement among the top 30 in terms
of the revenue table. Some impressive performances were achieved,
however, most notably from Bingham, which increased its revenue by
$9.8m to $40.8m, and Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker, which
achieved a 44 per cent hike in turnover to $39m.
Binghams success was down to its restructuring and finance litigation
practices, which hit boom time when the recession kicked in. Paul
Hastings stepped up investment in London with the arrival of seven
partners from Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft and, like Bingham,
the firms strength in restructuring and insolvency protected it through
the downturn. The partner exodus from Cadwalader, which left it with
only two partners in the capital at the year-end, saw the firm fall out of
the top 30.
Firms with a strong finance focus, such as White & Case, were the
worst hit last year. Yet despite the firms revenue in London falling by 20
per cent it still maintained its position at the top of the table. This was
primarily because most its competitors fared equally poorly.
When they were interviewed in April the majority of senior partners
were confident that, by the end of 2010, the recovery would be in full
swing. Since then a change of government in the UK, coupled with the
continuing fragility of the eurozone, has helped spark fears of a double-
dip recession and has subsequently dampened their optimism a little.
Mergers will continue to be on the agenda for US firms in the coming
months, a trend highlighted by the news this August that Hammonds
and Squire Sanders & Dempsey are in talks. If Dentons chief
executive Howard Morris is correct, then the Hogan Lovells and SNR
Denton deals will be the vanguard of a period of consolidation in the
legal industry for years to come.
Rank Firm
London
revenue
2009 ($m)
London
revenue
2008 ($m)
Global
revenue
2009 ($m)
Global
revenue
2008 ($m)
Global PEP
2009 ($m)
Global PEP
2008 ($k)
1 White & Case 197.0 245.9 1,307 1,460 1.60 1.59
2 Baker & McKenzie* 190.3 184.5 2,104 2,080 1.13 0.98
3 Latham & Watkins 151.1 150.0 1,821 1,923 1.90 1.80
4 Mayer Brown 146.3 202.0 1,118 1,290 1.05 1.11
5 Reed Smith 141.1 159.0 1,013 980 1.00 0.94
6 Skadden 130.0 137.0 2,046 2,200 2.05 2.05
7 Sullivan & Cromwell 117.4 121.0 1,050 1,100 2.94 3.00
8 Dewey & LeBoeuf 110.0 125.0 914 1,030 1.60 1.57
9 Sidley Austin 101.0 107.9 1,489 1,480 1.46 1.43
10 Shearman & Sterling 99.7 113.8 801 876 1.74 1.67
11 Jones Day 86.3 85.5 1,337 1,310 0.77 0.77
=12 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton 85.0 90.0 961 965 2.33 2.33
=12 Weil Gotshal & Manges 85.0 103.0 1,233 1,230 2.32 2.30
14 Kirkland & Ellis 80.8 87.0 1,428 1,320 2.50 2.55
15 Dechert 80.7 91.8 713 816 1.96 2.14
16 Debevoise & Plimpton 77.4 86.0 668 761 1.87 2.22
17 WilmerHale 58.1 49.9 941 955 1.16 1.08
18 Milbank 56.0 58.9 601 621 2.23 2.23
19 Simpson Thacher & Bartlett 52.5 56.3 871 904 2.41 2.48
20 Gibson Dunn & Crutcher 51.8 51.8 995 957 1.91 1.87
21 Hogan & Hartson 49.6 52.3 864 923 1.11 1.17
22 McDermott Will & Emery 48.1 55.9 961 966 1.52 1.52
23 K&L Gates 43.4 60.2 1,034 959 0.86 0.85
=24 Bingham 40.8 31.0 860 767 1.40 1.42
=24 Davis Polk & Wardwell 40.8 40.0 782 767 2.10 2.05
26 Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe 40.5 38.0 847 835 1.36 1.32
=27 Covington & Burling 39.0 35.0 583 531 1.20 1.30
=27 Paul Hastings 39.0 27.0 889 986 1.88 1.90
29 Salans 38.3 54.3 269.5 340.8 0.82 1.04
30 Morrison & Foerster 33.7 36.3 844 911 1.14 1.10
Average exchange rate 2009 to $ 1.56953; Average exchange rate 2008 to $ 1.85518; *1 July 2009-30 June 2010
TLS_019_a ug_uk100_i nt _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 30 Pa ge 19
International
20|The Lawyer|UK 200
Top 30 US firms in London by revenue per lawyer, 2009
Rank Firm
Revenue
per lawyer
2009 ($m)
Revenue
per partner
2009 ($m)
Number
of lawyers in
London 2009
Number
of lawyers in
London 2008
Number of
partners in
London 2009
Number of
partners
in London
2008
1 Sullivan & Cromwell 1.57 6.18 75 75 19 21
2 Simpson Thacher & Bartlett 1.38 4.77 40 40 11 10
3 Milbank 1.37 4.67 41 41 12 13
4 Davis Polk & Wardwell 1.24 5.83 33 33 7 8
5 Skadden 1.20 4.64 108 108 28 27
6 WilmerHale 1.16 4.84 50 50 12 12
7 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton 1.12 5.31 76 76 16 17
8 Gibson Dunn & Crutcher 1.08 2.73 48 48 19 18
=9 Kirkland & Ellis 1.02 2.45 79 79 33 27
=9 Latham & Watkins 1.02 3.22 148 148 47 39
11 Dechert 1.00 2.78 81 81 29 32
12 Bingham 0.97 2.72 42 42 15 11
13 Shearman & Sterling 0.92 3.84 109 109 26 24
=14 Dewey & LeBoeuf 0.89 2.56 123 123 43 46
=14 McDermott Will & Emery 0.89 0.89 54 54 26 36
=14 Weil Gotshal & Manges 0.89 3.86 96 96 22 23
17 Sidley Austin 0.86 2.66 118 118 38 41
=18 Covington & Burling 0.78 2.44 50 50 16 13
=18 Paul Hastings 0.78 3.90 50 50 10 7
20 Debevoise & Plimpton 0.70 4.30 110 110 18 17
21 Hogan & Hartson 0.68 2.61 73 73 19 17
22 White & Case 0.65 3.13 301 301 63 73
23 Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe 0.63 2.03 64 64 20 25
24 Morrison & Foerster 0.62 1.69 54 79 20 20
25 Baker & McKenzie 0.61 2.24 314 290 85 85
26 Reed Smith 0.57 1.37 248 247 103 106
27 Mayer Brown 0.53 1.46 275 275 100 109
28 Jones Day 0.45 1.88 190 190 46 47
29 Salans 0.44 1.20 88 92 32 34
30 K&L Gates 0.34 0.78 126 126 56 59
An anticipated uptick in commercial
litigation, particularly in the financial services
arena, has seen several US firms expand or
launch litigation teams in the City over the
past year.
One of the most ambitious has been US trial
outfit Kobre & Kim. It opened its London
office in the summer of 2009 and remained
under the radar until April, when it launched a
recruitment drive with the high-profile
capture of Serle Court silk James Corbett QC.
Corbett give the firm an English law
capability for the first time; and a
month later he was joined by Fladgate
litigator Simon Cullingworth and Enterprise
Chambers barrister Tim Prudhoe. Further
arrivals are expected at the firm, which
specialises in cross-border financial
services litigation, in the coming months.
US litigation powerhouse Quinn Emanuel
Urquhart & Sullivan was another firm to step
up its activity in the City. Growing in London
is central to founding partner John Quinns
strategy and he has not ruled out doubling or
even trebling the firms workforce in the
capital. This strategy was underlined with the
capture of rising star Alex Gerbi, a partner
from Olswang.
In November 2009 Sidley Austin launched
its London dispute resolution practice, again
in the hope of capitalising on an upswing in
commercial litigation as a result of the
economic downturn. As with Kobre, the firm
is targeting the area of cross-border financial
services regulation.
Another firm that revealed its interest in
London was US securities class action outfit
Labaton Sucharow, which began raising its
profile in the UK in a bid to pick up clients in
the pension funds arena.
Not everyone shares the Americans
optimism. One UK-based recruiter, who has
seen several US firms fail in their bids to open
bases in the UK, told The Lawyer: In America
they make bucketloads of cash from litigation.
A star litigator in the US can bill tens of
millions of dollars and gain a big following of
clients.
British lawyers dont have that same kind of
following. US firms think that, when they hire
a British litigator, they ll bring lots of clients
with them, but that doesnt happen and then
their plans fall apart. Its a different ball game
to the US.
US litigation practices in London
TLS_020_a ug_uk100_i nt _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 31 Pa ge 20
www. conyersdi l l . com
Mul t i mi l l i on dol l ar deal s don t
wai t for your part of t he eart h t o t urn
around and face t he sun.
Qui ck answers regardless of t i me zone.
BERMUDA
LONDON
BRI TI SH VI RGI N I SLANDS
MAURI TI US
CAYMAN I SLANDS
MOSCOW
CYPRUS
SO PAULO
DUBAI
SI NGAPORE
HONG KONG
TLS_021_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 18 Pa ge 1
Corporate
22|The Lawyer|UK 200
FOR THE UKs top corporate practices, 2009-10 was very much a
case of plus ca change, plus cest la meme chose, with dealflow still in
decline and competition for the work as tough as ever.
Revenues across the top 20 firms dropped by an average of just over
4 per cent, with total fees across all practice areas also dropping by
that amount. But whereas last year brought with it some drastic
action from City firms, the feeling this time around is that things may
finally be picking up.
Its definitely better than last year, says Allen & Overy (A&O)
London corporate head Richard Browne. Over the course of the
past 12 months its been tough and the markets been down
substantially, but theres more happening now.
Leaders of the pack
It is no surprise to see that the magic circle, along with Slaughter and
May, monopolised the few big deals that did see the light of day.
Clifford Chance and Slaughters took the honours by acting on the
years standout deal, Krafts hostile acquisition of Cadbury. Clifford
Chance rainmaker Guy Norman led for Kraft and also acted for Bab-
cock on its 1.3bn takeover of VT Group. Slaughters M&A chief
Stephen Cooke led the defence for Cadbury. However, with private
equity not making the comeback that some were predicting, Clifford
Chance still saw its corporate revenue fall by more than 6 per cent.
Against levels of activity in the market we were pretty pleased
with our performance, says global corporate head Matthew Layton.
Weve had a raft of good deals across the network.
Slaughters, meanwhile, could not match last years performance,
aided by a healthy slew of Government work on the back of
the banking crisis. It too lost ground on its rivals, although A&Os
12 per cent drop-off was the most alarming among the big five.
Linklaters extended its lead at the top of the table, with its
corporate revenue dropping by only 1 per cent. A prize role acting
for Lloyds Banking Group on its record-breaking 13.5bn rights
issue helped Linklaters stay on an even keel following last years 14
per cent fall. Jeremy Parr led the capital-raising exercise before
stepping up to fill David Barnes shoes as global head of corporate.
In contrast to Slaughters, Linklaters reaped the rewards from the
continuing fallout from the financial meltdown of 2008, courtesy of
its relationships with Lloyds and RBS.
Best of a bad crunch
Despite suffering a 6 per cent year-on-year fall, Freshfields
Bruckhaus Deringer can justifiably claim to have had the best
recession of all the leading corporate lights. It is the only firm to
have increased corporate revenue since 2007-08.
Global corporate head Ed Braham believes that the continuing
absence of deals is acting as a differentiator for the best firms.
Its been a horrible market in which weve more than held our
own, he says. Wed probably say we took market share.
Braham highlights the firms European spread as key to keeping the
corporate practice on track. A German and French team landed a role
for Daimler on its three-way tie-up with Renault and Nissan, while
partner Ian Frost led the international group acting for Springer
Science & Business Media on its sale to private equity house EQT.
The struggles of the mid-market continued, with firms either
consolidating after a poor 2008-09 or suffering a delayed dip.
SJ Berwin steadied the ship after its disastrous performance the
previous year. Its 1.5 per cent fall is a sound performance considering
its emphasis on a thin private
equity market. Corporate
chief Steven Daviss work
for Apax Partners on the
600m investment by China
Investment Corporation even
bagged The Lawyers Corpo-
rate Team of the Year gong.
This years biggest fallers
were Addleshaw Goddard,
Norton Rose and Simmons
& Simmons, all of which
posted double-digit corporate
drops.
Norton Rose did win a role
acting for France Telecom
on one of the biggest Euro-
pean deals of the year,
last Septembers T-Mobile-
Orange merger, but still saw
revenue fall by 10 per cent.
Theres been lots of pric-
ing pressure and a squeeze
on the mid-market, said
head of corporate Tim
Marsden. We can expect to
see the magic circle push
into the areas where were
strong.
Herbert Smith and Lovells
were both widely seen as
having solid if unspectacular
years. But the gap to the big
boys remains as large as ever.
Rank Firm
Corporate
turnover
2009-10 (m)
Corporate
turnover
2008-09 (m)
Per cent
difference
Per cent
of total
turnover
Number of
corporate
partners
Revenue per
corporate
partner (m)
1 Linklaters 449.5 454.3 -1.1 38.0 199 2.26
2 Freshfields 399.0 424.7 -6.0 35.0 147 2.71
3 Clifford Chance 347.1 370.0 -6.2 29.0 169 2.05
4 Allen & Overy 315.3 360.0 -12.4 30.0 155 2.03
5 Slaughter and May 228.5 247.0 -7.5 52.0 55 4.15
6 Herbert Smith 199.8 202.2 -1.2 44.0 122 1.64
7 Lovells 162.6 159.3 2.1 30.0 123 1.32
8 DLA Piper 139.4 146.2 -4.0 24.0 153 0.91
9 Eversheds 127.8 124.0 3.1 36.0 133 0.96
10 Norton Rose 107.4 119.3 -10.0 35.0 101 1.06
11 CMS Cameron McKenna 107.2 105.0 2.1 50.0 60 1.79
12 Ashurst 87.9 87.3 0.7 30.0 71 1.24
13 Simmons & Simmons 85.0 105.2 -19.2 34.0 92 0.92
14 Denton Wilde Sapte 70.4 71.3 -1.3 42.0 75 0.94
15 Taylor Wessing 70.0 71.4 -2.0 40.0 90 0.78
16 SJ Berwin 59.8 60.7 -1.5 35.0 63 0.95
17 Berwin Leighton Paisner 53.5 52.2 2.5 28.0 58 0.92
18 Macfarlanes 50.4 54.5 -7.5 55.0 31 1.63
19 Clyde & Co 42.2 40.7 3.7 22.0 38 1.11
20 Addleshaw Goddard 40.2 48.5 -17.1 24.0 51 0.79
Reasons to be cheerful?
Although the corporate practices of the top 20 firms suffered
an average fall in revenue, by the end of the year things were
pretty much the same as before. By Gavriel Hollander
T
op 20 corporate performances, 2009-10
TLS_022_a ug_uk200_c or por a t e _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 33 Pa ge 22
Our strong Canadian roots have served us well.
Operating within one of the worlds soundest
banking systems, RBC provides a solid base from
which to deliver our unique trust offering.
As nimble and exible as an independent, but with
the global resources of an international nancial
institution, we offer trust services of exceptional
quality coupled with the provision of world-class
wealth management solutions.
This unparalleled service is based on putting our
clients at the centre of everything we do. We believe
in delivering solutions tailor made to suit the needs
of our clients, even if that means looking beyond our
suite of in-house solutions. Were like a boutique,
but with a balance sheet.
To nd out more, please contact us on:
+44 (0) 1534 501656
Email: trustinfo@rbc.com or log on to
www.rbcwminternational.com
Condence.
A word you dont hear very often these days.
Unless youre talking to one of our clients.
BAHAMAS BARBADOS CAYMAN DELAWARE GENEVA GUERNSEY HONG KONG JERSEY LONDON
Enjoy bespoke trust services with the stability
and security of Canadas largest bank.
This advertisement is issued by RBC Trust Company (International) Limited (the Company) on behalf of certain RBC subsidiary companies that form part of the international network of RBC Wealth Management. Trust Services may be
provided by a variety of subsidiaries and ofces, either independently or acting together. Some of the services are not offered in all jurisdictions and may not be available to you. This advertisement does not constitute an invitation to apply
for any product or service in any jurisdiction to any person to whom it is unlawful to make such a solicitation in such jurisdiction. The Company is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission in the conduct of fund services and trust
company business, registered company number 57903, and has its Registered Ofce at: La Motte Chambers, St Helier, Jersey, Channel Islands, JE1 1PB.
A full list of addresses of local legal entities may be obtained thorough RBCs website at the following address : www.rbcwminternational.com
Registered trademark of Royal Bank of Canada.Trademark of Royal Bank of Canada used under license. All rights reserved.
TLS_023_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 19 Pa ge 1
24|The Lawyer|UK 200
ALL FINANCE practices had a difficult 2008-09, when they bore
the brunt of restructuring, but 2009-10 saw a distinct pick-up in the
finance market.
Although capital markets was volatile, Allen & Overy (A&O)
pulled in one of the choisest structured deals of the year with its
representation of Lloyds Banking Group on its 2.47bn residential
mortgage-backed securitisation (RMBS) issue the first RMBS
issuance since the credit crisis (February 2010). Elsewhere, banking
(where, like Clifford Chance, A&O had made deep cuts, particularly
on the leveraged finance side) had a stormer. With some 499m in
total revenues, A&O was pulling in 2.33m per partner and was
involved in a number of major deals for both sponsors and lenders.
A standout deal saw partner George Link advising the banks on
the 1.7bn (1.4bn) Springer Science & Business Media debt
refinancing, which led to one of the biggest European buyouts of
2009, with a secondary sale from Candover and Cinven to EQT.
Structurally, the mezzanine market may have frozen over, but high-
yield was going great guns despite a hiccup in the latter part of the
financial year following the Greek crisis. A&Os move to recruit high-
yield specialist Kevin Muzilla from Milbank saw the firm catching the
trend early and benefiting. One of his first deals in January was to
advise Manchester United on its 500m bond issue (Latham acted
for the banks). The hire of Muzilla to bolster A&Os issuer side was
echoed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer this July when it hired Gil
Strauss from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett straight into the equity.
The arrival of high-yield as a dominating force within finance
underlines the changing transactional landscape for banking lawyers.
In the pink
Linklaters, which had been buoyed in the previous year by the
mammoth Lehman Brothers administration, polished up its
mega restructuring credentials with its roles for RBS and for Lloyds
on the Governments asset protection scheme, but continued to be
visible on a series of more conventional market transactions:
partner Stephen Lucas acted for Commerzbank and RBS on the
corporate restructuring of Schaeffler Group; partner Gideon Moore
acted for the arrangers of the 690m funding of CVC Capital
Partners acquisition of Anheuser-Busch InBevs Central and
Eastern European operations (the largest new-money financing of
2009); Moore also advised ING on the debt financing of Apax
Partners 975m acquisition of Marken from Intermediate Capital
Group; and partner Nick Syson advised Nomura and Calyon on
KKRs 955m acquisition of Pets at Home from Bridgepoint.
Freshfields had a strong year in both restructurings (Four Seasons,
Zim and McCarthy & Stone) and new-money deals. Partners such
as Chris Howard and Presley Warner excelled. Freshfields lean
practice accounts for 20 per cent of total firm revenue, but only 17
per cent of total partners.
Clifford Chance put its difficult 2008-09 behind it to post some of
its best figures for three years. It grossed a total of 486m, of which
348m was banking and 138m was capital markets. Its biggest
acquisition finance deal was advising HSBC (partner Nicola Wherity)
on its 1.25bn loan to fund Reckitt Benckisers takeover of SSL.
Down a bit
Below the big four revenues at best held steady. Ashursts neat
leveraged finance team remained busy and kicked off its summer in
2009 with a role on the landmark secondary buyout of Wood
McKenzie, bought by Charterhouse from Candover for 553m.
Mark Vickers advised Lloyds, Bank of Scotland, HSBC and Nomura.
It continued to be active in the upper mid-market and saw its
turnover inch up from 63.2m to 67.4m.
Lovells, in its last year before
merging with Hogan & Hartson,
edged up by just 1m to 107m,
mainly through restructuring
work. Although the complex
structured investment vehicle
restructurings that occupied
Lovells practice in 2008-09
tapered off, the firm was
involved on the 3.5bn financial
restructuring of Pearl Group,
advising the senior syndicate
banks. Lovells acquisition
finance highlight was on Krafts
9.8bn hostile bid for Cadbury,
where it had a subsidiary role
advising Citibank, Deutsche
Bank and HSBC on the Eng-
lish law aspects of the financing.
DLA Pipers turnover of
81.3m yielded a low average
revenue per partner of
753,000 something new
banking head Bob Charlton will
be looking to improve, although
his first priority is to cohese the
national and Europe, Middle
East and Asia practices. The
firms trade, energy and project
finance practice held up well,
with work such as the Intercity
Express fleet programme.
Banking
& Finance
Rank Firm
Finance
turnover
2009-10 (m)
Finance
turnover 2008-
09 (m)
Per cent
difference
Per cent
of total
turnover
Number of
finance
partners
Revenue per
finance
partner (m)
1 Allen & Overy 499.0 492.0 1.4 48 214 2.33
2 Clifford Chance 486.0 472.0 3.0 39 216 2.38
3 Linklaters 473.0 493.0 -4.0 40 180 2.63
4 Freshfields 228.0 257.4 -11.4 20 79 2.89
5 Norton Rose 119.7 119.0 0.6 39 101 1.19
6 Lovells 107.0 106.2 0.8 19 63 1.64
7 Slaughter and May 99.0 80.0 23.8 23 33 3.00
8 Simmons & Simmons 95.0 93.0 2.2 38 71 1.34
9 DLA Piper 81.3 93.6 -13.1 14 108 0.75
10 Ashurst 67.4 63.2 6.6 23 56 1.20
11 Herbert Smith 44.8 42.6 5.4 10 30 1.49
=12 Addleshaw Goddard 38.5 34.6 11.3 23 34 1.13
=12 Denton Wilde Sapte 38.5 40.0 -3.8 23 45 0.86
14 CMS Cameron McKenna 36.4 50.4 -27.8 17 22 1.66
15 Berwin Leighton Paisner 34.4 34.6 -0.6 18 39 0.88
The biggest players enjoyed a return to form in the beleaguered
banking and finance sphere, with their mid-market rivals
looking on enviously. Andrew Pugh provides the lowdown
Top heavies
Top 15 finance performances, 2009-10
TLS_024_a ug_uk200_ba nki ng_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 35 Pa ge 24
TLS_025_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 22 Pa ge 1
Real Estate
26|The Lawyer|UK 200
PROPERTY was hit first and hardest during the financial crisis and
two years on most of the leading UK real estate practices have still
failed to bounce back.
Most practices experienced static growth or dips in revenue.
Pre-merger Lovells, the best performer of the top 20 real estate
practices during 2008-09 with a revenue increase of 5 per cent, from
45m to 47m, is a case in point. It fell by 13 per cent last year to
41m. A similar fall was felt at DLA Piper, which saw real estate
revenue slide by 14 per cent, from 87.75m to 75.53m, while
Addleshaw Goddards revenue shrunk by 13 per cent, from 34.62m
to 30.2m.
Success in the City
At first glance this is surprising given the recent activity in the
London prime real estate market. Examples include DLA Pipers
advice to Funderburk Europe 2 on the acquisition of Allen &
Overys (A&O) headquarters at One Bishops Square from Clifford
Chance client Hammerson. Also Herbert Smith and SJ Berwin
advised Al Salam Bank and Evans Randall on their joint purchase
of Addleshaws London headquarters at Milton Gate from UBS
Asset Management. The building was subsequently sold once again
to an unnamed Middle East investor.
On the lettings side Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP) acted for
Oxford Properties on the letting of Watermark Place to Japanese
investment bank Nomura (one of the largest pre-lets ever to be
completed), while Lovells assisted fund manager BlackRock on its
relocation to Drapers Gardens in the City.
But despite this relatively frenetic level of activity, joint head of
Lovells legacy real estate practice Michael Stancombe points out
that high-grade City property is still a relatively narrow market
and alone is not enough to sustain revenue growth.
One firm that did experience an increase in real estate revenue was
CMS Cameron McKenna. The 7 per cent growth rate in the
property department was all the more striking because it took place
against the backdrop of an overall 11 per cent drop in firmwide
turnover. Real estate partner Mark Heighton claims this was
because of a well-hedged practice. This includes a hotels sector
focus, with deals including acting for Grosvenor on the sale of
the Hilton Hotel Liverpool to Taylor Wessing client Ability
Developments and work for Dutch entity Citizen M Hotel Group on
the redevelopment of two London hotels. The departments coffers
were also boosted by acting on the sale of retail warehouses, an area
that boomed as a result of the weight of money coming in, the fact
that its safe income and [involves] good tenants, according to
Heighton. Real estate assistance in non-core areas, such as acting
for an energy joint venture on its acquisition of sites for new nuclear
power stations, also provided a strong income line.
De-stressing news
One of the great mistakes made by commentators at the start of the
recession was the prediction that banks would flood the market with
distressed assets. Transactions such as the White Tower portfolio,
which was recently snapped up by Carlyle Group, Schroders and
Hammerson, are a rarity. While Camerons has retained a key role
since the end of the 2009-10 financial year advising Halliwells on
the carve-up of its property obligations, Heighton believes that
it will continue to be a gradual process over the next three to
five years.
The banks own so much property that it would damage the banks
themselves and prices if they flooded the market, he comments.
This is a view that Stancombe echoes, arguing that it will be a
controlled release.
Despite a challenging 2009-
10, Clifford Chance maintains
its position as having the
largest real estate practice
group, with the best real estate
revenue per partner figure of
any City practice at 2.15m. Cliff
McAuley, global practice area
leader, shares the relative
optimism expressed among his
counterparts at other firms
about the year ahead.
The past two years have been
challenging for the global prop-
erty market, but were pleased to
see activity beginning to pick
up, he says. The practice is
showing some improvement
in the developed Western
economies and, although theres
still some way to go, we expect
this upward trend will continue
over the coming year.
With his firm recently
completing its merger with
Hogan & Hartson, Lovells
Stancombe is also positive that
an upward trend is around the
corner and anticipates acting
for hotels and opportunity
funds.
Property clash
Rank Firm
Real estate
turnover
2009-10 (m)
Real estate
turnover
2008-09 (m)
Per cent
difference
Per cent
of total
turnover
Number of
real estate
partners
Revenue
per real
estate
partner (m)
1 Clifford Chance 86.0 93.6 -8.1 7.2 40 2.15
2 DLA Piper 75.5 87.8 -13.9 13.0 89 0.85
3 Eversheds 63.9 69.5 -8.0 18.0 56 1.14
4 Berwin Leighton Paisner 55.4 59.4 -6.8 29.0 43 1.29
5 Linklaters 51.3 58.2 -11.8 4.3 31 1.65
6 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 43.8 51.5 -14.9 3.8 25 1.75
7 Allen & Overy 42.0 41.1 2.4 4.0 40 1.05
8 Lovells 41.0 47.0 -12.8 7.6 24 1.71
9 Taylor Wessing* 38.0 24.5 55.2 21.4 40 0.95
10 Herbert Smith 34.2 36.1 -5.2 7.6 20 1.71
11 Nabarro 33.0 35.4 -6.8 29.0 32 1.03
12 Trowers & Hamlins 32.2 32.2 -1.2 36.0 45 0.72
13 Pinsent Masons 30.9 34.4 -10.2 15.0 39 0.79
14 Addleshaw Goddard 30.2 34.6 -12.8 18.0 30 1.00
15 Ashurst 29.3 33.1 -11.5 10.0 20 1.47
16 Denton Wilde Sapte 28.5 27.2 4.8 17.0 23 1.24
17 CMS Cameron McKenna 27.9 26.0 7.2 18.0 18 1.55
18 Wragge & Co 26.9 28.2 -4.6 28.0 33 0.82
19 SJ Berwin 25.7 29.4 -12.9 15.0 24 1.07
20 Shoosmiths 24.3 24.8 -1.8 27.0 42 0.58
*2009-10 figure is a global figure, whereas 2008-09 figure is UK only
Despite an active London real estate market,
property teams continue to suffer from hangovers
coming out of the recession. Luke McLeod-Roberts
looks back at a difficult year for the sector
Top 20 real estate performances, 2009-10
TLS_026_Aug_uk100_r e a l e s t a t e _e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 43 Pa ge 26
Driving careers
forward
Keep ahead of the competition
with The College of Law
To stay ahead ih the legal professioh, your team heeds high
quality legal traihihg ih the areas that really couht.
At The College of Law we've got the right courses to drive
your orgahisatioh forward.
All our professiohal developmeht programmes are
desighed to hohe your team's skills ahd give them a
competitive edge.
Ahd with ohlihe traihihg available through College of Law
Media, your staff cah study where ahd wheh they waht
so their CFD woh't get ih the way of their day-to-day work.
Subscribe to Traihihg Matters, our topical CFD e-hewsletter
at college-of-law.co.uk/traihihgmatters
Find out more
college-of-law.co.uk
0800 289997 or e-mail pd@lawcol.co.uk
Fegistered charity
TLS_027_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 25 Pa ge 1
Litigation
28|The Lawyer|UK 200
LITIGATION revenue improved across the top 15 UK practices last
year, but the long predicted litigation boom has still failed to mate-
rialise. Nevertheless, total revenue for the top practices rose by 3.9
per cent, from 1.78bn to 1.85bn, with Freshfields Bruckhaus
Deringer leading the way, posting a litigation turnover of 250.8m.
Undoubtedly the recession has prompted a rise in dispute
resolution activity, but clients are now on the hunt for value, which
means they are spreading the work around.
That should not detract from those at the top of the pile, which
have invested to build up quality global practices capable of working
at full capacity to meet demand for global legal solutions.
Big country
Having invested heavily in its US practice, Freshfields is beginning
to reap the financial rewards. The firm extended its lead over its
nearest rivals by posting an 8.1 per cent rise in turnover at the
2009-10 year-end. Freshfields litigation practice now accounts for
22 per cent of the firms 1.18bn turnover, compared with 18 per
cent at the 2008-09 year-end.
Since January 2008 Freshfields has made seven high-level lateral
hires in its US litigation practice. These include partners Marshall
Fishman from Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel and Timothy
Coleman from Dewey & LeBoeuf in New York, plus Vinson & Elkins
partner Walter Stuart, who joined the Washington DC practice.
States slide
This contrasts sharply with Clifford Chance, which suffered a series
of exits from its US group last year. These included former global
litigation chief Mark Kirsch, who quit in May 2009 to join Gibson
Dunn & Crutcher along with partners Joel Cohen and Christopher
Joralemon. The firms US practice is now run from Washington DC
by Juan Morillo.
Clifford Chance is now 28 per cent behind Freshfields in terms of
litigation turnover, with 179.5m, down 5.1 per cent from 189m.
However, overall partner headcount declined by just one to 74,
meaning that revenue per litigation partner (RPLP) has fallen by 3.9
per cent, from 2.52m to 2.42m.
Main contenders
The best performance of the year in terms of growth came from
Allen & Overy, another firm that has invested heavily in its US
practice. The firm posted a 24.2 per cent jump in litigation revenue,
from 110m to 136.6m. Nevertheless, with partner headcount up
by nine to 50, RPLP rose only marginally, from 2.68m to 2.7m,
putting it behind Linklaters and Freshfields.
Linklaters may have a smaller litigation partnership at 40, but
those partners produced an RPLP of 3.24m, generating a revenue
of 129.8m, down from 130m a year earlier.
The firm is eclipsed by Herbert Smith, home to a weighty
contentious practice, which contributed 38 per cent of the firms
449.9m revenue, in terms of turnover.
Herbert Smith reported a 4.8 per cent increase in litigation
revenue, from 163m to 170.96m, with 81 partners producing an
RPLP figure of 2.31m.
Gain sayers
At the end of the next financial year the magic circle will feel the full
effect of the Hogan & Hartson-Lovells merger. At the latest year-end
Lovells 52 legacy litigation partners posted an RPLP of 2.5m, 8.2
per cent ahead of Herbert Smiths, giving it a turnover of 130.07m.
That said, the firms contentious practices in tax, real estate, IP and
employment sit outside the dispute resolution revenue stream. If
these are taken into consideration, litigation work accounted for 34
per cent of Lovells turnover, or 184.2m.
An interesting pattern is beginning to emerge, with those firms that
sit just outside the top 15 increasingly stealing a march on their peers.
Addleshaw Goddard, for instance, revealed its litigation group
turnover for the first time this year. The firm posted a disputes
turnover of 53.6m, up by 14.8 per cent from 46.7m a year earlier.
If the upward trend continues the firm is likely to break into the top
15 in 2010-11.
Similarly, Norton Rose saw a 23.6 per cent jump in its litigation
revenue, from 34.8m to 43m, and with 70 per cent of the firms
work deemed contentious, Reynolds Porter Chamberlain posted a
litigation turnover of 42m.
While litigation practices for the top 15 firms can boast
a 4 per cent average rise in revenue, there is still no
sign of the predicted boom, reports Katy Dowell
Rank Firm
Litigation
turnover
2009-10 (m)
Litigation
turnover
2008-09 (m)
Per cent
difference
Per cent
of total
turnover
Number of
litigation
partners
Revenue per
litigation
partner (m)
1 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer 250.8 232 8.1 22.0 63 3.98
2 Clifford Chance 179.5 189 -5.1 15.0 74 2.42
3 Herbert Smith 171.0 163 4.8 38.0 81 2.31
4 Allen & Overy 136.6 110 24.2 13.0 50 2.73
5 Irwin Mitchell 133.5 134 -0.4 85.0 102 1.30
6 Clyde & Co 130.6 119 9.7 68.0 108 1.20
7 Lovells 130.1 122 6.6 24.0 52 2.50
8 Linklaters 129.8 130 -0.2 11.0 40 3.24
9 DLA Piper 122.0 104 17.3 21.0 108 1.12
10 Beachcroft 86.5 73 18.4 66.0 79 1.09
11 Simmons & Simmons 84.0 79 6.3 33.6 57 1.47
12 Holman Fenwick Willan 81.6 82 -0.4 81.7 78 1.04
13 Kennedys 76.8 58 32.4 87.0 125 0.61
14 Eversheds 71.0 104 -31.7 20.0 53 1.34
15 Barlow Lyde & Gilbert 64.4 70 -8.0 79.0 60 1.07
Up, up and a wait
Top 15 litigation performances, 2009-10
TLS_028_a ug_uk200_l i t i ga t i on_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 44 Pa ge 28
15-19 Athol Street, Douglas,
Isle of Man IM1 1LB
Tel: +44 1624 638300
Fax: +44 1624 638333
Email: law@cains.com
One Love Lane,
London EC2V 7JN
Tel: +44 20 7367 0030
Fax: +44 20 7367 0031
Email: london@cains.com
19th Floor, 6 Battery Road
Singapore 049909
Tel: +65 6307 9928
Fax: +65 6307 9929
Email: singapore@cains.com
ISLE OF MAN LONDON SINGAPORE
INTEGRATED EXPERTISE
WWW.CAINS.COM
We are a highly successful, dynamic firm and
work alongside the worlds leading law firms
and investment banks to provide integrated
legal and professional services expertise to a
global client base.
For more information please contact:
Isle of Man - Richard Vanderplank
London - Geoff Kermeen
Singapore - Mike Edwards
The Lawyer Awards 2008
British Legal Awards 2007
Offshore Firm of the Year
TLS_029_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 27 Pa ge 1
round meant headcount in the department remained
static, while it continued to provide around 15 per
cent of firmwide fees.
Despite a tricky corporate year there were plum roles
on two of the biggest M&A transactions of the year.
Guy Norman led on Krafts acquisition of Cadbury and
for Babcock on its less acrimonious purchase of VT
Group. Normans subsequent move to Dubai could
leave a deal-making hole in the London group.
The past financial year was bookended by two
high-profile defections to Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
in the shape of private equity heavyweight Adam Signy
and funds chief Jason Glover, who left in July. Add in
the June 2010 loss of global competition head Simon
Baxter to another US raider, Skadden, and the image
persists of a firm where partners heads can be turned.
Geographically, the UK and Western Europe
suffered most, with revenues falling by 9 and 8 per
cent respectively. Despite the partner exits early in the
year, the US practice was down only slightly (3 per
cent), while Asia performed strongly and now
accounts for 10 per cent of revenue.
Clifford Chances lockstep runs from 40 to 100 points,
with equity partners taking nine years to reach the
plateau. Unlike at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and
Linklaters, the firm has retained a significant rump of
salaried partners, with one in three outside the equity.
1-4
30|The Lawyer|UK 200
Turnover (M): 1,197
Average PEP (K): 933
Equity spread (K): 451-1,130
Profit margin (%): 29
RPL (K): 463
A GLANCE at the raw numbers might suggest that
Clifford Chance enjoyed a more successful 2009-10
than any of its magic circle peers. But few believe the
figures tell the full story of a firm that has been more
recession-hit than its illustrious rivals.
In terms of turnover Clifford Chance vaulted back in
to the number one spot despite posting a manageable
5 per cent revenue drop to 1.2bn. Meanwhile,
average profit per equity partner (PEP) saw a
dramatic 27 per cent increase to reach 933,000.
Partner numbers fell last year, from 637 to 562,
but most of the cost of Clifford Chances major
restructuring operation was absorbed in 2008-09.
The leaner constitution of the firm allowed
management to take around 10 per cent out of its cost
base, equating to a saving of 108m and helping to
fuel this years surge in PEP.
Yet with fewer partners at the shop and profitability
still short of the stellar performance of 2007-08, when
partners took home an average of 1.3m, the percep-
tion endures of a firm that is struggling to keep up.
The restructuring exercise carried out by the Canary
Wharf-based outfit may not have been quite as large as
those at Allen & Overy or Linklaters, but the effect has
been to leave the firm looking as if it is still in limbo.
The strongest-performing departments over the
2009-10 year, according to the assessment of
managing partner David Childs, were finance and
litigation. Indeed, the finance practice was the only
major department to increase its turnover, even if it
did not return to the halcyon days of 2007-08.
Litigation, meanwhile, was hit at the start of the year
by the loss of a number of US partners to Gibson
Dunn & Crutcher, including former group head Mark
Kirsch. In spite of the losses a healthy promotion
Strengths
Finance remains
Clifford Chances
strong suit and there
were signs over the
past 12 months that it
was returning to its
former glories.
Litigation, under the
new leadership of
Jeremy Sandelson, is
now being touted as a
serious growth area,
particularly with Nick
Munday moving to
Moscow to garner
cross-border work
between Russia and
the UK.
Weaknesses
The firm is widely
viewed as having a
succession problem,
particularly in
corporate. A top-
heavy management
class an issue that
managing partner
David Childs has
moved to address
has created a
fee-earning vacuum
in some areas, such as
private equity. While
the firm continues to
push the concept of a
mobile global
partnership, moves
such as Guy Normans
to Dubai mean that
the City practice is
left short of some of
the big names that
clients want to see.
Clifford Chance
1
(l-r) Childs and Sandelson
300
600
900
1200
1500
Costs
Net profit
Turnover
2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-6
m
Five-year key trends
TLS_030_a ug_uk200_t op4_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 46 Pa ge 30
AUSTRIA | BULGARIA | CROATIA | CZECH REPUBLIC | EUROPEAN UNION | HUNGARY | POLAND | ROMANIA | SERBIA | SLOVAKIA | SLOVENIA | UKRAINE
home advantage
in central europe
home advantage in central europe. schoenherr is a leading corporate law rm with unmatched coverage in Central Europe. More than 300
lawyers in 12 ofces contribute their experience, knowledge, talent and know-how to bring clients innovative legal solutions. Providing a mix of high-
quality advice and effective, business-oriented solutions is at the heart of schoenherrs philosophy. www.schoenherr.eu
TLS_031_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 11: 10 Pa ge 1
Lven at our age,
we oo know better.
www.argyllscott.co.uk
Argyll Scott |nternatlonal ls baseo ln Lonoon ano
Hong Kong ano ls part ot tbe Peograve Group LEGAL
AR GY L L S COT T
Argyll Scott ls a new name ln legal recrultment, but wltb over 30 years'
collectlve eperlence ln botb tbe law ano recrultment tbere are olo
beaos on our young sbouloers. However, lt's not just wbat we know tbat
sets us apart. Wbo we know ls equally lmpresslve.
Tben tbere's our commltment to bullolng long-term relatlonsblps.
Persuaolng people to make lnapproprlate cbolces tor sbort-term galn
lsn't on our agenoa, seamlessly matcblng cllents ano canoloates ls.
We may be a young company, but we bave tbe epertlse ano ambltlon to
oellver a worlo class servlce to everyone we work wltb. To no out more
about our approacb, contact tbe relevant consultant.
Flnanclal Servlces
Monlque Mulllns 020 7936 1122 mmulllns@argyllscott.com
Cbarlle Hagan 020 7936 1127 cbagan@argyllscott.com
Tecbnology, Meola & Telecoms
Davlo von Daoelszen 020 7936 1123 ovonoaoelszen@argyllscott.com
Sarlta Pal 020 7936 1124 sral@argyllscott.com
Consumer & Healtbcare
Catberlne McKeown 020 7936 1125 cmckeown@argyllscott.com
Hela 8ousslt 020 7936 1126 bbousslt@argyllscott.com
TLS_032_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 28 Pa ge 1
1-4
The Lawyer|UK 200|33
2
Linklaters
Strengths
Linklaters true
strength can be
summed up in a single
word corporate.
Despite a diminishing
market and less
international reach
than at some of its
competitors, the firm
managed to extend
its lead at the top of
the dealmaking table.
With turnover in the
department dipping
by only 1 per cent,
it continues to be
a licence to print
money for its
partners.
Weaknesses
The perception is
that there is still
not enough revenue
being generated by
the global network,
despite moves to
counter this. There
is also a feeling in
the City that a move
towards corporate
culture needs to be
mirrored by fat profit
increases, or some
partners might begin
to look elsewhere.
Turnover (M): 1,183
Average PEP (K): 1,214
Equity spread (K): 622-1,555
Profit margin (%): 43
RPL (K): 546
AFTER only a year at the top of the revenue pops,
Linklaters has relinquished its number one position
to Clifford Chance. But despite an uncomfortable
drop-off in both turnover and profitability, the year of
consolidation clich applies in this instance, as the
firm continues to remould its partnership.
Turnover was down by 8.8 per cent to 1.2bn, while
average profit per equity partner (PEP) fell by a shade
under 7 per cent to 1.21m.
Managing partner Simon Davies says the firms
focus is more on overall profit than revenue, but
nevertheless a dip edging towards double digits is not
likely to be tolerated two years in succession.
However, PEP was pegged back by the Davies-led
move towards an all-equity partnership. While overall
partner numbers fell on a full-time equivalent basis as
the effects of 2008-09s job cuts continued to be felt,
the equity partnership actually grew over the year.
Some 93 per cent of the global partnership is now part
of the equity, up from 83.5 per cent in 2008-09.
While such a move will inevitably deflate the headline
PEP figure in the short term, Davies says it will
ultimately lead to greater cohesion. It also brings
Linklaters more into line with Freshfields Bruckhaus
Deringer, which is increasingly seen as its greatest rival.
In terms of legal work, the chief drivers behind the
falling turnover at Silk Street are the continuing lack
of activity in the mainstream M&A markets and the
firms focus on its corporate and commercial arms.
However, diversity is creeping into the practice mix.
Litigation enjoyed a second successive solid year after
its turnover leapt by almost 20 per cent in 2008-09.
In 2009-10 the practice took in just shy of 130m,
upping its share of firmwide fees to 11 per cent and
giving a revenue per partner figure of 3.24m.
On the transactional side mainstream activity
was replaced to an extent with a healthy flow of
restructuring and capital market mandates. Incoming
corporate head Jeremy Parr, who took over from
David Barnes at the end of the financial year,
celebrated his last few months as a full-time
dealmaker with the record-breaking 13.5bn rights
issue by Lloyds Banking Group, which remains as one
of Linklaters core clients.
UK revenue accounted for 43 per cent of the
firms total turnover during the year representing a
second consecutive year-on-year fall. A slow but
steady international programme has seen Linklaters
continuing to push into Brazil, where it set up a proj-
ects practice last year, and a renewed focus on Asia,
albeit with the hiccup of seeing former Asia head Zilli
Shao move to JPMorgan less than a year into the job.
The US practice continues to be something of an
enigma. It houses more than 170 lawyers, but still
does not have the profile in New York that some
in the firm would like. Despite this, its financial
performance is improving, helped by it picking up
some juicy mandates not least a role on Sanofi-
Aventiss $4bn (2.56bn) acquisition of 50 per cent of
its animal health joint venture Merial from Merck.
The firm operates a classic lockstep, with partners
joining on 10 points and adding 2.5 points a year until
reaching a plateau at 25 points.
(l-r) Davies and Parr
300
600
900
1200
1500
Costs
Net profit
Turnover
2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06
m
Five-year key trends
TLS_033_a ug_uk200_t op4_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 46 Pa ge 33
1-4
34|The Lawyer|UK 200
Turnover (M): 1,141
Average PEP (K): 1,406
Equity spread (K): 627-1,500
Profit margin (%): 52
RPL (K): 533
FRESHFIELDS Bruckhaus Deringer began to share the
pain of its peers in 2009-10 after putting in a stellar
performance in 2008-09. Turnover at the magic circle
firm dropped by 11 per cent, from 1.29bn to 1.14bn,
while net profit fell marginally, from 603m to 589m.
While the firms average profit per equity partner
(PEP) figure fell by 3 per cent, from 1.44m to
1.41m, it is still some way ahead of Allen & Overys
(A&O) 1.05m and Clifford Chances 933,000 and
it continues to best closest rival Linklaters 1.21m.
Geographically, Londons contribution to firmwide
revenue continued to fall, down from 35 per cent in
2008-09 (460m) to 33 per cent (426m). Europe
now accounts for around 50 per cent of revenue, with
the German practice proving particularly strong in
the past year. Choice mandates on which German
partners advised included acting for Porsche on its
merger with Volkswagen, advising a joint venture led
by Australian company Industry Funds Management
on its acquisition of German energy company
50Hertz Transmission and usurping Shearman &
Sterling to represent Daimler on its tie-up with
Renault and Nissan. Corporate remains Freshfields
largest practice group, generating 35 per cent, or
399m, of total revenue. Litigation accounted for 22
per cent, finance 20 per cent and real estate 4 per
cent. The remainder came from competition and tax.
The firm continued to build its US litigation practice,
which launched in January 2009, with the hire of
Bank of Americas former deputy general counsel and
director of litigation David Onorato and partners Mar-
shall Fishman, Timothy Coleman and Walter Stuart.
They joined from Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel,
Dewey & LeBoeuf and Vinson & Elkins respectively.
Elsewhere the firm upped its partnership promo-
tions to 18 (the figure was 14 in 2008-09), relocated
London bank ing head David Winfield to Hong Kong
as Asia head of finance and hired A&O senior energy
partner Alan Rae Smith.
It was not all good news on the people front, though.
High-profile banking partners Maurice Allen and
Mike Goetz left the firm after just a year to set up the
UK arm of US firm Ropes & Gray, while Herbert
Smith poached pensions partner Dan Schaffer.
The firm saw headcount fall significantly during the
year. In 2008-09 it had 5,038 staff, but this fell by 8
per cent to 4,653 in 2009-10. In the same period its
fee-earner headcount dropped by 4 per cent and its
qualified lawyer headcount declined by 5 per cent,
while partner numbers remained static at 444.
Of the 444 partners, 419 are in the equity. Those at
the bottom of the firms 12-year lockstep were
awarded a profit share of 627,000, while those at the
top took home 1.5m. With the lockstep running
from 20 to 50 points, this means the value of one
lockstep point was 31,350, down from 32,900 the
year before. It is estimated that the 25 non-equity
partners received an average pay packet of 420,000.
Strengths
Freshfields
management,
including chief
executive Ted Burke
and joint senior
partner Konstantin
Mettenheimer,
continue to steer
the firm expertly
through exceptionally
tricky markets
while maintaining
a collegiate
culture within the
partnership. The firm
remains a corporate
powerhouse, winning
mandate after
mandate opposite
arch-rival and
corporate trailblazer
Linklaters.
Weaknesses
While Freshfields
financial performance
and client record are
outstanding, its
biggest concerns over
the coming years
concern people issues
and work-life balance.
Its obsession with
keeping both the
partnership and the
leverage ratio lean
means it is the most
vulnerable of the big
four to charges of
beasting associates.
And its tendency to
take on laterals only
from what partners
consider to be
comparator firms
may in the end be
shortsighted.
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
3
(l-r) Burke and Mettenheimer
300
600
900
1200
1500
Costs
Net profit
Turnover
2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06
m
Five-year key trends
TLS_034_a ug_uk200_t op4_e d 1/ 9/ 10 16: 17 Pa ge 34
1-4
The Lawyer|UK 200|35
Turnover (M): 1,050
Average PEP (K): 1,100
Equity spread (K): 661-1,652
Profit margin (%): 37
RPL (K): 533
HAVING stripped out some 450 staff from the
business and booked the associated costs in the 2008-
09 financial year, Allen & Overy (A&O) was perhaps
the most expansionist of the magic circle firms in
2009-10, opening in new jurisdictions and making
significant lateral hires at home and abroad.
One of the firms major points of focus has been the
Asia-Pacific region and it caused ripples in the
tight-knit Australian legal market in February 2010
with its announcement that it would be launching
there.
In contrast to rival Clifford Chance, which just
flirted with alleged merger partner Malleson Stephen
Jacques two years ago, A&O went all the way with its
Australian ambitions, raiding Clayton Utz to launch
a niche banking and energy and natural resources
practice.
Not content with Australia, a week later it opened in
Qatar with a focus on high-end corporate and finance
work, adding to a credible Gulf offering in the United
Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.
It also expanded its Singapore offering by merging
with local firm and former White & Case ally Venture
Law, while partner Srinivas Parthasarathy left A&Os
Singapore office to move to its Indian alliance firm Tri-
legal, thereby strengthening ties between the two firms.
This expansiveness seen across the Asia-Pacific
region was not necessarily in evidence in the firms
operations in more mature markets. It lost its entire
Milan-based employment team to local boutique
Lablaw and its Mannheim office to Quinn Emanuel
Urquhart Oliver & Hedges.
It was also hit by the departure of corporate ace Rolf
Koerfer to Linklaters spin-off Oppenhoff & Partner.
Meanwhile, in the UK, finance partner Alan Rae
Smith left for Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and
leveraged finance partner Neil Caddy moved over to
Mayer Brown. However, A&O did hire in France,
Germany, the UK and the US.
The firm led on a number of sophisticated finance
deals during the year, with partners Alun Eynon-
Evans and Stephen Miller advising longstanding client
Bank of Ireland on a 3.4bn (2.79bn) integrated
debt and equity capital raising; and Vanessa Hardman
assisted Alliance & Leicester on a 1.4bn residential
mortgage-backed securitisation deal.
A&O replicated this success with a number of panel
wins, including BAA, Nationwide and Virgin Group.
The litigation department reported one of the best
performances in the market, with the departments rev-
enue growing by 24 per cent, from 110m to 136.6m.
A&O also broke new ground by outsourcing litigation
document review work to Integreon in a move that is
expected to generate a 30-50 per cent cost saving.
Under the terms of the firms lockstep, partners
enter the equity on 20 points and gain two a year for
15 years until they accumulate a maximum of 50. Last
year a point was worth roughly 33,000.
Strengths
Investment in
litigation paid off,
with substantial
growth in that
department. A&Os
reputation as a
go-to adviser in
times of crisis was
demonstrated by
the fact that it acted
on a UK Government
panel on how to
handle its stake
in bailed-out banks.
It was also lead
counsel to the
creditors of Dubai
World, which
requested a debt
standstill at the
end of 2009.
Weaknesses
The firm was left
exposed by its
reliance on financial
institutions, as
evidenced by the
disproportionate
impact of job cuts
on the leveraged
finance department
during the firmwide
restructuring.
Meanwhile, there are
questions about its
Australian operation,
including the viability
of trying to enter Asia
through the back
door, and A&O is still
considered a little
lean in the US.
Allen & Overy
4
Five-year key trends
(l-r) Senior partner David
Morley and global managing
partner Wim Dejonghe
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Costs
Net profit
Turnover
2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06
m
TLS_035_a ug_uk200_t op4_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 48 Pa ge 35
5-10
36|The Lawyer|UK 200
Turnover (M): 581
Average PEP (K): 527
Equity spread (K): 225-1,500
Profit margin (%): 17
RPL (K): 250
DLA PIPER cut 37m out of its cost base over the
past financial year through a combination of
reducing headcount, deferring office moves and
tightening business development expenditure.
Around 2m was saved on air travel alone.
Nevertheless, such prudent financial manage-
ment was insufficient to stave off an 18 per cent
drop in average profit, from 645,000 to
527,000. In contrast, turnover fell by just 1 per
cent. Net profit was down by 19 per cent on 2008s
123m to 99.8m, a margin of 17 per cent.
One of the largest contributing factors to the
fall in profitability was the firms Middle East
network. Revenue for that region declined by 40
per cent from 2008s 20.5m (during which time
the firm had its best billings month ever) to
12.4m in 2009-10.
As a result the firm made a number of
redundancies and alterations to its regional senior
management. Middle East head David Church
was replaced by Abdulaziz Al-Yaqout, Alex Saleh
was moved out of the role of head of Bahrain and
Kuwait, senior partners Peter Monk and Damian
McNair were seconded to Australian alliance firm
DLA Phillips Fox and Shehzaad Sacranie, who
was billed to act as regional finance head, left the
firm after a year.
Elsewhere the picture was more mixed. Asia
grew by 21 per cent to 56.5m and Continental
Europe raised income by 10 per cent to 229m.
Strong performances were recorded in Belgium,
Germany, Hungary, Italy and the Netherlands.
The UK, meanwhile, saw income fall by 8 per
cent to 284m. The UKs largest single area last
year was litigation, accounting for a fifth of
national turnover, followed by finance. The latter
area was boosted by the hire of Bob Charlton from
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer as global head of
projects and finance.
DLA Pipers fixed-share partners divide up
a 25 per cent share of any profit above budget
(equity partners get the rest) and may receive a
performance-based bonus. Equity partners (on
average one more than the previous year) are
remunerated on bands worth 25,000 on a merit-
based system. While the bottom of the equity fell by
100,000 to 225,000, joint chief executive Nigel
Knowles remuneration as sole plateau partner
remained static year-on-year at 1.5m.
Turnover (M): 542
Average PEP (K): 663
Equity spread (K): 415-830
Profit margin (%): 30
RPL (K): 388
IN ITS final year as an unmerged entity, Lovells posted
an impressive set of results, with fee income rising by
2 per cent to 542m and net profit increasing by 13.8
per cent to 160m. The firm also achieved its highest-
ever average profit per equity partner (PEP), which
rose from 586,000 to 663,000, narrowly beating
the previous high of 661,000 in 2007-08 some
legacy as it morphs into Hogan Lovells.
The London office contributed 43.3 per cent of total
income, while Asia and the Middle East accounted for
9.7 per cent, Europe 42.7 per cent and the US 4.3 per
cent. The highest volume of income came from
disputes, which made up 130m of the total revenue,
representing a 1 percentage point increase on the
previous year.
Finance accounted for 19 per cent of revenue, but
that is a figure the merged firm will be looking to
improve this year.
While the number of staff dropped year-on-year
from 3,400 to 3,271, the number of partners grew
from 349 to 359. Hogan Lovells, which went live on
1 May, is estimated to have a turnover of 1.2bn
($1.87bn). That could elevate it above Allen & Overy
in terms of revenue by 2010-11.
Yet the merger has not been without its problems.
Earlier this year it was announced that Lovells
Chicago office would not be part of the merger and
there have been a series of departures across the firms
offices in New York, Warsaw, Berlin and Beijing.
However, if the merger is successful and at present
there is little to suggest it should not be it could
push Hogan Lovells into the premier league of global
law firms.
Strengths
At 162.6m of total revenue,
corporate was one of Lovells best
performers in 2009-10. The firm
landed roles on a string of
high-profile mandates, including
advising Segro on its takeover of
Brixton and Arcus Infrastructure
Partners on its purchase of failed
company Babcock & Browns 1.9bn
European infrastructure fund a
much-needed corporate platform on
which to build.
Weaknesses
Mergers are never easy, but
combining two firms the size
of Lovells and Hogan & Hartson
has already raised numerous
integration issues. The firm lacks
the strength in finance, particularly
in New York, to compete with
behemoths such as Skadden or
Linklaters. It is an area that the
firm is desperate to grow in and
until that happens it will struggle
to be considered as among the
worlds elite.
Strengths
DLA Pipers biggest selling point
is its global breadth, and this is the
reason new clients such as Christies,
Kraft and UBS have turned to it.
Its Asia practice is booming and
it is able to recognise new market
opportunities, as indicated by
launches in Brazil and Turkey,
which are destined to become
increasingly important for the firm.
Weaknesses
The firm was overambitious in the
Middle East, having hired too rapidly
and relying too much on one client,
Nakheel, which was aversely
affected by the property crash.
London is also a little skinny and
could do with a bolt-on to improve
market standing, particularly in
more sophisticated corporate work.
DLA Piper
Lovells
David Harris, managing partner
5
6
TLS_036_a ug_uk200_5t o10_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 50 Pa ge 36
The Lawyer|UK 200|37
5-10
Turnover (M): 449.9
Average PEP (K): 862
Equity spread (K): 440-1,025
Profit margin (%): 26
RPL (K): 426
HERBERT Smith was one of only three firms in
the UK top 10 to report an increase in turnover in
2009-10, albeit the rise was a modest 1.3 per cent
to 449.9m.
It also recovered from a disappointing 21 per
cent slump in net profit in 2008-09 to post a 1.3
per cent rise to 117.2m, while average profit per
equity partner (PEP) also rose, by 2 per cent, from
845,000 to 862,000.
The firm continues to maintain an unrivalled
reputation for litigation it was named Litigation
Team of the Year for the second year running at
The Lawyer Awards 2010 yet corporate remains
its highest-earning practice. It brought in 199.8m
in turnover last year, although that figure was
down slightly on the previous years 202m.
While the UK makes up 62 per cent of total
turnover, much of the firms investment has been
in its overseas operations, strengthening offices
in Moscow, Hong Kong, Dubai and Spain. The
majority of the redundancies at Herbies came in
2008-09, when 84 staff were let go in London. The
firm avoided making similar cuts this time.
Finance is now the fastest-growing area in the
firm and its strategy of targeting major banks is
paying off. It is now on the panels of RBS, Lloyds
Banking Group and BNP Paribas. It has also seen
a high volume of restructuring work, including
the Oilexco North Sea insolvency and the Yell
restructuring project.
Turnover (M): 439.5
Average PEP (K): 1,840
Equity spread (K): 1,050-2,100
Profit margin (%): 52
RPL (K): 791
SLAUGHTER and May remains an enigma in the
City. The firm does not reveal its financial results, but
with the corporate engine room stuttering of late, The
Lawyer estimates that revenue fell by around 13 per
cent during 2009-10.
Slaughters previous years performance was helped
in no small part by its work for HM Treasury,
primarily due to corporate big-hitter Charles Randell.
That flow slowed somewhat in 2009-10, although
Slaughters did win a role for the Treasury on its
agreement to subscribe to 25.5bn of RBS shares,
emphasising the fact that that particular well had not
run completely dry.
The early part of Slaughters financial year was
dominated by restructurings, with the finance arm
outperforming other departments. Dispute resolution
also had a good year, while competition performed
well. M&A activity, still the firms strongest suit,
remained thin on the ground.
Nevertheless, Slaughters did win roles on its fair
share of big-ticket transactions. Among the most
lucrative was a mandate for Cadbury on its ultimately
unsuccessful defence of a hostile takeover bid from
Kraft. M&A head Steve Cooke, who led the defence,
remained as busy as any City partner. Other major
pieces of work included advising BA on its tie-up
with Iberia, while the year-end brought a role for
Prudential on its cancelled 14.5bn rights issue and
attempted purchase of AIG in Asia.
While Slaughters is still largely UK-focused, the
Asian side of the business has become more important
of late. Turnover was up for the Hong Kong office,
while the firm continued to bed down in its Beijing
base. The importance of Asia was confirmed in this
years partner promotions round, which saw the firm
make up one City and one Hong Kong corporate
partner.
Another sign of a changing landscape at this
traditional firm was the news last year that it was in
talks to outsource some low-level legal work.
Strengths
Litigation was up by 10 per cent on last
year, accounting for some 171m of fee
income. Herbert Smith has worked on
some of the biggest deals around, including
transport group Arrivas prospective
takeover by Deutsche Bahn. It also
represented the underwriters on
Prudentials cancelled $21bn (13.44bn)
rights issue as part of its ultimately failed
bid to acquire American International
Groups Asian insurance arm AIA.
Weaknesses
Herbies suffered a series
of defections from its
Paris office during the
year, including that of
international banking and
finance head Georges Dirani,
who left to become general
counsel at BNP Paribas. This
trend needs to be addressed.
Strengths
Slaughters traditional
strength has always been
M&A. Last year, however,
the multidisciplinary
training of the firms
lawyers began to pay
off as some of the juiciest
mandates came from
the finance side, with
restructurings and
capital raisings propping
up performance.
Weaknesses
While lack of diversity in terms of both
geography and practice area has not proved a
big hindrance in the past, that could be about to
change. The firm can only keep achieving for so
long without a healthy M&A market to back it
up. The closure of the Paris office last year a
long time in the offing shows that the firms
toe-in-the-water international strategy might
have become anachronistic.
Herbert Smith
7
8
Slaughter and May
TLS_037_a ug_uk200_5t o10_e d 26/ 8/ 10 15: 51 Pa ge 37
5-10
38|The Lawyer|UK 200
Turnover (M): 355.2
Average PEP (K): 517
Equity spread (K): 275-872
Profit margin (%): 20
RPL (K): 292
HAVING made 735 job cuts during the recession
and booked much of the cost in 2008-09,
Eversheds was a much leaner and more profitable
business in 2009-10. This had an impact on
average profit per equity partner (PEP), which
rose by a third.
That said, around 95 secretaries were made
redundant during 2009-10 because the firm
outsourced document production work to Exigent
in South Africa, while 22 real estate lawyers also
had their jobs up for review.
The firm has not yet managed to shake off the
number of redundancies it made, nor the fact that
many were paid just the statutory minimum in
compensation.
Furthermore, one male associate who lost his job
took Eversheds to court, successfully claiming
unfair dismissal and sex discrimination against
the firm. Eversheds was ordered to pay 123,000
in damages.
Eversheds reputation is as a mid- market firm,
but at its core it has some stellar practices. These
include its public sector group, which has advised
regional development agencies on the creation
of some 400m worth of EU-financed funds,
and the Ministry of Justice on the expansion
of prisons.
On the private sector side of the business,
Eversheds has acted for the trustees of a number
of high-profile pension funds, including the New
Airways Pension Scheme and the Airways Pension
Scheme on a pension recovery deal with British
Airways and the trustees of the Cable & Wireless
Worldwide Retirement Plan.
Eversheds is also the proud possessor of a
number of blue-chip clients, including Boeing,
BAE Systems and Lloyds Banking Group.
But its failure to crack Londons high-end
corporate and finance markets, despite some
pretty hefty investment in its City operation,
remains a frustration.
The firms equity is split into 17 bands. Fixed-
share partners are distributed across five bands.
They made between 135,000 and 250,000 and
are eligible for a bonus worth up to 25 per cent of
base earnings.
Equity partners have their bandings reviewed
every two years and can be moved up or down by
a maximum of two steps. No partner currently sits
above band 15.
Further afield, Eversheds grew in Sweden
through a merger and announced plans to send its
first-ever secondee to Indian firm Khaitan & Co.
Turnover (M): 307
Average PEP (K): 486
Equity spread (K): 283-950
Profit margin (%): 30
RPL (K): 301
IN ANY normal year drops in both revenue and
profit per equity partner (PEP) would be signs of a
firm in trouble, but few could seriously suggest
that Norton Rose had anything but another good
year in 2009-10.
Global turnover was down by just over 2 per cent
on 2008-09s, falling from 314m to 307m.
However, unlike many of its competitors, for
Norton Rose that figure represents an improve-
ment on the 297m it posted a year previously.
PEP was down by 6 per cent, with partners
taking home an average of 486,000. Net profit
was marginally up from 88.4m to 92.3m and
the firm increased the total amount of equity in
circulation by around 7 per cent and boosted its
equity partner ranks.
Therein lies the key to Norton Roses year. In a
period during which many firms have displayed a
somewhat mercurial streak in their financial
performances, Norton Rose has stuck to its plan
and maintained steady progress.
The firm introduced a flexible working scheme
at the beginning of the financial year in an effort
to avoid redundancies. This initiative, which
allowed staff to take four-day weeks and part-
paid sabbaticals, ended in January as workflow
picked up, with chief executive Peter Martyr
reaffirming his promise that the firm would not
profit from it.
Further afield, Asia remained a big focus. The
tie-up with Deacons (now Norton Rose Australia)
has given the firm added clout in the Asia-Pacific
region and pushed its projected global turnover to
around the 440m mark.
In practice area terms, litigation continued to
perform well, growing to 14 per cent of firmwide
revenue (and 17 per cent in London).
Meanwhile, finance edged ahead of corporate as
the biggest-billing department on the back of its
work for HSBC, Socit Gnrale and Crdit
Agricole.
However, the biggest mandate of the year came
from the regulatory practice, which snared a role
for Orange on its merger with T-Mobile.
Norton Rose partners start as junior equity
partners before moving onto a modified lockstep
system, starting on 100 points. They move up 12.5
points a year until they reach a gateway at 150.
Partners plateau at 200 points, at which level a
handful of high performers can move up to a
maximum of 300 points.
Strengths
Eversheds management is
commercially focused, ambitious
and has a reputation for innovative
thinking. The firm improved
profitability last year and appears
to have learnt from past mistakes
by offering enhanced redundancy
packages to support staff whose jobs
are on the line, rather than the bare
minimum, while distributing a bonus
of 1,000 to all non-partner staff.
Weaknesses
Eversheds handled its redundancies
badly and, while it has sought to
improve on that record, mud sticks.
This means that, whenever it floats
plans such as paying staff for
business development ideas and
piloting iPads for staff, it elicits a
barrage of criticism. Equally, the
firms strategy of targeting major
corporates for the whole spectrum
of their legal needs risks diluting
the brand.
Strengths
Finance was a big plus this year,
with Norton Rose acting on some
of the biggest IPOs around,
including Jupiter Asset Management
and Polish power group Tauron.
Litigation outperformed
expectations for the second year
running, while the continuing push
into Asia is another big positive
for the future.
Weaknesses
There is concern that London
is being left behind as the focus
remains on growing the global
network. Mainstream corporate
work has also fallen away, in line
with the M&A market, although
headline figures were boosted by
work coming through the corporate
finance and competition practices.
Eversheds
9
Norton Rose
10
TLS_038_a ug_uk200_5t o10_e d 1/ 9/ 10 10: 37 Pa ge 38
3VB
3 Verulam Buildings
Grays Inn London WC1R 5NT
DX: LDE 331 Tel: 020 7831 8441 Fax: 020 7831 8479
chambers@3vb.com www.3vb.com
3 VERULAM BUILDINGS is one of the foremost commercial sets of barristers chambers in London, as its ranking in
the legal directories conrms. Clients receive a service in which legal excellence is combined with commercial attitude.
3 Verulam Buildings is well known for its approachable style and the willingness of its members to work as part of a
team with solicitors and clients.
Chambers provides litigation and advisory services across a wide range of commercial law, specialising in:
Details of members specic areas of expertise and reported cases appear
on the chambers web site: www.3vb.com or for further information contact
Nicholas Hill, Senior Practice Manager.
U
Commercial Arbitration
U
Insurance and Reinsurance
U
Entertainment and Media
U
Cross Border Disputes
U
Banking
U
Insolvency
U
IT and Telecoms
U
Building and Construction
U
Financial Services
U
Professional Negligence
U
Commercial Fraud
U
International Trade
TLS_039_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 11: 15 Pa ge 1
11-50
40|The Lawyer|UK 200
Ashurst
Turnover (M): 293
Average PEP (K): 689
Equity spread (K): 362-940
Profit margin (%): 35
RPL (K): 366
AS WITHmany of its peers
jostling for position below
the magic circle, Ashurst has
managed to steady its ship to
some degree after recording
a big fall in profit during
2008-09. But it was still far
from plain sailing in 2009-10.
Average profit per equity
partner nudged up to 689,000
from last years 673,000,
which is still some way short
of the 1.04m recorded in
2007-08. Total revenue was
down slightly, from 301m
to 293m.
The lack of a significant bounce
should not come as too much of a
surprise given that the economic
downturn is still affecting
Ashursts major sweet spots
of mainstream corporate
and acquisition finance work.
Also, while cutting around
6 per cent from its total staff
numbers, the firm avoided any
major redundancy programme
last year.
Total partner headcount
actually increased from 221 to
225, but those figures do not tell
the full story of a year that saw a
number of comings and goings
from the partnership.
Kirkland & Elliss June 2010
raid for private equity duo David
Arnold and Gavin Gordon
certainly shook the firm, coming
on the back of a number of other
partner departures throughout
2009-10. Meanwhile,
restructuring partners Dan
Hamilton and Lee Doyle were
recruited from White & Case and
RBS respectively, while Centrica
general counsel Peter Roberts
joined the energy practice.
Some commentators believe
that the Ashurst partnership
revolving door has changed the
culture of the firm, suggestions
that managing partner Simon
Bromwich denies vigorously.
The firms management is
understood to believe that the
changes, with the notable
exception of the Arnold and
Gordon departures, have
actively improved the quality
of the partnership.
Ashursts performance was
bolstered by a strong showing
from some of its overseas offices,
with non-UK revenue up from
33 per cent last year to 37 per
cent in 2009-10. But while
offices in France, Spain and
Sweden performed well, there
was trouble in Italy, when four
partners, including office
managing partner Riccardo
Agnostinelli, quit the firm
last August.
11 =
Simmons
& Simmons
Turnover (M): 251
Average PEP (K): 461
Equity spread (K): 240-850
Profit margin (%): 23
RPL (K): 332
SIMMONS & Simmons
highlights over the past year
included litigation partner Philip
Vaughans work on the
Buncefield case, which resulted
in a Court of Appeal victory for
client Shell, and fellow litigation
ace Colin Passmores win for
Barclays in the landmark
bank charges case. As a result
litigation grew as a proportion
of firmwide income, from 27
per cent in 2008-09 to 33.6 per
cent in 2009-10. IP was also up.
Despite the success, absolute
income for contentious work
grew by only 6 per cent on the
previous year as turnover for the
firm as a whole dropped by 14
per cent to 251m.
The reduction in total income
was largely the result of a 22 per
cent drop in revenue for the
financial institutions practice,
where clients include Bank of
America, Deutsche Bank and
Standard Chartered, and which
accounts for almost half of
firmwide revenue.
The decision to demerge the
Portuguese practice,
implemented on 1 May 2009,
12 =
CMS Cameron
McKenna
Turnover (M): 214.4
Average PEP (K): 453
Equity spread (K): 200-501
Profit margin (%): 21
RPL (K): 291
FEW FIRMS can have
experienced as incident-packed a
year as CMS Cameron McKenna.
It started with the introduction
of a redundancy-busting flexible
working scheme. It ended with
the firm in the throes of
negotiating potentially the
biggest legal process outsourcing
deal in the City.
Avoiding the previous years
redundancies (43 fee-earners lost
their jobs) has been a key priority
for managing partner Duncan
Weston, who has continued his
crusade to reshape the firm.
Camerons introduced its flexible
working arrangement at the
beginning of the 2009-10
financial year, with as many as
90 per cent of staff either
accepting shorter weeks or
taking unpaid leave.
The result was that no more
job losses were necessary, but
turnover was affected. Fee
income dropped by 11 per cent to
214.4m, while average profit
per equity partner fell by 18 per
cent to 453,000.
With 16 partners being taken
out of the equity at the end of
2008-09 and a total of 21 fewer
equity partners on a full-time
equivalent basis in 2009-10, net
profit also suffered, falling from
68m to 45.7m. The drop in
profitability came despite an
ongoing drive at the firm to
reduce costs.
This drive will continue apace
during the current year as the
details of Project Skylark an
outsourcing arrangement with
Integreon are finalised. Due to
go live in the autumn, the project
could see as much as 90 per cent
of the firms support functions
outsourced.
Surprisingly, given the carnage
across the market over the past
two years, Camerons corporate
practice performed well, posting
a second consecutive rise in
turnover. The firm was helped by
a vibrant energy sector, while its
life sciences and technology,
media and telecoms departments
also had a good year.
A high point for the firm was
winning a place on the coveted
13 =
also took approximately 6m
out of the coffers and reduced
staff by 60. Simmons now
operates an associate
relationship with the firm of
former Portugal managing
partner Pedro Rebelo De Sousa.
The closure of the Moscow office
in October, with eight staff made
redundant, also led to a
(smaller) dip in revenue.
Meanwhile, Simmons centred
its international attention on
China, making lateral hires and
applying for a Beijing licence.
Central to that focus were the
merger talks with Mayer Brown.
The US firm has an extensive
East Asia presence, but
discussions were eventually
abandoned after concerns were
raised over office duplication and
differences in profitability.
Simmons overhauled its
salaried bonus system during the
year after no bonuses were paid
out in 2008-09 because of a
failure to hit budget. It also took
the decision to break associate
lockstep, replacing it with a
merit-based arrangement from
1 May 2010.
The firm moved some partners
out of the equity partnership,
which was 5 per cent smaller
than in 2008-09. The profit pool
is split 80:20 between a 12-rung
lockstep and an additional
allocation of either one, three
(the norm), six or 10 points.
Equity partners enter the
lockstep on seven points and are
expected to progress up a level
each year for the first seven
rungs, accumulating 1.5 points
per year. Progress is managed
more actively in the top five
rungs. A remuneration
committee is comprised of
managing partner Mark
Dawkins and four elected
members.
Simmons put corporate
responsibility at the heart of its
2009-12 business plan through
increasing cooperation with
clients, rewarding employees
with time off in lieu and
recognition in the appraisal
process.
TLS_040_a ug_uk200_wr i t e ups 11t o50_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 03 Pa ge 40
11-50
The Lawyer|UK 200|41
Pinsent
Masons
Turnover (M): 206
Average PEP (K): 410
Equity spread (K): 240-605
Profit margin (%): 22
RPL (K): 223
PINSENT Masons increased its
profit margin from 17 to 22 per
cent and its average profit per
equity partner by 32 per cent
over the past financial year
without substantially slashing
either the total number of equity
partners, which fell slightly from
116 to 113, or total staff, which
shrank by 3 per cent on the
previous year.
In fact, with 19 job losses at
the beginning of the 2009-10
financial year, Pinsents made
one of the smallest number of
redundancies of any of the
firms of its size. The rest of the
minimal staff reduction came
largely through natural wastage.
Cost cutting was achieved partly
through an extensive flexitime
scheme, which was taken up by
204 members of staff and saved
2m, and putting the freeze on
salaries and non-strategic
recruitment.
The national firm is well-
known for its public sector
practice, scoring panel wins for
the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority and Birmingham City
Council, and also leads in the
education arena. It has also
picked up new work for
HSBC through its joint
venture with Salans.
However, the lack
of activity on AIM,
where it is one of
the market leaders,
has hit the bottom
line, while corporate and
property were both down on the
previous year. Total firmwide
turnover fell by 4 per cent, from
215m to 206m.
Pinsents has a two-tier
partnership. Fixed-share
partners contribute capital,
receive a salary and an additional
two profit points each, which
roughly accounts for between 10
and 15 per cent of their total
remuneration. Equity partners
enter the 10-rung modified
lockstep on 20 points.
Remuneration is reviewed every
three years by a 10-member
committee and partners can
move down, as well as up, the
lockstep. In addition, there is a
partnership-wide bonus scheme,
which accounts for 10 per cent of
the total profit pool. The firm
retains a waiting room
arrangement, limiting the
number of partners who can
resign at any one time.
Last year the firm signed up to
new London headquarters, with
the investment starting in
2010-11. While it has managed
to offload two of its London
premises in City Point and
Bunhill Row, it still has a
four-year lease
remaining on
premises in
Clerkenwell
to deal
with.
14 =
Bird & Bird
Turnover (M): 201.8
Average PEP (K): 466
Equity spread (K): 284-766
Profit margin (%): 19
RPL (K): 273
TECHNOLOGY specialist Bird
& Bird continued its apparently
permanent growth spurt last
year off the back of its increased
geographic reach and continued
strengthening of various practice
areas in a number of markets.
The expansionist firm broke
through the 200m revenue
barrier for the first time, posting
a total turnover of 201.8m for
the 2009-10 financial year.
In contrast with the 10 per cent
rise in turnover, Bird & Birds
average profit per equity partner
figure fell for the second year
running, from 481,000 to
466,000.
The reduction in average profit
is also reflected in Bird & Birds
relatively low margin for a City
firm of 19 per cent. Although
Bird & Birds net profit grew last
year from 34.6m to 37.7m,
with the overall growth in
turnover that translated into a
drop in the profit margin from
2008-09.
Although Bird & Bird has 81
full equity partners (up from
72 last year) it maintains that
all of its partners should be
categorised as equity thanks to
its merit-based remuneration
system. According to CEO
David Kerr, on that metric the
firms profit margin is closer to
35 per cent.
However, Kerr agrees that
junior partners are effectively
on a fixed-share basis until they
enter the full equity. Only the
latter were counted as part of the
18 per cent net profit last year.
Several of Bird & Birds
contracts in its specialist
litigation areas, such as IP,
sports and technology, held up
particularly well last year.
The firms financial year was
characterised by international
expansion. It is planning to open
an office in Abu Dhabi, its first
base in the Middle East region,
while further afield it formed an
alliance last year with Beijing IP
boutique Xiang Kung Law Firm
with the aim of strengthening
its contentious capabilities in
China.
Consequently, the proportion
of revenue derived from overseas
grew from 65 per cent to around
70 per cent.
In London Bird & Bird
bolstered its corporate team
with the hire of two partners
from Orrick Herrington &
Sutcliffe, Richard Eaton and
Struan Penwarden.
15 h
Clyde & Co
Turnover (M): 192
Average PEP (K): 605
Equity spread (K): 286-885
Profit margin (%): 28
RPL (K): 337
IT WAS another year of
expansion for Clyde & Co,
which reported a 3.8 per cent
rise in revenue at the financial
year-end, from 185m to 192m.
Sustainable growth at the firm
comes as a direct result of a
number of initiatives aimed at
building up its core practices of
litigation, arbitration, insurance
and IP, in particular trademark
matters. The firm has managed
this while also spreading its
geographical base, with an eye on
targeting work coming from the
emerging markets.
Turnover has risen at Clydes
steadily and since 2005-06,
growing by 53.6 per cent, from
125m to 192m. Net profit
has also climbed upwards,
standing at 54.5m last year,
a 16 per cent increase on the
47m posted at the 2008-09
year-end.
Approximately 42 per cent of
Clydes revenue is now generated
outside the UK, the equivalent of
80.64m compared with 77m
in 2008-09.
Clydes expanded its equity
partnership from 87 to 91 during
the past financial year and also
increased the wider partnership
by 14 to 164. New recruits last
year included insurance partners
Roger Doulton, Neil Beresford
and Toby Rogers, who all joined
16 h
BT global panel. Another
big mandate came with its
continued work for RWE on
the disposal of the UKs
nuclear power sites.
Camerons operates what
amounts to a three-tiered
partner structure. At the lowest
level are office partners, who are
not included in the total partner
figure of 141 given by the firm,
and who are effectively
senior associates with more
responsibility. They are
promoted to a three-year
gateway level before progressing
to the full lockstep, which has
nine levels with a plateau
of 70 points. The equity spread
in 2009-10 topped out at
501,000, down from 644,000
in 2008-09.
TLS_041_a ug_uk200_wr 11t o50_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 46 Pa ge 41
SJL | Sedlo Jimenez Lunz is an independent Luxembourg law firm that offers
first-class legal services in all fields of business law. SJLs wide-ranging
expertise in Luxembourg finance, securities and corporate law allows it to
advise leading institutional and major corporate clients on sophisticated and
complex cross-border transactions, including banking & finance, structured
finance, securitisations, public offerings and private placements of securities,
alternative investment vehicles, restructuring & insolvency, M&A and
corporate financial transactions.
SJLs lawyers are all multi-lingual professionals with substantial experience in
private practice, and SJLs partners are recognised experts in their respective
practices and specialities.
The quality of services, expertise and broad capabilities of SJL in most
complex transactions also make SJL the first choice of many leading
international law firms that do not have a presence in Luxembourg and that
require advice and support for their clients in respect of Luxembourg law.
SJL Sedlo Jimenez Lunz
2, rue de la Reine L-2418 Luxembourg
Tel. +352 246 185 20 Fax: +352 246 185 20 50
Email: info@sjl-legal.com
Website: www.sjl-legal.com
TLS_042_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 14: 40 Pa ge 1
11-50
The Lawyer|UK 200|43
like many firms, this process can
be accelerated. Remuneration is
allocated on the basis of a
number of criteria, including
how many hours partners bill,
what role they take on a deal and
the contribution
to business development. The
bottom of equity increased
slightly over the past financial
year, from 185,000 to
208,000, while the highest-
paid partners continued to
receive 1.2m.
from Barlow Lyde & Gilbert.
The firm operates a 10-year
modified lockstep, which
stretches from 40 to 100 points.
Partners move through gates
every three years, reaching
plateau within 10 years.
At the end of the last
financial year the firms average
profit per equity partner figure
rose by 10 per cent, from
550,000 to 605,000. The
firms equity spread also moved
upwards marginally, now
ranging from 286,000 to
885,000.
The increased financial metrics
are a result of sustained
investment at Clydes. Over the
past year this has included the
bolt-on of Shadbolts London-
based construction and
infrastructure practice and
dispute teams, as well as the
UK corporate practice and the
Paris office.
The deal also gave the firm a
presence in Tanzania through
a best friends relationship with
AKO Law.
In addition, there have been
new offices in New Jersey and
Saudi Arabia and a best friends
alliance with Indias ALMT,
giving it a route into the Indian
market.
Berwin
Leighton
Paisner
Turnover (M): 191
Average PEP (K): 455
Equity spread (K): 208-1,200
Profit margin (%): 22
RPL (K): 327
BERWIN Leighton Paisner
(BLP) bounced back from its
disappointing performance
during the 2008-09 financial
year in 2009-10, breaking
through the 190m revenue
barrier and reporting a 10 per
cent increase in average profit
per equity partner (PEP).
One of BLPs biggest successes
has been its ability to respond
to changes in client demand,
particularly the disaggregation of
legal services. The firm launched
a managed legal services
department designed
to take over the in-house legal
functions of major corporates.
The first client to sign up was
Thames Water in a deal worth
5m per year over five years,
which sees BLP refer lower-value
work to Ashfords and Pannone.
Other programmes, such as
Lawyers on Demand, also
continue to be successful, with
the scheme working with Cisco,
Dell, Gucci, Orange, Sky and
UBS.
Overseas the jury is still out on
BLPs ambitious Russian
adventure, but the Abu Dhabi
office has experienced a steady
growth in headcount. The client
base has also grown with Aldar,
the major Abu Dhabi-based
developer of projects such as the
Ferrari World Abu Dhabi theme
park, being one of the latest
additions.
BLPs turnover was boosted by
several high-profile matters last
year, not least through it picking
up Clifford Chance client
Blackstone on its joint venture
with British Land and the
National Pension Service of
Korea. The firm also acted for
stalwart clients such as Tesco on
a major sale-and-leaseback deal
and Oxford Properties and UBS
in relation to the letting of
Watermark Place to Nomura,
one of the largest pre-lets ever
in the City.
The restructuring practice
continued to be busy, with
insolvency ace Ben Larkin acting
for accountancy firm Moore
Stephens on the administration
of Readers Digest.
Although PEP rose, the
increase was slightly more
muted than at some of BLPs
competitors as a result of a
number of opportunistic
senior hires, such as sports
litigator Graham Shear from
Teacher Stern and tax partner
Linda Adelson from Lloyds
TSB, plus leaders in support
services, such as business
development, HR and
marketing. The firm also
made 85 redundancies.
BLP operates a modified
lockstep, with 20 per cent of
partners remuneration based on
performance. On the lockstep
element partners enter the equity
on 50 points, typically taking 10
years to reach plateau. However,
17 h
Taylor
Wessing
Turnover (M): 177.9
Average PEP (K): 385
Equity spread (K): 200-700
Profit margin (%): 32
RPL (K): 279
WHILE there are still lingering
question marks over the extent
of its international integration,
almost a full decade after the
Anglo-German merger that
created it, there is no doubt
that Taylor Wessing continues
to be a tightly run ship.
Turnover was down by 5 per
cent overall to 177.9m, with
UK turnover falling by 7 per
cent to 84.5m. Average profit
per equity partner, meanwhile,
edged up slightly to 385,000
globally and 453,000 in the
UK, while net profit held at
56.3m.
The consistent profitability
can be put down to the prudent
financial management that has
always been a Taylor Wessing
calling card. One of the
shortest average lockup
periods in the City was reduced
further in 2009-10 to an
impressive 86 days.
Managing partner Tim Eyles
first full year in the top job was
dominated by a rebranding
exercise that finally went live in
the summer. One of the key
elements was a paring down of
the firms core client list,
abandoning country-specific
rosters in favour of a select
line-up that includes Nike,
Deutsche Post, Google and RBS.
It is one of a number of moves
that speaks of a firm wanting to
be seen as a truly international
player. Expansion away from
Taylor Wessings traditional
European bases is also on the
cards, with Asia and South
America possible targets.
Partners have been appointed to
put together business plans for
key jurisdictions, opening up the
possibility of further growth.
IP continues as a strength,
but the corporate practice has
improved steadily, with the firm
acting for a healthy slew of
private wealth clients on M&A
deals.
There are still discrepancies
between the partner
remuneration systems in Taylor
Wessings European and UK
practices. For example, there are
eight equity bands in Germany
and 10 in the UK. The latter
system starts on 200 points,
rising to a plateau of 700.
18 m
SJ Berwin
Turnover (M): 171
Average PEP (K): 447
Equity spread (K): 180-640
Profit margin (%): 23
RPL (K): 315
FOLLOWING its annus
horribilis that was 2008-09, the
past financial year saw SJ Berwin
manage to steady the ship. Yet
few in the City believe the firm
is out of the woods yet.
The firms 2009-10 was defined
by its courting of a US merger
partner. Early contender Orrick
Herrington & Sutcliffe opted out
of the tie-up, to be replaced by
Proskauer Rose. The public
pursuit of Proskauer has led
many commentators to suggest
that the future of the firm lies in
the successful completion of the
merger.
Transatlantic ambitions aside,
revenue dropped for the second
year in succession at SJ Berwin,
down 7 per cent from 184m to
171m. This represents an
overall decline over two years of
20 per cent. Average profit per
19 m
TLS_043_a ug_uk200_wr 11t o50_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 47 Pa ge 43
11-50
Addleshaw
Goddard
Turnover (M): 167.5
Average PEP (K): 426
Equity spread (K): 221-572
Profit margin (%): 25
RPL (K): 287
IT WAS a middling year at
Addleshaw Goddard. The profit
margin fell from 26 to 25 per
cent, but average profit per
equity partner increased by
5 per cent, from 405,000 to
426,000, largely as a result of
an equity partner cull: the firm
had on average 14 fewer equity
partners and 19 fewer partners
than in 2008-09. However,
unlike in 2008-09, Addleshaws
is paying out bonuses on a
discretionary basis this year.
It was a particularly impressive
year for the contentious
department, which grew fee
income by 25 per cent and which
now accounts for almost a third
of firmwide revenue. This was
boosted by the ongoing
Berezovsky
litigation and
partner
David Engel securing more than
30 settlements from media
outlets for Robert Dee, the
worlds worst tennis player. The
question remains as to whether
this performance will be
sustained next year given that
former department head Simon
Twigden is set to leave, along with
partner Pietro Marino, to set up a
claimant-focused boutique.
Speculation arose that
Twigdens exit was linked to his
failure to win the chairman
election, in which he ran against
Malcolm Pike, the head of the
contentious and commercial
division, and litigation partner
Monica Burch. Burch won,
becoming one of just a handful
of women to lead a City firm.
It was a good year for the
professional services practice
set up last August by former
managing partner Mark Jones.
It advised on the tie-up between
offshore firms Mourant du Feu
& Jeune and Ozannes.
However, three of the firms
four major practice areas saw
their incomes drop: finance made
38.5m compared with 41.5m a
year before; real estate brought
in 34.6m, down from 40.2m;
and corporate generated 40.2m,
a drop from 48.5m.
The equity runs from 50 to
150 points with 10-point
increments. It is split into three
bands, the first of which, 50-80
points, is lockstep. Thereafter
it is performance-based. No
partner currently has more
than 130 points.
=20 h
Denton Wilde
Sapte
Turnover (M): 167.5
Average PEP (K): 360
Equity spread (K): 230-540
Profit margin (%): 19
RPL (K): 275
AT THE start of the past
financial year Denton Wilde
Sapte launched a three-year
strategy review, with chief
executive Howard Morris
speaking of the need to offer
an alternative to the magic circle.
What the new approach did not
feature at least publicly was
the plan to secure a transatlantic
merger.
By Christmas 2009 Dentons
had agreed a deal with
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal
that would create a 500m firm
with 1,400 lawyers by September
2010. Arguably the smaller, less
profitable Dentons got the better
deal. But Dentons has taken
steps over the past financial
year, including making 27
redundancies, to improve its
profitability and make itself a
more eligible merger partner.
As a result average profit per
equity partner increased by 22
per cent, from 300,000 to
360,000, while the firms profit
margin improved from 15 to 19
per cent. Currently partners
enter the firms equity on 45
points and progress by five
points per year until they
plateaue at 90 points. Following
the merger Dentons will change
to an entirely merit-based
system.
Dentons has been highly active
in the projects and infrastructure
sector, assisting the Highways
Agency on the expansion of the
M25, the Ministry of Defence on
a 15-year shipbuilding deal with
BVT Surface Fleet and Deutsche
Bahn subsidiary DB Regio Tyne
& Wear on its contract to operate
the Tyne & Wear Metro. The hire
of two nuclear sector partners
from Hammonds, Rupert Cowen
and Jonathan Leech, may help
Dentons up its ante in that area.
Other investments included a
fitout in a new base in Milton
Keynes, which functions as a
UK lower-cost office, and several
million pounds spent on
upgrading the IT system.
International now accounts for
31 per cent of total revenue and
expansion abroad has continued,
with associations launched in
Libya and Lebanon. Dentons
strong reputation in the Middle
East has been underscored by its
winning mandates from Deutsche
Bahn on a $25bn (16.01bn)
project to build Qatars rail
network and Vodafone Qatar on
its $950m IPO on the Doha
Securities Market.
=20 h
equity partner rose by 9 per cent
to 447,000, but this is still a
long way off the 2007-08 high
of 801,000. Furthermore,
partners at the firm continued
to see their quarterly profit
distribution payments held
back until the start of 2010,
when they resumed.
While still securing a decent
share of whatever private equity
work was out there, the firms
reliance on that practice along
with real estate has seen it
continue to slump in terms of
transactional work.
One bright point came with
a mandate acting for Apax
Partners on a 600m investment
by Chinese Investment
Corporation, a deal led by
corporate head Steven Davis,
corporate partner Michael
Halford and funds star Nigel
van Zyl.
However, several departures
also rocked the firm through the
year, with banking partner Stuart
Brinkworths defection to Hogan
Lovells at the start of the year,
leaving the finance practice
feeling threadbare.
Irwin Mitchell
Turnover (M): 157
Average PEP (K): 540
Equity spread (K): 150-700
Profit margin (%): 18
RPL (K): 359
TOTAL revenue at Irwin
Mitchell declined by 0.6 per cent
during 2009-10, from 158m to
157m. Average profit per equity
partner also contracted, by 12.2
per cent, from 615,000 to
540,000.
This, however, comes after the
firm had its most successful year
to date in 2008-09. The falling
figures also serve to reflect the
firms investments, including the
opening of an office in Bristol in
February this year.
Taking a five-year snapshot,
the firms revenue has increased
by 40.2 per cent since the
2005-06 year-end, when the
firm posted a turnover of
112m. Over the same period
the partnership has expanded
from 96 to 115, although it
also introduced the partner
equivalent position of associate
director during the past year
(Irwin Mitchell also created a
career path for non-lawyers
when it converted to a legal
disciplinary practice).
Including associate directors,
the firm has 102 litigators
working at partner level
producing an average revenue
of 1.3m each.
At the end of the last
financial year the firms 115
22 h
44|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_044_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 08 Pa ge 44
The Lawyer|UK 200|45
Beachcroft
Turnover (M): 131
Average PEP (K): 314
Equity spread (K): 215-535
Profit margin (%): 19
RPL (K): 185
BEACHCROFTS financial
success over the past three
years has been underpinned by
internal investment against a
backdrop of modest turnover
growth.
During 2009-10 turnover grew
by 8.2 per cent to 131m from
121m a year earlier. Since
2005-06, when the firm
recorded a turnover of 98m,
Beachcroft has grown by a third.
In contrast, the equity
partnership at the firm has
contracted from 84 to 78 over
the same period.
According to Beachcroft senior
partner Simon Hodson, this has
not been a deliberate ploy, but
rather the result of equity
partner retirements.
Last year those 78 equity
partners earned an average
profit share of 314,000.
This compares with 84 equity
partners during the 2008-09
financial year earning an average
of 301,000.
Beachcroft has traditionally
been best known for its core
insurance practice, although
much of the past year has seen
investment into its healthcare
offering. This has brought
about a geographical
rebalancing of the firm. It
has tended to focus on the
South in the past, but is now also
looking north.
This trend began in November
2008 with the hire of Eversheds
healthcare partners David
Weatherburn, Paul Taylor and
Neil Rowe, who joined the firm
with a team of 11 lawyers and a
plethora of clients, worth an
estimated 4m. The firm
launched an office in Newcastle
off the back of these hires.
In the past year Beachcroft has
reinforced further its healthcare
practice in Manchester with the
hire of a team from Halliwells,
which included partners
Christopher Briggs and Simon
Wortley.
Beachcrofts equity spread
was 215,000 to a record
high of 535,000 last year,
an improvement on 2008-09,
when the spread ran from
165,000 to 452,000.
Hodson says the improved
result was a consequence of
discretionary awards being
handed out to the firms
best-performing partners.
23 h
Hammonds
Turnover (M): 118
Average PEP (K): 364
Equity spread (K): 156-471
Profit margin (%): 19
RPL (K): 257
WHILE Hammonds turnover
again saw a decline in 2009-10,
falling by 6 per cent to 118m,
profit bounced back. The firm,
which reported a 25 per cent
drop in average profit per equity
partner in 2008-09, saw that
figure leap by 32 per cent
to 364,000 in the past
financial year. Net profit saw
a 17 per cent hike to 22.6m.
The soaring profit was largely
a result of the reduction in the
firms headcount. The total
number of staff dropped from
1,297 to 1,015, and the number of
qualified lawyers dropped from
614 to 459. The number of equity
partners was also slashed, from
73 to 62.
The headcount reduction was
not all down to redundancies.
There were several high-profile
departures over the past year,
including Manchester head
Jonathan Edwards and
international construction chief
David Moss, who both joined
McGrigors, and Leeds head of
litigation David Williams, who
joined Walker Morris. Other
partner departures include
property specialist Paul Groobey,
corporate partner Ian Gillis and
construction partner Rupert
Cowen.
Towards the end of
the financial year the
firm was forced to
abandon its Munich
office following a series
of partner defections to
rivals Eversheds and Reed
Smith. However, the firm
is now considering plans to
open in Frankfurt. It has
also made 11 partner
appointments in the past
year, strengthening areas
such as corporate, pensions,
insolvency and litigation.
Corporate was a key practice
in 2009-10, generating 21 per
cent of fee income. The team
advised Rensburg Sheppards
on its all-share 412m takeover
by Investec and Care UK on
its 281m acquisition by
Bridgepoint Capital.
Litigation remains another
key area, accounting for 31m
of revenue, higher than any
other practice, while pensions
and employment continue to
perform well.
Despite the departures and
falling revenue, Hammonds
client base remains loyal: 73
per cent of its top 100 clients
have been advised by the
national firm for at least five
years or more.
24 h
partners posted a revenue per
partner of 1.36m, down by
3.26 per cent from 1.41m a
year earlier.
Irwin Mitchells practice is
dominated by contentious
work. The litigation group
accounts for 85 per cent of
overall revenue, the equivalent
of 133.45m, up slightly
from the 134m posted at
the 2008-09 year-end.
In the latest partnership
promotions round the firm made
up seven, including financial
director Mark Dakin and costs
manager Steven Green.
The litigation practice spans
a number of areas, from
high-volume defence work for
insurer clients such as Aviva to
higher-profile specialist cases
such as FSA criminal
investigations.
Irwin Mitchell is one firm
that has not been shy about
its enthusiasm for the Legal
Services Act, although it refuses
to divulge exactly what those
plans are and how it will action
them. But the next phase of its
growth is likely to come from
investment into the corporate
practice.
11-50
TLS_045_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 10 Pa ge 45
11-50
46|The Lawyer|UK 200
Holman
Fenwick
Willan
Turnover (M): 99.6
Average PEP (K): 527
Equity spread (K): 320-640
Profit margin (%): 32
RPL (K): 318
FOLLOWING a stonking year
in 2008-09, when turnover
mushroomed by 27 per cent and
average profit per equity partner
(PEP) by 26 per cent, Holman
Fenwick Willan experienced
little growth in 2009-10.
Turnover increased by 1 per cent,
from 98.7m to 99.6m, while
PEP was up by 2.5 per cent,
from 514,000 to 527,000.
The firm remains firmly
focused on litigation, with 82 per
cent of total revenue (81.6m)
coming from the 78-partner
litigation group. While the firm
also remains committed to
expanding into key strategic
jurisdictions, Londons
contribution to total turnover
has grown as a percentage year-
on-year. In 2008-09 the firms
UK practice accounted for 48
per cent of the total (47.4m).
In 2009-10 it accounted for
56 per cent (55.9m).
This is despite the firm
launching in Sydney and
forming associations in Abu
Dhabi and Saudi Arabia during
the year.
In September 2009 the firm
hired Blake Dawson partner
Alex Baykitch for the Sydney
launch. At the beginning of
26 h
Nabarro
Turnover (M): 113.8
Average PEP (K): 320
Equity spread (K): 170-510
Profit margin (%): 27
RPL (K): 282
NABARRO has sought to
broaden its offering beyond
its traditional property focus,
with expansion into corporate,
dispute resolution and the public
sector.
While it has made headway
in a number of non-property-
related areas a panel win for
Nationwide, work on the now
defunct Building Schools for
the Future scheme and acting
for winning bidder General
Dynamics on a 2bn Ministry of
Defence deal Nabarro remains
exposed to the real estate
market. Last year property
accounted for almost a third
of total revenue. As a result
turnover at the firm dropped
by 10 per cent over the past
financial year, from 126.5m
to 113.8m.
Despite the challenges
of the recession, real estate
continues to be one of the firms
greatest assets. In fact, the
property group actually has
more partners now than it did in
2008-09. Land Securities, which
Nabarro advised on the 250m
sale of Oxford Street retail
property Park House to a Libyan
investor, continues to be a major
client. The firm also worked with
Quintain on a 191m rights issue
and with Westfield on prelet
agreements related to the
Stratford development.
Despite the reduction in total
revenue Nabarro managed to
broadly retain its profit margin,
which at 27 per cent is at the
higher end for its market. This
was as a result of an 8 per cent
reduction in total headcount
and putting certain capital
expenditure on hold.
Average profit per equity
partner still fell by 15 per cent,
from 375,000 to 320,000
a reflection of the relatively
large (73 per cent) proportion
of partners in the equity.
Associates typically enter
the partnership as fixed-share
partners, remunerated on the
basis of a salary plus a share
of profit. Some of the 35 fixed-
share partners earned more than
those partners at the bottom of
the equity, who last year made
170,000. It typically takes three
years to progress into the equity.
The firm operates a
meritocratic remuneration
system, with profit share
determined one year in advance.
25 m
Wragge & Co
Turnover (M): 96.2
Average PEP (K): 276
Equity spread (K): 130-445
Profit margin (%): 32
RPL (K): 219
WRAGGE & Co had 23 fewer
staff members in 2009-10
compared with 2008-09. But
with 32 redundancies, coupled
with at least a degree of natural
wastage during that period, total
headcount would have been even
lower had it not been for the
firms acquisition of a team of 45
lawyers, including 10 partners,
from Lefvre Pelletier & Associs
in Paris at the beginning of this
calendar year.
The fact that these additions
came relatively late in the
financial year meant that no
uplift was felt on overall
turnover. Total revenue fell
by 7 per cent, from 103.4m
to 96.2m, over the period.
The dip was partly down to
Wragges exposure to property,
which at 28 per cent is one
of the highest proportions
of any of the major UK firms,
and to major corporates, many
of which have brought work
in-house.
While Wragges has aimed to
increase its FTSE100 client base,
it has also sought to hedge
against the downturn in private
sector investment through
increasing its presence among
public sector clients, particularly
in health, waste, transport and
education.
Wragges has an all-equity
partnership. Remuneration is
determined by a committee that
comprises the senior and
managing partners and three
elected members. Partners
receive a proportion of the total
profit, averaging around 0.75
per cent.
The firm is financed
conservatively and has
substantial cash reserves.
Other than its Paris launch
Wragges has also proceeded
cautiously on the investment
front, with no major advances
on expansion into the Middle
East, despite noises to this
effect.
For 2010-11 the firm is
budgeting a 20 per cent increase
in turnover to 115m, largely as
a result of the Paris acquisition.
This would take it a little south
of where it was in 2008.
27 =
2010 it formed a best friends
relationship with Abu Dhabi firm
Salem Al Maddfa Advocates &
Legal Consultants while also
creating a formal link with Saudi
lawyer Faisal Al Lazam.
Holman Fenwick operates a
modified lockstep remuneration
system. Progression up the
ladder is discretionary and
dependent on whether partners
meets their individual financial
and soft targets the latter
including contribution to areas
such as corporate social
responsibility. At best it takes
partners seven years to progress
to the top of the equity ladder.
In the past financial year those
entering the equity received a
profit share of 320,000, while
plateau partners took home
640,000. This was marginally
down on the spread in 2008-09,
which ran from 325,000 to
650,000.
TLS_046_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 10 Pa ge 46
Email: info@careyolsen.com
www.careyolsen.com
Legal matters are rarely straightforward
Let our experts examine the details for you
GUERNSEY
PO Box 98 Carey House
Les Banques St Peter Port
Guernsey GY1 4BZ
Telephone: +44 (0)1481 727272
JERSEY
47 Esplanade
St Helier
Jersey JE1 0BD
Telephone: +44 (0)1534 888900
LONDON
8-10 Throgmorton Avenue
London
EC2N 2DL
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7614 5610
Carey Olsen advise more London Stock Exchange and Alternative Investment Market clients than any other law
firm in the Channel Islands placing the firm in the Hemscott Report's Top 10 along side UK legal advisers.
Source: May 2010 Report.
"It is like dealing with a magic circle firm outside London." Source: Chambers and Partners.
TLS_047_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 30 Pa ge 1
11-50
Withers
Turnover (M): 92.7
Average PEP (K): 359
Equity spread (K): 230-600
Profit margin (%): 22
RPL (K): 369
DURING 2008-09 Withers
average profit per equity partner
(PEP) fell by 23.5 per cent, from
357,000 to 273,000. The
good news is that after some cost
cutting and reorganising, at the
2009-10 year-end the firms
58 equity partners pocketed an
average PEP of 359,000,
up 31 per cent.
Withers continues to be
heavily reliant on private
client and family, servicing
the needs of ultra-high-net-
worth individuals. Clients
include the Barclay Brothers,
owners of Telegraph Media
Group.
In 2009-10 that practice
contributed 53.67m (57.9
per cent) of the firms overall
turnover. This compares with
61.8m contributed by the
same practice at the 2008-09
year-end.
Across Withers global network
litigation has seen an upturn.
The practice outside the UK
contributed 20.5m (22.1 per
cent) of turnover. At the same
point last year the overseas
litigation practice reported a
turnover of 17.2m.
In the domestic offices the
firms 17 litigation partners
saw their proportion of overall
turnover rise from 23.7m to
27.4m.
The firm is strategically
pushing to develop its
international network. Withers
said 37.4m of its turnover was
generated outside the UK and
that offices in Switzerland and
Hong Kong had both weathered
the recession well.
Withers further bolstered its
international offering with the
opening of an office in the
British Virgin Islands at the
beginning of the financial year.
Initially this was intended to be a
dispute resolution hub, but now
the firm plans to expand
its offering to include
corporate, banking and finance
transactions, funds and
regulatory work.
28 h
Macfarlanes
Turnover (M): 92.4
Average PEP (K): 710
Equity spread (K): 415-985
Profit margin (%): 42
RPL (K): 431
TWO CONSECUTIVE double-
digit drops in average profit per
equity partner (PEP) would hurt
any firm, but with Macfarlanes
very much dependent on a still
depressed corporate sector,
partners could be forgiven for
panicking about seeing profit
on the wane.
Although PEP dropped to a
hardly breadline 710,000, this
was 16 per cent down on last
years 846,000 and well below
the 1.1m the firm managed in
2007-08. This years figures
are the first to use fully GAAP-
compliant (Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles)
accounting procedures. If these
had been used in 2008-09 the
fall in PEP would have been just
4.5 per cent.
Revenue fell from 99m to
92.4m, although again last
years GAAP-compliant total
would have been 94.3m,
making the revenue drop just
2 per cent.
With the redundancies of last
year behind it, Macfarlanes
performance actually represents
a solid year. There are also signs
that it is diversifying from its
private equity base and into
other areas such as restructuring
and financial services litigation.
As a result much of the firms
work in 2009-10 went under
the radar. While many of
Macfarlanes better-known
private equity clients, such as
Terra Firma, 3i and Darwin
Private Equity, had a quiet
year, other work filled the void.
The ongoing 15bn debt
restructuring for the Four
Seasons care home business,
for example, continued to boost
income and keep lawyers busy.
An indicator that this most
29 m
traditional of firms has sought
to broaden its horizons is that it
made two lateral hires over the
year. Restructuring specialist
Francis Bridgeman and litigator
Barry Donnelly arrived in 2009
from Allen & Overy and Jones
Day respectively, following on
from Dresdner Kleinwort
regulatory specialist David
Bermans arrival in March 2009.
At the other end of the
equation, M&A rainmaker Tim
Lewis left the firm for Clifford
Chance during the year.
Overall, partnership numbers
remained steady. Partners join
the salaried ranks for three years
before moving onto a modified
lockstep that runs from eight to
20 points. The top of equity
spread dropped slightly, with top
earners now taking home just
shy of 1m.
Field Fisher
Waterhouse
Turnover (M): 92
Average PEP (K): 476
Equity spread (K): 199-616
Profit margin (%): 18
RPL (K): 254
WHILE many of its UK rivals
were all too eager to cut their
workforces in bids to slash costs
and boost profits, Field Fisher
Waterhouse (FFW) bucked the
trend.
While FFW certainly has not
been immune to redundancies,
making 42 in the 2008-09
financial year, managing partner
Moira Gilmour says the firm has
embarked upon a growth-related
three-year master plan it calls
the virtuous triangle (a term the
firm has trademarked).
The triangle refers to the
three areas FFW has chosen to
expand: corporate, IP/IT and
regulatory. The firm says it has
pursued the strategy regardless
of the economic climate in the
belief that in the long term it
will pay dividends.
In the short term this has
meant the firm posted declining
turnover, net profit and average
profit per equity partner (PEP)
for the 2009-10 financial year.
Turnover at the firm dropped by
3 per cent to 92m, net profit
fell by 3.3m to 16.7m and
PEP tumbled by 7.6 per cent to
476,000.
Despite this years fall, the
past four years has seen turnover
rise by 36 per cent from 67.7m,
although during the same period
net profit fell by 4.8m.
FFW has tightened up its
billing and collection practices
recently, including internal
sanctions, and within the past
two years has managed to drive
year-end work-in-progress down
from 42 to 18 days, while its
lockup target has been reduced
from 136 to just 60 days. Total
lockup at the 2009-10 year-end
was 88 days.
Gilmour believes this
improvement in its financial
management has been
essential in allowing the firm
to pursue its investments.
Looking ahead, FFW is hoping
to win more work in Asia and
India and it will, of course,
continue to pursue its virtuous
triangle strategy.
30 h
48|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_048_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 11 Pa ge 48
Two names youve heard of.
An approach you havent.
Strategy. Processes. Until now, your choice of
consultancy was limited to experts in one eld or
the other.
Now, with the coming together of H4 Partners
and Huron Consulting Group, youve the best of
both worlds.
Acknowledged leadership in strategic thinking,
together with world-class management
processes and systems.
Its a unique approach. And one that could bring
unique benets to your business.
Huron Consulting Group
29 Farm Street
London W1J 5RL
P +44 (0) 20 7152 6125
F +44 (0) 20 7152 6127
W www.huronconsultinggroup.com
Alan Hodgart
E ahodgart@huronconsultinggroup.com
Julia Chain
E jchain@huronconsultinggroup.com
2010 Huron Consulting Group Inc. All Rights Reserved. Huron is not a law rm; it does
not offer, and is not authorized to provide, legal advice or counseling in any jurisdiction.
TLS_049_UK200_10_di s 26/ 8/ 10 15: 11 Pa ge 1
11-50
Olswang
Turnover (M): 91
Average PEP (K): 420
Equity spread (K): 250-750
Profit margin (%): 28
RPL (K): 283
OLSWANG went through
something of a reboot during
2009-10, with an overhaul
of its business focus, senior
management positions and
strategy. Ultimately, not a lot
changed. David Stewart
continues as the public face and
head of the firm, swapping the
managing partner title for chief
executive, while the former
incumbent in that role Kevin
Munslow became a consultant.
Strategically the consensus was
for Olswang to continue with its
sector-based strategy, with
media and technology being key.
The firm moved to rebuild its US
coverage after the collapse of its
Greenberg Traurig relationship
by forming a non-exclusive
alliance with technology firm
Cooley. It also kick-started what
is widely expected to be a period
of significant international
growth by opening an office in
Madrid in June this year.
The downward spiral of
average profit per equity partner
(PEP), referred to in last years
UK 200, was reversed in 2009-
10 in some style. The firm posted
a 38 per cent hike following a
return to form in certain core
areas and a war on costs.
Chief executive Stewart admits
the firm had taken a draconian
line on discretionary spend,
slashing around 4m. It had
also booked the cost of its
redundancies in the prior year,
helping the 2009-10 results.
The result was an increase
in PEP, from 360,000 to
420,000, and in net profit,
from 22.3m to 25.2m.
Olswangs turnover rose from
89.2m to 91m.
Firmwide, litigation was the
largest single practice area,
generating 24 per cent of fees.
Corporate was next largest at
23 per cent.
Olswang operates an entirely
merit-based remuneration
system, although Stewart is
understood to be keen to
introduce more of a formal
structure into partner pay in
the form of gateways.
32 h
Stephenson
Harwood
Turnover (M): 91.9
Average PEP (K): 561
Equity spread (K): 277-831
Profit margin (%): 30
RPL (K): 340
STEPHENSON Harwoods
fortunes continue to head in the
right direction after a year that
saw a healthy 8 per cent rise in
turnover to 91.9m the first
time the firm has broken the
90m barrier.
Average profit per
equity
partner dipped by 8 per cent to
561,000, but with a growing
number of equity partners net
profit went up from 26.5m to
27.3m.
Lateral hires have been a
feature of the past few years for
Stephensons, with expansion
very much the name of the game.
Recently the firm recruited
finance partners Richard Parsons
and Graeme McLellan from
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
and Pinsent Masons respectively
as well as Ashurst corporate duo
Duncan Stiles and Andrew Edge.
The firms robust financial
performance was helped by a
stellar year from its litigation
department. Both commercial
litigation and shipping
litigation a
traditional strength
saw 20 per cent
revenue rises. The
recent hire of Sean
Jeffrey, another
Freshfields alumnus,
should see the
litigation group
continue to perform well in the
future.
While litigation generates 45
per cent of total revenue, the
corporate group remains
relatively small for a City firm.
However, with Edge in particular
already proving his worth after
securing a mandate acting for
Indias Piramal Healthcare on its
2.5bn sale to Abbott
Laboratories, the signs there
are also positive.
The international practice
continues to be strong too,
with 22 per cent of fees coming
from overseas (up from 20 per
cent in 2008-09). Again, backed
by a high-performing litigation
department, Hong Kong and
China saw a 17 per cent turnover
uptick.
The firm moved from an
associate lockstep to a
merit-based system for its
junior lawyers, mirroring the
system at partner level. Half
of Stephensons partners are
fixed-share, while full equity
partners can move up or
down by five points each year
on a scale that runs from 40
to 120 points.
The bigger ambitions at the
firm are soon to be matched by
its surroundings, with
Stephensons finalising a move,
due in 2011, from its St Pauls
base to Londons Finsbury
Square in March.
31 h
Shoosmiths
Turnover (M): 90
Average PEP (K): 256
Equity spread (K): 229-288
Profit margin (%): 12
RPL (K): 271
DURING 2008-09 Shoosmiths
saw its profit plummet, with its
average profit per equity partner
(PEP) figure down by 54 per cent
and net profit taking a 51 per
cent hit.
Last year, however, the firm
bounced back thanks to a
series of cost-cutting measures
introduced by new chief
executive Claire Rowe. The
result was that net profit rose
by a staggering 83 per cent to
11m, while PEP made a
comeback to reach 256,000.
Impressive as the figures may
be, they also need to be placed in
context. PEP remains well down
on the 2006-07 high of
407,000, while net profit is well
short of the 16.1m the posted in
that same financial year.
Turnover is another area where
the firm has struggled in recent
years. In 2009-10 revenue fell
for the third year running, down
by 9 per cent to 90m. The
2007-08 figure was 103.4m.
It is probably a good thing,
then, that Rowe says the firms
focus is on building up
profitability as opposed to
turnover.
The firms cost-cutting
measures have been threefold.
In the past year it made 107 staff
redundant and in October 2009
it introduced a voluntary 3.5 per
cent paycut for 90 per cent of
staff earning more than
25,000. It also introduced an
extensive flexible working
scheme.
Despite the cuts the firm
has continued to build up its
Manchester office, bringing in
personal injury (PI) specialist
Debra Woolfson from Pannone
among others. Its plan is to
provide a full-service offering
in the city within the next few
years.
Litigation, which encompasses
commercial disputes, recovery
work for banks and PI litigation,
accounts for around 37m of
fee income. The firms second-
largest practice area is property,
which makes up 24.3m of total
turnover.
33 m
50|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_050_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 12 Pa ge 50
11-50
Kennedys
Turnover (M): 88.2
Average PEP (K): 380
Equity spread (K): 210-600
Profit margin (%): 21
RPL (K): 298
AT THE beginning of 2009-10
Kennedys senior partner Nick
Thomas warned employees at
the firm not to expect a bonus
at the year-end.
However, after a second
consecutive outstanding year in
terms of revenue growth, that
decision was ultimately reversed.
Kennedys, predominantly an
insurance firm handling a mix of
top-end liability work for a range
of insurers, including Axa and
RSA, posted a 31.1 per cent rise
in total revenue, from 67.3m
to 88.2m.
Net profit also grew last
year, from 14m to 18.6m.
This follows a period of
sustained investment at
Kennedys, which began in the
2008-09 financial year with the
addition of insurance boutique
Davies Lavery, followed by the
acquisition of Reynolds Porter
Chamberlains Tiverton office.
That acquisitive trend
continued in 2009-10. Kennedys
acquired the bulk of Halliwells
insurance team in Sheffield
during the year to launch an
office in the city.
Average profit per equity
partner rose by 8.5 per cent,
from 350,000 to 380,000.
This also reflects a rise in
revenue per partner of 21.7
per cent, from 575,000 to
700,000, generated by the
firms 126 partners.
The equity spread moved
upwards at both ends, from
175,000-500,000 in 2008-09
to 210,000-600,000 in
2009-10.
Kennedys equity ladder starts
on 40 points, with five-point
increments up to 60. Thereafter
remuneration is decided on a
case-by-case basis.
35 h
Trowers &
Hamlins
Turnover (M): 89.4
Average PEP (K): 553
Equity spread (K): 437-583
Profit margin (%): 16
RPL (K): 286
FOR A firmthat puts a lot of
store in its property practice it
makes up 36 per cent of global
revenue and almost half of UK
income Trowers & Hamlins
had a surprisingly strong year.
While it did not quite match
the growth seen in 2008-09,
when revenue rose by 15.3 per
cent, a flat turnover of 89.4m
was more than many of its
competitors could achieve. And
after seeing net profit plunge in
2008-09, in 2009-10 the firm
reported a 21 per cent bounce-
back to 14.4m plus a 9 per cent
increase in average profit per
equity partner, from 509,000
to 553,000.
The overall staff count was
down from 694 to 653, with
the firm making around 28
redundancies since autumn
2007, although lawyer numbers
remained stable. And in the past
year Trowers was busy in the
recruitment market, with 10
partner hires.
The hires include Manchester-
based commercial property
partner Paula Hamer from
Pannone, housing finance
partner Anna Clark from
Winckworth Sherwood and
international projects partner
Stewart Simpson from Simmons
& Simmons.
Earlier this year the firm
opened its second office in Saudi
Arabia, with the Jeddah practice
launched in association with
Feras Al Shawaf Law Firm.
Trowers also made several key
hires in the Middle East, where it
now has seven offices, and made
up Islamic finance specialist
Jeremy Ingham in Bahrain.
Income from the region now
accounts for a quarter of
Trowers turnover.
Globally, corporate is Trowers
biggest revenue generator,
accounting for 42 per cent of the
total, while in the UK property is
the biggest source of revenue.
The firm has landed roles on
numerous high-end property
deals, including representing
pub group Daniel Thwaites on
its 77.5m sale of The Stafford
Hotel. Among the firms key
clients are the Crown Estate,
Arcapita, the Homes and
Communities Agency and Lagan
Construction.
34 m
Hill Dickinson
Turnover (M): 87.1
Average PEP (K): 248
Equity spread (K): 150-310
Profit margin (%): 15
RPL (K): 225
HILL Dickinsons turnover grew
by 6 per cent, or 5m, last year,
around 3m of which came from
its July 2009 merger with
London commodities boutique
Middleton Potts. The rest was
attributable to growth in the
insurance department, with
double-digit expansion in the
firms fledgling fraud and
claimant practice.
However, profitability fell for
the second year running.
Compared with 2008-09, net
profit dropped by 15 per cent and
average profit per equity partner
by 16 per cent as a result of
the decline in corporate and
commercial property work,
investment in a Manchester
corporate practice targeting
higher-end work that failed to
get off the ground, as well as a
net increase of 139 members of
staff, including seven partners.
The firm reformed its three-tier
partnership, replacing the
salaried partner role with salaried
member. Around a third of all
partners are equity. They enter
on 28 points and plateau at 70
points. A review committee
chaired by managing partner
Peter Jackson, and including four
elected partners, can allocate any
number of points to partners
within those parameters.
Fixed-share members comprise
around another third of the
partnership. They contribute
capital, have a fixed profit share
and some voting rights on
strategic matters. Salaried
members contribute less capital,
have a smaller profit share and
limited voting rights. For
example, they attended the
meeting on the acquisition of 127
members of staff from Halliwells,
but did not have a vote.
Both fixed-share and salaried
members are eligible for a bonus
based on performance indicators
accounting for between 10 and
20 per cent of total salary.
The Liverpool-headquartered
firm spent part of summer 2010
in negotiations with partners at
Halliwells to take on the entirety
of the firm. In July a deal was
struck that saw it take the firms
Liverpool office, part of Sheffield
and a handful of lawyers in
Manchester.
Hill Dickinson has raised its
forecasted budget for 2010-11
from 97m to 105m as a result
of the acquisition.
36 h
The Lawyer|UK 200|51
TLS_051_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 13 Pa ge 51
11-50
Barlow Lyde
& Gilbert
Turnover (M): 81.5
Average PEP (K): 350
Equity spread (K): 170-460
Profit margin (%): 33
RPL (K): 282
IT WAS a year of transition for
Barlow Lyde & Gilbert (BLG),
with new management coming
in and the firm deciding to
concentrate on its core strengths
of insurance and financial
institutions.
BLG began the year with a
number of key partner exits,
including those of Roger
Doulton, Neil Beresford and
Toby Rogers, who left to join
Clyde & Co.
Overall, the number of equity
partners at the firm fell by one
to 76, reflecting the fact that the
firm has also brought people into
the fold.
BLG hired DLA Piper
insurance partners Mark
Hemsted and Robert Muttock to
launch an office in Manchester
in April 2009.
The firm also brought in
additional partners through
the acquisition of Halliwells
insurance practice in July this
year, but the cost of that
investment will be felt in the
2010-11 financial year.
In terms of profit shares, the
bottom of the firms equity fell
from 200,000 to 170,000,
although the top end rose from
400,000 to 460,000. Average
profit per equity partner has
been at 350,000 for the past
two years, down from 380,000
during 2007-08.
The firms traditional lockstep,
which ran from 30 to 100 points,
has been ditched in favour
of an entirely merit-based
compensation system based
on three broad bands. The focus
on individual performance also
extends to associates, with the
PQE payscale being replaced by
a new competency framework.
Turnover at BLG fell by 6.2 per
cent, from 86.9m to 81.5m,
while net profit dropped by 1.1
per cent, from 26.9m to
26.6m.
The firms 60-partner litigation
practice contributed 79 per cent
to total turnover,
the
equivalent
of 64.4m,
or 1.07m
in revenue
per litigation
partner.
39 m
Ince & Co
Turnover (M): 86.3
Average PEP (K): 568
Equity spread (K): 260-700
Profit margin (%): 30
RPL (K): 355
INCE & Co saw a total revenue
rise of 8.7 per cent during
2009-10, from 79.4m to
86.3m. The largest proportion
of fee income, 55.9m, was
produced by the London office,
home to 143 lawyers and 55
partners.
Historically Ince operated on a
pure lockstep system, which ran
from five to 14 points. Partners
entered at five points and gained
one point a year for nine years.
However, since James Wilsons
appointment as managing
partner in March 2008 the firm
has refused to discuss its
remuneration system or reveal
how many equity partners it has.
That said, with an estimated 50
equity partners the firm achieved
an average profit per equity
partner of 568,000 working on
a profit margin of 30 per cent.
Recruitment at Ince has
virtually ground to a halt, with
partners instead being shifted
around the firms international
network.
The Singapore office has
benefited most from this strategy
with the arrival of energy partner
Denys Hickey in January
followed by reinsurance partner
Iain Anderson, who also
transferred there from London
in March. Ince did make a rare
hire in Singapore, appointing
consultant Martin Brown last
June from Norton Rose.
Also in Singapore, shipping
and international trade specialist
John Simpson was one of four
senior associates promoted to
partnership level last year.
Wilson says further partners
will be encouraged to relocate
to its offices in Hong Kong,
Shanghai and Singapore over
the next year as the firm looks to
take advantage of the resurgence
in international trade.
37 h
Osborne
Clarke
Turnover (M): 83.7
Average PEP (K): 393
Equity spread (K): 247-512
Profit margin (%): 23
RPL (K): 239
OSBORNE Clarkes 2009-10
was defined by cost-cutting.
After 2008-09 saw turnover
drop by 12 per cent and average
profit per equity partner (PEP)
take a 36 per cent hit, 2009-10s
story was one of consolidation.
The firm pulled in 83.7m
in fees, representing a flat
performance against 2008-09.
PEP rose by 11.6 per cent, with
UK partners taking home an
average of 393,000. The firm
did not supply figures for the
German partnership, which
brought in around 17 per cent
of revenue for the second year
running.
While the few redundancies
among fee-earners took place in
the previous financial year and
partner numbers went up
throughout 2009-10, a policy
of not replacing equity partners
who had quit the equity drove
up partner profits. Net profit in
the UK fell from 19.8m to
19.3m. German profitability
was thought to have stayed flat.
The first full year of the firms
outsourcing arrangement with
Integreon helped to drive costs
down and boost profitability. The
firm even extended the scope of
the agreement, which originally
saw 75 support staff transfer to
the outsourcer, to include events
organisation.
The continuing corporate and
property slumps continued to
affect the firm, with the two
practices accounting for more
than a third of revenue. But the
second half of the year brought
a significant upswing, with
property workflow alone up by
around 20 per cent year-on-year,
according to managing partner
Simon Beswick.
As part of a spring rebrand,
the firm has identified four core
sectors and created business
groups to drive performance in
each. These are digital business,
38 m
financial services, real estate and
infrastructure, and energy and
natural resources.
Partners enter the equity on
a four-year fixed-share level
before progressing to full equity
status. Once they move to the
lockstep partners start on 60
points and move up 10 points
a year until reaching 100,
with a gateway in place at the
half-way stage.
52|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_052_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 14 Pa ge 52
11-50
Travers Smith
Turnover (M): 72
Average PEP (K): 705
Equity spread (K): 375-1,000
Profit margin (%): 42
RPL (K): 358
TRAVERS Smiths singular
practice mix a combination of
mid-tier M&A and private equity
meant it suffered at least as
much as any of its rivals during
the downturn, making last years
bounce all the more welcome.
The revenue drop of 21 per cent
in 2008-09 was followed by an
11.6 per cent upswing to 72m in
2009-10. Average profit per
equity partner increased from
2008-09s nadir of 460,000 to
705,000, a 53 per cent jump.
In hindsight, incoming
managing partner Andrew Lilley
may have picked the perfect time
to start in his new role. The
firms private equity team hit a
relative purple patch early in
the year as some of its
stalwart clients, most notably
Bridgepoint, emerged from their
recessionary hibernation.
However, a certain amount of
hedging has also steadied the
ship. The firm has introduced a
cross-departmental group aimed
at cross-selling services to its
corporate client base.
Travers new financial services
litigation team, while still small,
began to pull its weight last year.
Meanwhile, the four-partner
employment department has
grown to become a self-standing
practice, with two-thirds of its
work now self-generated.
Costs are still being monitored
closely, although the firm
navigated the recession
without any major
redundancy
programme.
41 h
Watson Farley
& Williams
Turnover (M): 80.2
Average PEP (K): 448
Equity spread (K): 195-1,000
Profit margin (%): 32
RPL (k): 322
WATSON Farley & Williams
(WFW) is something of an
anomaly in its market. Despite
being dominated by corporate
and finance (together they make
up 80 per cent of the business),
the City firm has posted turnover
growth of around 10 per cent
or more for the past three
consecutive years.
This year the top line rose
by 9 per cent to hit 80.2m
following a 25 per cent increase
in 2008-09 and a 9 per cent
jump in 2007-08.
The ambitious decision to open
in Madrid through a five-lawyer
raid on Hogan Lovells legacy
firm Lovells contributed to this
improvement. But so has the
firms brand in the shipping
market, one of the few sectors
to have blossomed over the past
year, where activity included
working for Crude Carriers Corp
on its $311m (199.2m) New
York IPO. WFW also has a
strong practice in the growing
renewables sector, counting AES
Solar Energy among its clients.
At 448,000 WFWs average
profit per equity partner is
analogous to that of Addleshaw
Goddards, Berwin Leighton
Paisners and SJ Berwins. But it
has a relatively high proportion
of equity partners (64 per cent),
which it did not reduce in the past
financial year.
The firms profit margin was
32 per cent, while the top of
the 13-rung lockstep rose from
850,000 to 1m over the past
financial year. All staff were
awarded a discretionary one-off
bonus equivalent to one weeks
pay as a mark of the firms
success.
The firms revenue base is
increasingly international, with
overseas income accounting for
51 per cent of the total in 2009-
10 compared with 49 per cent
the previous year. This was
reflected in its promotions: for
the second year running, in
2009-10 WFW did not make a
single promotion in London.
40 h
Berrymans
Lace Mawer
Turnover (M): 69.4
Average PEP (K): 222
Equity spread (K): 120-270
Profit margin (%): 18
RPL (K): 184
INSURANCE
liability
specialist
Berrymans Lace
Mawer (BLM)
defied the
recession to post
an 8.8 per cent
revenue increase
in 2009-10, from
63.8m to 69.4m
However, with a
growing equity
partnership the firms
average profit per
equity partner figure
declined by almost
11 per cent, from
249,000 to
222,000. BLM
added three partners
to the equity over the
past year, meaning
that 57 of its 117 partners now
receive a profit share. Since
2005-06 the firm has grown its
equity partnership by 39 per
cent, from 41 to 57.
Although BLMs total number
of lawyers rose from 350 to 377
last year, revenue per lawyer
(RPL) continued its upward
climb, albeit at a slower rate than
during the previous financial
year. At the 2009-10 year-end
RPL stood at 184,000, up by
1.1 per cent from 182,000.
Compare that with the previous
year when RPL jumped by 35
per cent, from 135,000 to
182,000.
After four consecutive years
of growth BLMs net profit fell
last year by 5.2 per cent, from
13.4m to 12.7m. But over the
past five years net profit has
increased by 55 per cent, from
8.2m to 12.7m. This reflects
the firms ongoing inward
investment, which last year
included the hire of two partners,
Andrew Lawson and Rebecca
Shafto, from Bristol-based John
A Neil Solicitors, who were
brought in to launch the firms
office in the city on 1 April.
In addition, there has been
strong investment in BLMs IT
systems, which will go live in
2010-11. The technology has
been designed with the firms
insurance clients in mind.
43 h
DWF
Turnover (M): 71.5
Average PEP (K): 333
Equity spread (K): 72-608
Profit margin (%): 12
RPL (K): 204
TURNOVER at DWF was up by
a fifth, from 60m to 71.5m, in
2009-10. Litigation dominates
the Manchester-headquartered
firm, accounting for 49m, or
69 per cent, of total turnover.
The practice group is bolstered
by substantial insurance work,
where clients include RSA
and Aviva.
Revenue growth was also
driven by a number of team
acquisitions. DWF began the
financial year with the hire of a
three-strong team from
Newcastle-based Dickinson
Dees, followed by lateral hires
from Addleshaw Goddard,
Barlow Lyde & Gilbert,
Hammonds, Reed Smith and
Watson Burton.
As a result the firm has 10
per cent more lawyers than in
2008-09 and 3 per cent more
fee-earners. However, total staff
levels have remained broadly
static, while the total number
of partners has fallen by 4 per
cent.
The firms profit margin is
relatively low at 12 per cent, but
average profit per equity partner
increased by 28 per cent, from
260,000 to 333,000. This
was partly the result of DWF
keeping a tight equity, with just
a fifth of its partners part of
the entirely merit-based club.
Strikingly, the bottom of the
equity halved on the previous
year, from 150,000 to
72,000, while the top grew
by 38 per cent, from 440,000
to 608,000.
42 h
The Lawyer|UK 200|53
TLS_053_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 15 Pa ge 53
11-50
Mills & Reeve
Turnover (M): 67.3
Average PEP (K): 307
Equity spread (K): 244-359
Profit margin (%): 28
RPL (K): 206
WHILE it may only have
been a modest rise of 1 per
cent in 2009-10, Mills & Reeve
nevertheless posted a rise in
turnover for the fourth successive
year. During that period fee
income rose by 19.3 per cent to
67.3m. Last year the majority
of turnover came from corporate,
which accounted for 27m of
fee income, while property and
private client contributed 20m
apiece. Elsewhere the firm is
continuing to grow the insurance
and professional indemnity side
of the business.
Average profit per equity
partner increased by 2 per cent
to 307,000, but managing
partner Guy Hinchley is keen to
point out that the figure would
have been higher were it not for
the firm paying out more than
700,000 in bonuses to its
700-plus staff.
The firm works with a number
of major clients in the public
sector, including the Ministry of
Defence and Nottinghamshire
Healthcare NHS Trust. Despite
Government announcements
that some department budgets
could be slashed by up to 40
per cent, Hinchley says he is not
overly concerned and believes
the cutbacks could, in fact, lead
to more mandates for the firm,
as departments struggle with
the pressures of internal
reorganisation.
Like all firms Mills & Reeve
has been monitoring its costs
closely. But thanks to a client
base that provides a steady
stream of corporate work the
firm fared better than many
during the downturn and
has so far avoided any
redundancy programmes,
although it has been careful
about recruitment.
The firm operates a
modified lockstep and
partners can reach the
top of equity within
five years.
45 m
McGrigors
Turnover (M): 69
Average PEP (K): 263
Equity spread (K): 160-417
Profit margin (%): 21
RPL (K): 189
MCGRIGORS, which has a
September year-end, had a better
year in 2009-10, with the firms
revenue rising by 10 per cent to
69m and net profit up by 11 per
cent to 14.5m.
The bulk of the turnover boost
was down to the firms October
2009 merger with Belfast firm
LEstrange & Brett. The merger
increased McGrigors size
significantly in Northern Ireland,
taking it from around 10 people
to more than 100, 10 of whom
are partners.
The firm also bulked up in
Manchester, hiring a
three-partner construction
and engineering team from
Hammonds consisting of David
Moss, Paul Giles and Richard
Anderson.
However, as that team only
joined in August 2010 it will
have had little impact on the
top line.
The series of investments has
affected the level of profit that
makes it into partners pockets.
Average profit per equity
partner slid by 6 per cent, from
280,000 to 263,000. Top of
equity also fell, from 450,000
to 417,000, although the
bottom remained unchanged
at 160,000.
The firm calculates partner
profits on a merit-based
system, with a four-person
remuneration committee
assessing partners after the
September year-end. Points
are awarded on a balanced
scorecard system up to a
maximum of 60.
Partners also receive a notional
salary based on seniority and
market position.
44 h
LG
Turnover (M): 64.9
Average PEP (K): 460
Equity spread (K): 230-690
Profit margin (%): 29
RPL (K): 346
LG POSTED one of the
highest profit rises of
any top 100 firm last year,
with its average profit
per equity partner figure
climbing by 63 per cent,
from 281,000 to 460,000.
The highest-paid partner
took home 690,000 in
2009-10, 35 per cent more
than in the previous year.
This was achieved in part
through reducing the payroll,
with total headcount 13 per
cent smaller than it was a year
previously, while most of the
costs associated with making
47 redundancies were booked
in the 2008-09 financial
year. The total number of
equity partners also fell, from
45 to 41.
LG operates a modified
lockstep with a broadly
bell-curve shape. The bottom
three of its nine classifications
resemble a traditional lockstep.
Remuneration for those equity
partners in the top six
classifications is determined by
the equity partner committee
and is entirely performance-
based.
LG restructured its three-tier
partnership in 2009-10, phasing
out the salaried partner role.
Sixteen salaried partners
converted to fixed-share status
on 1 October 2009. The partners
all contribute capital to the
firm and LG will not pay any
national insurance on their
behalf.
LG is often cited as a
fashionable merger target and
this set of results, after several
years of relative stagnation on
the profit front, will make it an
47 h
Halliwells
Turnover (M): 67
Average PEP (K): N/A
Equity spread (K): N/A
Profit margin (%): 0
RPL (K): 180
IN JUNE 2010 national
firm Halliwells filed notice
of its intention to appoint an
administrator, confirming the
extent of the financial problems
that had dogged the Manchester-
headquartered firm for most of
the 2009-10 financial year.
These included a turnover drop
of 14 per cent, from 77.8m in
2008-09 to 67m for 2009-10,
alongside an annual rent bill of
around 9m. The latter was
exacerbated by the firm taking
on 120,000sq ft of space at
Spinningfields in Manchester,
paying top-of-market rent
believed to be 35 per sq ft.
It subsequently distributed a
property-related windfall to the
then 40 equity partners as
opposed to investing it in the
business. This was combined with
significant debt, including a
bank loan, an overdraft facility,
non-property leases and 10m
members capital liability.
The firm suffered a number
of partner departures during
2009-10, including those of
property head Mike Edge, who
exited for Pinsent Masons;
healthcare partners Christopher
Briggs and Simon Wortley, who
moved to Beachcroft; and the
majority of its Sheffield
insurance practice, which was
snatched up by Kennedys.
At the end of the 2008-09
financial year the firm had 42
equity partners and 112 fixed-
share, who also contributed
capital to the firm. On average
these numbers fell to 40 and 96
respectively by 2009-10.
However, the firm did have
some successful practice areas,
including a profitable insurance
business acting for clients such
as Axa, Chartis (the rebranded
business of AIG UK), NFU
Mutual and Quinn, while public
sector clients included Liverpool
City Council. As a result a
number of firms, including
Barlow Lyde & Gilbert, HBJ
Gateley Wareing and Hill
Dickinson swooped on parts of
the troubled business, acquiring
the majority in July 2010.
46 m
54|The Lawyer|UK 200
TLS_054_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 15 Pa ge 54
11-50
Charles
Russell
Turnover (M): 63.2
Average PEP (K): 259
Equity spread (K): 154-285
Profit margin (%): 18
RPL (K): 249
WHEREAS in 2008-09 Charles
Russells revenue dipped only
slightly, its average property per
equity partner (PEP) took a hit
of 37 per cent, from 390,000
to 235,000, affected by the cost
of its London headquarters
move. The 2009-10 financial
year reversed that position: PEP
inched up to 259,000 and the
equity spread stood at 154,000-
285,000 for 2009-10 compared
with 130,000-260,000 the
previous year. However, 2009-10
saw turnover drop by 9 per cent,
from 69.5m to 63.2m.
The firm says its AIM practice
held up relatively well, but the
dearth of acquisitions work
meant that the corporate groups
turnover of 14.5m (23 per cent
of the total) put in the poorest
revenue per partner (RPP)
showing of the firm at
500,000. Private client one
of the firms signature practices
represents approximately 16 per
cent of total turnover, or 10.1m.
The best-performing sector
was litigation, which contributed
18.96m of total billings (30
per cent) and 903,000 in
RPP a relatively impressive
performance given that 10 of the
21 litigation partners are based
outside London. However,
London does account for the
greatest proportion of partners
(58 out of 96) and an even
greater proportion of equity
partners (32 out of 43).
While Charles Russell can
be pleased that it increased its
margin from last year from 15
per cent, the 2009-10 figure
was a still meagre 18 per cent.
Its national spread within the
expensive Middle England
(offices in Cheltenham, Oxford
and Guildford) and two small
international offices in Geneva
and Bahrain certainly
contributes to higher overheads
than those at firms such as
Farrer & Co, but Charles
Russells margin is hardly helped
by a long lockup of 158 days.
Despite making two rounds of
redundancies in 2008-09, the
number of qualified lawyers
dipped by only 13 to 254 in
2009-10, and the number
of total fee-earners actually
increased from 330 to 345. The
biggest headcount reduction
came on the support side,
dropping from 589 to 547.
Charles Russell operates three
classes of partners: salaried,
fixed-share and equity. Profits
are shared via a traditional
lockstep of seven rungs. Some
30 of the equity partners are on
the top rung.
48 m
Dundas &
Wilson
Turnover (M): 61
Average PEP (K): 317
Equity spread (K): 150-730
Profit margin (%): 41
RPL (K): 215
EDINBURGH-headquartered
Dundas & Wilson had another
muted year in 2009-10, with
turnover dropping by 8 per
cent while average profit
per equity partner (PEP) and
net profit both nudged up.
Turnover stood at 61m, down
from 66m in 2008-09, with
23m coming from the firms
London base. The remainder was
generated across its offices in
Glasgow and Edinburgh. This is a
return to the level of fee income
the firm produced in 2006-07.
Despite this the firm managed
to increase its profit margin to 41
per cent after net profit rose
marginally from 24.3m last year
to 25.3m this year. PEP rose by
3 per cent, from 308,000 to
317,000, which is still much
lower than the 386,000 it
achieved in 2007-08.
Property remains Dundass
biggest contributor to revenue,
generating 24.3 per cent
(14.82m) of the total. The
corporate groups contribution
has fallen significantly, having
generated 25 per cent (18.7m)
in 2007-08, 21.5 per cent
(14.19m) in 2008-09 and 15.9
per cent (9.7m) during the
2009-10 financial year.
The firm, which operates an all-
equity partnership, has seen its
partner numbers remain largely
unchanged year-on-year, with the
number rising from 79 to 79.69
on a full-time equivalent basis.
Partner remuneration is
entirely merit-based and is
decided by the firms eight-strong
board, led by managing partner
Donald Shaw.
The equity spread remains
unchanged on the previous
year, with those at the bottom
of the equity receiving a profit
share of 150,000, while those at
the top took home 730,000.
49 m
Burges Salmon
Turnover (M): 60.7
Average PEP (K): 414
Equity spread (K): 209-464
Profit margin (%): 34
RPL (K): 246
FOR A firm characterised by its
small c conservatism, 2009-10
was a relatively tumultuous year
at Burges Salmon. There were
two new managing partner
appointments, a new
management structure and a
firmwide strategy to bed down.
This plus a move to new offices
all within the past 18 months.
After longstanding managing
partner Guy Stobart stood down
in May 2009, his replacement
Chris Jackson lasted just seven
months before returning to
full-time fee-earning, handing
the reins to Peter Morris.
Morris has since overseen the
firms move to its new Temple
Quays home and a strategy
rethink that has seen it focus
on its core industry sectors.
The relocation was fully funded
by partners in a capitalisation
process going back five years.
In terms of practice areas, the
firm remains weighted towards
corporate and litigation, with
a sizeable property arm also
pitching in. Given the failure of
mainstream corporate or real
estate to bounce back, the
firms relatively consistent
performance reflects a good year.
Turnover was down by 5.8 per
cent to 60.7m, a similar fall to
that posted in 2008-09. Average
profit per equity partner nudged
up from 409,000 to 414,000.
With a healthy stable of
property management clients,
rather than investors, the real
estate department managed to
hold its own. In corporate, work
for unquoted companies
continued to be a rich seam.
Burges Salmon still operates
a pure lockstep system. Once
partners join the equity on 450
points they move up 78.6 points
per year for seven years until
plateauing at 1,000 points.
50 m
increasingly attractive option.
Other assets at the firm,
which has small but growing
international offices in Dubai
and Moscow and a one-partner
operation in Monaco, include a
first-rate private capital practice
focusing on ultra-high-net-worth
individuals. However, this was
hit by the departure of four
partners, who left to form a
wealth advisory boutique in the
spring, leaving just four partners
in LGs London private client
team.
LG also has a good brand
in the commercial property
sector, where clients include
Sainsburys, and in AIM, but
activity in that market has been
reduced massively compared
with previous years.
The Lawyer|UK 200|55
TLS_055_a ug_uk200_wr ups 11t o5_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 16 Pa ge 55
51-100
56|The Lawyer|UK 200
Weightmans
Turnover (M): 56.2
Average PEP (K): 354
Equity spread (K): 233-414
Profit margin (%): 16
RPL (K): 165
IT WAS another steady year at
Weightmans on the back of the
Liverpool-headquartered firms
continuing reputation in the
insurance and litigation markets
and among its public sector
client base.
Weightmans turnover
increased by 8 per cent to
56.2m, while average profit
per equity partner increased
by 30 per cent over the same
period to 354,000.
Weightmans averaged three
fewer equity partners compared
with the previous year as a result
of two departures for DWF and
two retirements, although on 1
May 2010 it promoted a further
three into the equity.
But managing partner Patrick
Gauls management style tends
to be conservative and, despite
indications in previous financial
years that he would like to widen
the equity, this is still a tight
club. Weightmans equity
encompasses less than a third
of all partners.
Those who enter the equity join
on the first rung of a nine-year
lockstep. Partners in the first
band typically earn 50 per cent
of plateau partner remuneration.
But most of Weightmans equity
partners are currently clustered
around the top, which last year
was equivalent to 414,000, a
slight increase on 2008-09s
393,000.
Changes at the firm during the
year included the appointment
of professional indemnity
partner Stuart Whittle to the
newly created role of operations
director, with responsibility for
marketing, HR, risk and
knowledge.
Elsewhere Weightmans
has invested in the expansion
of its now 15-strong
London-based professional
indemnity team. It has also
invested around 100,000
refurbishing its City premises,
taken on an additional
12,000sq ft in Birmingham
and established new case
management systems.
Gauls record was recently
endorsed by partners, who
re-elected him in May for a
third term at the top following
an uncontested vote.
53 h
Speechly
Bircham
Turnover (M): 58.4
Average PEP (K): 428
Equity spread (K): 245-570
Profit margin (%): 27
RPL (K): 288
SPEECHLY Bircham bounced
back from a difficult 2008-09 to
post an impressive 37 per cent
hike in turnover for the 2009-10
financial year.
Revenue grew from 45.4m
to 58.4m, while average profit
per equity partner rose by 29
per cent, from 331,000 to
428,000. Much of the
revenue growth was the result
of the firms June 2009 merger
with London firm Campbell
Hooper.
The firm also brought in a
52 h
Reynolds
Porter
Chamberlain
Turnover (M): 60
Average PEP (K): 327
Equity spread (K): 130-580
Profit margin (%): 34
RPL (K): 302
TRADITIONALLY Reynolds
Porter Chamberlain (RPC)
has been perceived as an
insurance firm, but the reality
is that it has a much broader
client base, as reflected by the
top-level hires it has made
over the past 18 months.
At the 2009-10 year-end
RPC posted a total turnover
of 60m, down marginally
from 60.1m the previous
year. The firms all-equity
partnership, however,
benefited from the growth
in net profit, up from
20.1m to 20.3m. This
meant average profit per
equity partner stood at
327,000 compared with
324,000 the previous
year.
The equity spread moved
upwards at the top slightly,
from 568,000 to 580,000,
while the bottom remained static
at 130,000.
This gradual but upward trend
is indicative of the longer-term
picture for RPC, which has
grown steadily over the past five
years, while avoiding many of the
dangers of the recession.
The firm has gradually evolved
its strategy to pull in higher-
quality work, which adds value
to its bottom line. This has
meant some inward investment
to attract strategic hires,
which in the past financial
year included Tom Hibbert
from Reed Smith to lead the
financial disputes team and
Jonathan Levy from Berwin
Leighton Paisner to lead the
tax litigation team.
RPCs practice remains
dominated by contentious
work, with 70 per cent of overall
turnover, or 42m, coming
from litigation.
51 =
four-strong specialist projects
team from the now disbanded
London-based Shadbolt
and made hires in its
pensions, financial services
and IP teams.
Not all of the growth was
down to the merger, however.
Managing partner Michael
Lingens estimates that, minus
the merger, underlying growth
in the business would still have
seen total revenue grow by
8 per cent.
Speechlys was quick to reduce
its cost base when the credit
crisis hit. Between 2007-08 and
2008-09 lawyer numbers fell
from 172 to 160. They have since
risen to 203.
It is a testament to the
degree of change the firm has
undergone that only half of
the current partnership was
at Speechlys three years
ago. Understandably, it is
now undergoing a
stocktaking exercise,
although the firm has not ruled
out making more hires in the
coming year. Lingens cites
the fact that the firm operates
without an overdraft as
evidence of its stringent
financial management.
The firm is divided into
three broad practice areas:
corporate, private client and
property.
Corporate, which includes
areas such as financial services,
is the highest-billing sector at
28m; next is private client,
which has held steady during
the downturn and in 2009-10
turned over 15.5m; property,
meanwhile, generated fees of
14.9m.
The firm has a modified
lockstep running from 40 to
100 points. Partners usually go
up or down by between five and
10 points each year based on
performance, although in
exceptional cases this can
be higher.
TLS_056_a ug_uk200_wr i t e ups 51t o100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 19 Pa ge 56
51-100
The Lawyer|UK 200|57
HBJ Gateley
Wareing
Turnover (M): 49.6
Average PEP (K): 302
Equity spread (K): 126-802
Profit margin (%): 35
RPL (K): 208
TURNOVER at HBJ Gateley
Wareing grew by 3 per cent
during the 2009-10 financial
year to just south of 50m.
Fee income was dominated by
corporate and property, which
together accounted for 63 per
cent of total revenue.
The national firms profit
margin increased significantly,
from 27 per cent to 35 per cent,
while average profit grew by
49 per cent, from 203,000 to
302,000. The top of equity
experienced an even more
dramatic 76 per cent uplift,
from 456,000 to 802,000,
facilitated by the drop in
total equity partners from 64
to 58.
As a result of the improvement
in profitability the firm was in
good shape to expand and earlier
this year acquired approximately
200 members of staff from
Halliwells, including 43
partners, across the non-
insurance commercial practice
areas. This saw it reach its long-
term objective of launching in
Manchester, although it took
place after the 2009-10 year-end.
The firm is forecasting a 30 per
cent increase in total turnover as
a result.
But the fact that the deal
was done within three weeks,
and that the new staff are
ringfenced in a separate
LLP, has raised reasonable
questions as to whether it
will meet these objectives.
HBJ operates a
modified lockstep system.
Seventy-five per cent of
profit points are
allocated according
to seniority, while the
remaining 25 per cent
are awarded on
merit.
55 h
Pannone
Turnover (M): 49.5
Average PEP (K): 229
Equity spread (K): 154-403
Profit margin (%): 16
RPL (K): 232
MANCHESTER-based Pannone
embarked on a major cost-
cutting exercise last year with 40
redundancies. Total headcount
was down by 7 per cent on the
previous year, while partner
headcount fell by 13 per cent.
The firm is one of the few of its
size to maintain a private client
department, one of its strongest
billing areas last year alongside
high-value personal injury and
clinical negligence. It is also
seeking to develop its public
sector client base, having
recently won a Homes and
Communities Agency panel
place. Nevertheless, exposure
in the commercial and property
sectors left total turnover down
5 per cent at 49.5m.
There was change at the top,
with managing partner Steven
Grant stepping down before the
end of his three-year term and
handing over to clinical
negligence department head
Emma Holt. At the same time
Grants predecessor Joy Kingsley,
who had held the position of
senior partner since January
2008, announced her departure
to smaller rival JMW Solicitors.
Pannone has three classes of
partner salaried, fixed-share
and full equity. Equity partners
enter a five-rung lockstep on 50
points and plateau at 100 points.
A further 10 points are available
to plateau partners for
exceptional performance. There
is also a bonus awarded on a
discretionary basis. Pannone
has made slight changes to the
traditional lockstep, which
means partners can have their
progression halted at a particular
point.
56 m
Maclay
Murray &
Spens
Turnover (M): 52.5
Average PEP (K): 265
Equity spread (K): 140-330
Profit margin (%): 24
RPL (K): 222
SCOTLAND-headquartered
firm Maclay Murray & Spens
had a more stable year in
2009-10 than in the previous 12
months, posting a small decrease
in turnover coupled with rises in
net profit and average profit per
equity partner (PEP).
Turnover was down by 5 per
cent, from 55.4m to 52.5m,
just below the level the firm
produced in 2006-07. At the
same time net profit rose by 9 per
cent, from 11.7m to 12.7m,
giving the firm a profit margin of
24 per cent, a rise of three percen-
tage points on the previous year.
PEP was up by 20.5 per cent,
from 220,000 to 265,000,
with the number of equity
partners dropping from 53 to 48.
Those on the bottom of the
firms lockstep took home
140,000, while plateau
partners received 330,000.
This compares with a spread
of 130,000-280,000 in the
previous financial year.
Corporate remains the firms
largest practice area in terms of
revenue, although its share has
fallen slightly from 33 per cent
in 2008-09.
Similarly, the property practice,
the second-largest group, has
contracted slightly. Litigation
and finance have grown
proportionately as a result.
Maclays London office, which
in 2008-09 generated around
30 per cent of revenue, dropped
to 25 per cent, with Aberdeen
contributing 10 per cent and
Glasgow and Edinburgh each
accounting for 32.5 per cent.
54 m
Dickinson
Dees
Turnover (M): 48.8
Average PEP (K): 216
Equity spread (K): 161-301
Profit margin (%): 19
RPL (K): 200
DICKINSON Dees saw a 12
per cent increase in average
profit per equity partner last
year, from 193,000 to
216,000.
Total fee income at the
Newcastle-headquartered firm
continues to fall, however. In
2009-10 revenue dropped by
5 per cent, from 53.8m to
48.8m, having hit 60m
the year before. In contrast,
the firms equity spread rose
at both ends, from between
100,000-220,000 to
161,000-301,000.
Dickinson Dees made 83
redundancies during the past
financial year, with the number
of lawyers dropping from 256 to
243 and the number of partners
from 76 to 67. Managing partner
Jonathan Blair says he is
confident there will be no further
cuts during the current year.
In recent years the firm has
looked to streamline its practice
and focus on its core areas. In
2008 it sold its volume arm D3
legal to Optima Legal. It also
spun off its family law team. This
team, led by partner Margaret
Simpson and barrister Ian
Kennerley, now operates under
the name Silk Family Law.
Dickinson Dees expects to lose
around 500,000 in turnover as
a result of the spin-off.
Corporate remains the firms
strongest area, accounting for
almost a third of total revenue.
At 24 per cent of fee income,
property has also held steady
despite the downturn. The
firm has secured a number of
impressive panel places over the
past year, including the London
Boroughs Legal Alliance, London
Boroughs Consortium, Tyne &
Wear Legal Framework and the
North East NHS joint
procurement initiative.
Blair says he expects to
see modest growth in 2010-11
and will look to strengthen the
firms offering in York and
London.
57 h
TLS_057_a ug_uk200_wr 51t o100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 23 Pa ge 57
58|The Lawyer|UK 200
Bond Pearce
Turnover (M): 46
Average PEP (K): 235
Equity spread (K): 158-306
Profit margin (%): 16
RPL (K): 170
AT THE end of the 2009-10
financial year Bond Pearce
posted a slight dip in turnover,
from 48m to 46m.
Despite this the firms focus on
its core sectors of energy, retail
and insurance helped to increase
underlying net profit by 2.7 per
cent, from 7.3m to 7.5m.
Indeed, since the 2006-07
year-end, net profit has risen
by 10.3 per cent from 6.8m.
The firms equity spread
has moved upwards, from
130,000-300,000 at
the 2008-09 year-end to
158,000-306,000.
Bond Pearces equity partner
headcount remained static last
year at 32, but average profit per
equity partner (PEP) increased
by 10.3 per cent, from 213,000
to 235,000. This is still short
of the 2007-08 year-end level,
when PEP stood at 245,000
and the equity partnership
numbered 34.
Bond Pearces litigation
practice accounts for the largest
proportion of the firms turnover,
contributing 22m, or 48 per
cent. Nevertheless, the firm
maintains a healthy corporate
practice, contributing 26 per
cent of turnover, or 12m.
The firm counts energy giant
Centrica, insurer Chartis and
Virgin Group among its key
clients and has spent much of
the past year trying to expand
its remit for each client.
This strategy is being
reinforced through key City
hires, including that of Barlow
Lyde & Gilbert senior partner
Richard Dedman, who joined
the firm in March.
59 m
Mishcon
de Reya
Turnover (M): 47.5
Average PEP (K): 450
Equity spread (K): 275-750
Profit margin (%): 21
RPL (K): 317
LITIGATION-led Mishcon De
Reya may have stunned its rivals
by launching in New York in
January, but do not expect the
London firm to embark on any
global expansion push.
New York was opportunistic
rather than strategic, according
to the firms managing partner
Kevin Gold.
In other words, Mishcon
unearthed a team of litigators
from Sheppard Mullin Richter &
Hampton capable of generating
$8m (5.12m) in its first year
and who meshed well with
the UK firms longstanding
international fraud practice.
Couple that with an attractively
priced real estate deal Mishcon
secured offices in the iconic
MetLife building for less than
$30 per sq ft and the Holborn
firm had a deal that is likely to
be profitable in its first year.
In contrast, the London end
of the business (the two are
separate LLPs) posted another
sharp decline in average profit
per equity partner (PEP), down
from 575,000 to 450,000 in
2009-10.
PEP at Mishcon, which
operates an entirely merit-based
remuneration system, has
dropped by 39 per cent from
740,000 two years ago.
Gold says the firms financial
performance was largely due to
the investments it had made in
hiring senior lawyers during
the year, plus the continuing
weakness of core areas such as
property.
Despite the struggles of
real estate, the group that
generated 20 per cent of the
firms total revenue was one of
the key areas into which Mishcon
recruited last year. Partner hires
included property partners Steve
Hughes and Nick Minkoff from
SJ Berwin, former Matthew
Arnold & Baldwin construction
head Richard Gerstein and
corporate partner Dean Poster
from Orrick Herrington &
Sutcliffe.
Litigation was Mishcons
biggest revenue contributor last
year at around 45 per cent.
58 h
Blake
Lapthorn
Turnover (M): 45
Average PEP (K): 116
Equity spread (K): 99-140
Profit margin (%): 13
RPL (K): 188
AFTER profitability fell through
the floor in 2008-09, Blake
Lapthorn spent much of 2009-10
trying to rebuild the bottom line.
This included reorganising the
equity with fewer partners
and abandoning a lockstep
structure in favour of a
merit-based system.
In part those efforts have
paid off, but there is still some
way to go before the firm is
back to 2007-08 levels.
Revenue slid by 6.4 per cent,
from 47.9m to 45m, but
underlying net profit was
significantly up, from
4.4m to 5.9m, a rise
of 34.1 per cent. This
gave the firms 51 equity
partners a much-needed
boost, with average profit
per equity partner (PEP) up by
78.5 per cent, from 65,000 to
116,000. Non-equity partners,
meanwhile, picked up an average
112,000 in remuneration.
The firms equity spread
narrowed from 100,000-
187,000 at the 2008-09
year-end to 99,000-140,000.
Compare that with 2007-08,
when Blake Lapthorn posted a
net profit of 9.6m, a PEP of
204,000 and an equity spread
of 110,000-210,000.
Blake Lapthorn is
working hard at
generating more
work from
individual clients
while also looking
for new panel
seats to help
boost the bottom
line.
60 =
Davies Arnold
Cooper
Turnover (M): 44.1
Average PEP (K): 278
Equity spread (K): 150-450
Profit margin (%): 18
RPL (K): 253
AT THE end of the 2008-09
financial year Davies Arnold
Cooper (DAC) celebrated its
best set of figures in almost a
decade, with the firm seeing
the full effects of its January
2008 merger with KSB Law,
a deal that added 8m to
DACs turnover.
A year later and growth
slowed. But the firm has
once again looked to invest by
hiring key partners to bolster its
core practices of insurance and
real estate, while also adding
further strength to its
employment team.
Turnover fell marginally by
2 per cent at the 2009-10
year-end, from 45m to
44.1m. The firms net profit
shrank by a much more weighty
25.9 per cent, from 10.8m to
8m. This had a direct impact
on average profit per equity
partner, which fell by 23
per cent, from 361,000 to
278,000.
DAC keeps its equity tight,
with just 29 out of 77 partners
being owners of the business.
Bottom of equity has remained
static for the past three
financial years at 150,000,
but the top end decreased in
2009-10 from 500,000 to
450,000.
The firms insurance clients,
which include Zurich and QBE,
kept its dispute resolution group
busy during the year,
contributing 64 per cent of the
firms turnover, or 28.2m.
61 h
51-100
TLS_058_a ug_uk200_wr 51t o100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 16: 27 Pa ge 58
I N S U R A N C E R E L A T E D T R A V E L E M P L O Y M E N T
Success through specialisation
Everatt & Company continues its solid organic growth across the country,
succeeding through an open, long-term approach to client relationships.
Serving a growing number of major insurers, local authorities and blue chip
PLCs, we welcome enquiries from potential new clients and from exceptional
individuals, at every level of experience, wishing to further their career.
www.everatt.co.uk
NORTH
Deansgate, Manchester
Jason Burt
0161 214 1140
jburt@everatt.co.uk
MIDLANDS
Vale Chambers, Evesham
Nick Yates
01386 769160
nyates@everatt.co.uk
SOUTH
Threadneedle St, London
Anthony Bushell
020 7763 6109
abushell@everatt.co.uk
the people
you want
on your team
Y
M C C
M
1
A
C C C C
d'
C P
l S L LC? Au
1 l
ux L C L
Aviation and Travel
Banking and Finance
Commercial Litigation
Dry Shipping:
Commodities and Transport
Energy, Construction and Shipbuilding
Insurance and Reinsurance
International Arbitrations
Mediation
Salvage, Collision and Admiralty
Sports and Media
M
a
y
o
W
y
n
n
e
B
a
x
t
e
r
8
.
8
2
8
4
1
6
6
7
5
5
3
3
1
=
1
7
6
m
R
i
c
k
e
r
b
y
s
8
.
8
5
1
8
1
1
9
8
0
7
4
1
7
1
7
8
m
T
o
l
l
e
r
s
8
.
6
4
5
3
1
8
7
8
4
4
6
1
9
1
7
9
m
M
u
c
k
l
e
8
.
5
4
7
0
1
6
0
6
5
5
3
1
8
1
8
0
m
E
M
W
P
i
c
t
o
n
H
o
w
e
l
l
8
.
4
3
0
0
1
7
5
6
5
4
8
2
8
1
8
1
m
T
r
e
t
h
o
w
a
n
s
8
.
3
3
3
0
1
5
0
6
6
5
5
2
5
1
8
2
m
T
a
y
l
o
r
W
a
l
t
o
n
8
.
2
3
4
2
1
9
5
6
0
4
2
2
4
1
8
3
E
v
e
r
a
t
t
&
C
o
7
.
8
6
4
6
2
3
5
6
8
3
3
1
2
1
8
4
h
B
r
i
d
g
e
M
c
F
a
r
l
a
n
d
7
.
6
3
6
2
1
7
7
1
0
0
4
3
2
1
1
8
5
m
D
a
r
b
y
s
7
.
5
3
5
7
1
5
6
6
7
4
8
2
1
1
8
6
m
B
P
C
o
l
l
i
n
s
7
.
4
4
2
5
1
8
4
5
6
4
0
1
7
1
8
7
m
P
o
r
t
e
r
D
o
d
s
o
n
7
.
3
3
4
8
1
5
2
7
4
4
8
2
1
=
1
8
8
h
B
i
n
d
m
a
n
s
7
.
2
4
5
0
1
7
6
6
7
4
1
1
6
=
1
8
8
h
F
u
r
l
e
y
P
a
g
e
7
.
2
3
6
0
2
2
5
6
3
3
2
2
0
=
1
9
0
G
o
r
v
i
n
s
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
7
.
0
5
0
0
2
1
2
4
5
3
3
1
4
=
1
9
0
m
P
e
m
b
e
r
t
o
n
G
r
e
e
n
i
s
h
7
.
0
5
1
5
2
4
1
3
9
2
9
1
4
=
1
9
2
D
u
t
t
o
n
G
r
e
g
o
r
y
6
.
9
3
2
9
1
6
0
5
8
4
3
2
1
=
1
9
2
m
F
o
r
s
t
e
r
D
e
a
n
6
.
9
1
,
1
5
0
1
8
2
4
9
3
8
6
1
9
4
m
K
e
m
p
L
i
t
t
l
e
6
.
8
5
6
2
2
5
2
2
8
2
7
1
2
1
9
5
m
W
a
k
e
S
m
i
t
h
&
T
o
f
i
e
l
d
s
6
.
7
2
7
9
1
6
3
6
0
4
1
2
4
1
9
6
D
e
b
e
n
h
a
m
s
O
t
t
a
w
a
y
6
.
5
5
0
0
1
5
5
5
2
4
2
1
3
1
9
7
E
l
l
i
s
o
n
s
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
6
.
4
2
6
7
1
9
4
5
5
3
3
2
4
=
1
9
8
m
B
e
r
r
y
m
a
n
6
.
2
3
6
5
1
2
7
7
0
4
9
1
7
=
1
9
8
M
B
P
E
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
6
.
2
3
2
6
1
2
7
6
3
4
9
1
9
2
0
0
m
B
l
a
n
d
y
&
B
l
a
n
d
y
6
.
1
4
0
7
1
5
8
5
1
3
9
1
5
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated
Firm
Turnover (m)
Revenue per partner (k)
Revenue per lawyer (k)
Total number of fee-earners
Total number of lawyers
Total number of partners
=
1
5
0
m
S
e
m
p
l
e
F
r
a
s
e
r
1
1
.
1
4
6
3
1
5
9
9
5
7
0
2
4
=
1
5
0
m
T
W
M
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
1
.
1
3
9
6
1
6
1
7
8
6
9
2
8
1
5
3
M
J
M
W
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
1
.
0
3
7
9
2
0
4
7
4
5
4
2
9
1
5
4
m
W
i
g
g
i
n
1
0
.
8
6
7
5
2
8
4
4
3
3
8
1
6
=
1
5
5
h
K
e
e
b
l
e
H
a
w
s
o
n
1
0
.
7
4
4
6
1
9
8
9
1
5
4
2
4
=
1
5
5
m
S
t
e
p
h
e
n
s
S
c
o
w
n
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
0
.
7
3
2
4
1
4
1
1
1
3
7
6
3
3
=
1
5
7
h
B
r
a
c
h
e
r
s
1
0
.
6
4
6
1
2
0
4
8
4
5
2
2
3
=
1
5
7
h
R
o
y
t
h
o
r
n
e
s
1
0
.
6
4
2
4
2
2
1
8
5
4
8
2
5
=
1
5
7
h
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
T
e
e
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
0
.
6
5
3
0
1
5
4
7
7
6
9
2
0
=
1
6
0
m
B
a
r
l
o
w
R
o
b
b
i
n
s
1
0
.
5
4
7
7
1
5
0
8
0
7
0
2
2
=
1
6
0
m
P
a
r
i
s
S
m
i
t
h
1
0
.
5
3
8
9
1
5
0
9
7
7
0
2
7
=
1
6
0
h
S
p
r
e
c
h
e
r
G
r
i
e
r
H
a
l
b
e
r
s
t
a
m
1
0
.
5
3
8
9
2
4
4
7
5
4
3
2
7
1
6
3
H
a
r
r
i
s
o
n
C
l
a
r
k
1
0
.
1
4
8
1
1
4
9
7
7
6
8
2
1
1
6
4
h
C
h
a
d
w
i
c
k
L
a
w
r
e
n
c
e
1
0
.
0
4
3
5
1
3
3
9
1
7
5
2
3
1
6
4
m
F
l
i
n
t
B
i
s
h
o
p
1
0
.
0
4
5
5
2
1
7
7
9
4
6
2
2
1
6
6
m
K
e
s
t
e
r
C
u
n
n
i
n
g
h
a
m
J
o
h
n
9
.
9
3
5
4
1
5
0
9
5
6
6
2
8
1
6
7
h
K
e
y
s
t
o
n
e
L
a
w
9
.
8
4
,
9
0
0
1
0
1
9
7
9
7
2
1
6
7
m
M
a
x
w
e
l
l
W
i
n
w
a
r
d
9
.
8
4
9
0
2
1
8
5
3
4
5
2
0
1
6
9
=
H
e
n
m
a
n
s
9
.
6
4
1
7
1
5
5
6
8
6
2
2
3
1
7
0
F
e
n
w
i
c
k
E
l
l
i
o
t
t
9
.
5
6
7
9
3
2
8
3
4
2
9
1
4
1
7
0
N
a
p
t
h
e
n
s
9
.
5
3
3
9
1
7
0
7
8
5
6
2
8
1
7
2
m
L
e
d
i
n
g
h
a
m
C
h
a
l
m
e
r
s
9
.
2
3
8
3
1
3
7
8
1
6
7
2
4
1
7
2
m
S
i
n
t
o
n
s
9
.
2
4
3
8
1
7
4
1
0
7
5
3
2
1
1
7
4
E
A
D
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
9
.
1
4
3
3
1
8
2
7
0
5
0
2
1
1
7
5
m
H
i
g
g
s
&
S
o
n
s
9
.
0
3
3
3
1
6
7
7
3
5
4
2
7
TLS_100_a ug_uk200_bot t om100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 37 Pa ge 100
The
UK 200
101-150
The Lawyer|UK 200|101
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Revenue per partner (k)
Revenue per lawyer (k)
Total number of fee-earners
Total number of lawyers
Total number of partners
=
1
0
1
m
G
e
l
d
a
r
d
s
2
0
.
5
3
8
7
1
9
0
1
4
5
1
0
8
5
3
=
1
0
1
h
V
e
a
l
e
W
a
s
b
r
o
u
g
h
2
0
.
5
4
5
0
1
6
1
1
8
6
1
2
7
4
6
1
0
3
M
a
c
R
o
b
e
r
t
s
2
0
.
4
5
1
0
2
5
5
1
5
7
8
0
4
0
1
0
4
h
F
o
o
t
A
n
s
t
e
y
2
0
.
3
5
2
1
1
2
9
2
2
8
1
5
7
3
9
1
0
5
h
S
t
e
w
a
r
t
s
L
a
w
2
0
.
0
8
0
0
3
4
5
1
0
8
5
8
2
5
1
0
6
h
W
e
d
l
a
k
e
B
e
l
l
1
9
.
8
4
8
3
2
4
4
1
0
0
8
1
4
1
1
0
7
m
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
r
a
t
h
e
r
n
1
9
.
7
4
1
0
1
6
4
1
9
2
1
2
0
4
8
1
0
8
m
W
i
n
c
k
w
o
r
t
h
S
h
e
r
w
o
o
d
1
9
.
3
5
5
1
2
2
7
1
2
3
8
5
3
5
1
0
9
h
C
r
i
p
p
s
H
a
r
r
i
e
s
H
a
l
l
1
9
.
2
5
0
6
2
0
4
1
4
5
9
4
3
8
1
1
0
h
M
i
c
h
e
l
m
o
r
e
s
1
8
.
8
4
5
9
1
7
2
1
5
0
1
0
9
4
1
1
1
1
m
W
a
t
s
o
n
B
u
r
t
o
n
1
8
.
5
6
3
8
2
5
7
1
2
0
7
2
2
9
=
1
1
2
h
B
i
r
k
e
t
t
s
1
7
.
8
4
3
4
1
8
2
1
3
5
9
8
4
1
=
1
1
2
m
H
o
w
e
s
P
e
r
c
i
v
a
l
1
7
.
8
6
3
6
1
9
8
1
5
0
9
0
2
8
1
1
4
h
F
i
n
e
r
s
S
t
e
p
h
e
n
s
I
n
n
o
c
e
n
t
1
7
.
5
4
7
9
2
6
9
7
4
6
5
3
7
1
1
5
F
i
s
h
b
u
r
n
s
1
7
.
1
9
5
0
2
3
1
1
0
3
7
4
1
8
1
1
6
m
B
i
g
g
a
r
t
B
a
i
l
l
i
e
1
7
.
0
4
1
5
1
6
0
1
3
8
1
0
6
4
1
1
1
7
h
H
a
r
b
o
t
t
l
e
&
L
e
w
i
s
1
6
.
8
6
0
0
2
3
3
8
8
7
2
2
8
1
1
8
h
S
h
a
k
e
s
p
e
a
r
e
P
u
t
s
m
a
n
1
6
.
6
4
8
8
2
2
4
1
5
4
7
4
3
4
1
1
9
h
E
d
w
i
n
C
o
e
1
6
.
4
4
9
7
3
4
2
6
4
4
8
3
3
1
2
0
h
W
i
t
h
y
K
i
n
g
1
5
.
9
3
1
8
1
7
7
1
1
5
9
0
5
0
1
2
1
h
L
a
n
g
l
e
y
s
1
5
.
7
4
9
1
2
0
4
1
6
2
7
7
3
2
1
2
2
m
M
o
r
t
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
1
5
.
4
4
4
0
1
4
3
1
6
0
1
0
8
3
5
1
2
3
m
S
t
e
v
e
n
s
&
B
o
l
t
o
n
1
5
.
2
4
2
2
1
7
7
1
0
1
8
6
3
6
1
2
4
h
H
a
r
p
e
r
M
a
c
l
e
o
d
1
5
.
1
3
5
1
1
5
7
1
5
2
9
6
4
3
=
1
2
5
B
a
t
e
s
W
e
l
l
s
&
B
r
a
i
t
h
w
a
i
t
e
1
5
.
0
5
5
6
2
0
3
9
2
7
4
2
7
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Revenue per partner (k)
Revenue per lawyer (k)
Total number of fee-earners
Total number of lawyers
Total number of partners
=
1
2
5
G
r
e
e
n
w
o
o
d
s
1
5
.
0
7
1
4
2
1
1
1
2
5
7
1
2
1
=
1
2
5
=
M
T
a
y
l
o
r
V
i
n
t
e
r
s
1
5
.
0
5
7
7
2
2
4
9
4
6
7
2
6
1
2
8
h
T
o
d
s
M
u
r
r
a
y
1
4
.
8
4
0
0
1
7
2
1
1
1
8
6
3
7
1
2
9
m
L
e
s
t
e
r
A
l
d
r
i
d
g
e
1
4
.
3
3
7
6
1
7
7
1
1
8
8
1
3
8
1
3
0
h
W
i
l
k
i
n
C
h
a
p
m
a
n
1
4
.
1
4
4
1
2
2
7
1
4
8
6
2
3
2
=
1
3
1
h
B
o
y
e
s
T
u
r
n
e
r
1
4
.
0
5
6
9
2
1
4
8
8
6
6
2
5
=
1
3
1
m
H
a
r
v
e
y
I
n
g
r
a
m
1
4
.
0
4
6
7
1
6
5
1
5
0
8
5
3
0
=
1
3
3
h
M
c
C
l
u
r
e
N
a
i
s
m
i
t
h
1
3
.
9
4
2
1
1
6
2
1
1
5
8
6
3
3
=
1
3
3
h
T
h
o
m
s
o
n
S
n
e
l
l
&
P
a
s
s
m
o
r
e
1
3
.
9
3
8
6
2
0
4
8
4
6
8
3
6
1
3
5
h
R
o
s
e
n
b
l
a
t
t
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
3
.
8
9
2
0
3
7
3
4
7
3
7
1
5
1
3
6
m
H
e
w
i
t
s
o
n
s
1
3
.
7
3
4
3
1
6
7
1
1
2
8
2
4
0
=
1
3
7
m
C
o
l
l
y
e
r
B
r
i
s
t
o
w
1
3
.
6
4
5
3
3
0
2
6
5
4
5
3
0
=
1
3
7
m
M
a
t
t
h
e
w
A
r
n
o
l
d
&
B
a
l
d
w
i
n
1
3
.
6
4
8
6
2
1
9
9
0
6
2
2
8
1
3
9
h
A
n
t
h
o
n
y
C
o
l
l
i
n
s
1
3
.
0
5
9
1
1
3
8
1
4
0
9
4
2
2
1
4
0
m
I
B
B
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
1
2
.
9
4
4
2
2
1
0
8
8
6
1
2
9
1
4
1
h
M
e
m
e
r
y
C
r
y
s
t
a
l
1
2
.
5
6
2
5
2
9
1
5
1
4
3
2
0
1
4
2
h
L
u
p
t
o
n
F
a
w
c
e
t
t
1
2
.
1
3
1
0
1
7
5
1
2
5
6
9
3
9
1
4
3
h
W
i
l
s
o
n
s
1
2
.
0
3
6
4
1
8
5
9
0
6
5
3
3
1
4
4
h
W
r
i
g
h
t
H
a
s
s
a
l
l
1
1
.
9
3
9
7
1
7
0
1
2
2
7
0
3
0
=
1
4
5
h
A
S
B
L
a
w
1
1
.
8
5
3
6
1
8
3
9
4
6
4
2
2
=
1
4
5
N
e
l
s
o
n
s
1
1
.
8
4
3
7
1
7
4
1
0
1
6
8
2
7
1
4
7
h
D
a
w
s
o
n
s
1
1
.
7
6
1
6
2
7
2
5
7
4
3
1
9
1
4
8
h
L
i
n
d
s
a
y
s
1
1
.
6
4
6
4
1
6
3
1
0
8
7
1
2
5
1
4
9
F
o
r
d
&
W
a
r
r
e
n
1
1
.
3
5
6
5
3
2
3
4
1
3
5
2
0
=
1
5
0
h
C
o
f
f
i
n
M
e
w
1
1
.
1
4
1
1
1
2
8
1
1
3
8
7
2
7
TLS_101_a ug_uk200_bot t om100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 38 Pa ge 101
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Profit per equity partner (k)
Earnings per partner (k)
Net profit (m)
Profit margin (%)
Bottom of equity (k)
Top of equity (k)
Rev per lawyer (k)
Rev per partner (k)
Rev per equity partner (k)
Cost per lawyer (k)
Profit per lawyer (k)
Total lawyers
Total partners
Total equity partners
Leverage
7
6
h
B
i
r
c
h
a
m
D
y
s
o
n
B
e
l
l
3
1
.
9
2
8
1
1
3
1
8
2
4
1
0
0
3
0
0
2
5
9
6
6
5
1
,
1
3
9
1
9
6
6
3
1
2
3
4
8
2
8
1
:
3
.
4
7
7
h
L
e
w
i
s
S
i
l
k
i
n
3
1
.
7
2
5
9
1
8
3
6
1
9
1
5
5
3
5
5
2
3
8
6
3
7
1
,
3
9
6
1
9
2
4
6
1
3
3
5
0
2
3
1
:
4
.
9
7
8
m
F
r
e
e
t
h
C
a
r
t
w
r
i
g
h
t
3
1
.
6
1
9
6
1
4
4
7
2
1
1
3
5
2
8
0
2
1
8
4
0
6
9
3
0
1
7
3
4
6
1
4
5
7
8
3
4
1
:
3
.
3
7
9
m
M
a
n
c
h
e
s
3
1
.
1
2
1
1
1
5
2
4
1
3
1
1
5
6
7
2
2
3
0
5
7
6
1
,
6
3
7
2
0
1
3
0
1
3
5
5
4
1
9
1
:
6
.
1
=
8
0
h
B
r
a
b
n
e
r
s
C
h
a
f
f
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
3
0
.
5
2
6
0
1
7
4
9
2
8
9
8
2
8
0
1
5
7
4
3
6
9
2
4
1
1
3
4
4
1
9
4
7
0
3
3
1
:
4
.
9
=
8
0
m
M
H
u
g
h
J
a
m
e
s
3
0
.
5
2
0
0
1
8
3
7
2
2
1
1
6
2
3
5
4
2
4
7
6
3
8
2
4
3
3
2
9
2
7
2
4
0
3
7
1
:
0
.
9
8
2
h
D
i
c
k
s
o
n
M
i
n
t
o
2
9
.
5
8
2
1
8
2
1
1
2
3
9
6
1
0
1
,
1
0
0
5
3
6
2
,
1
0
7
2
,
1
0
7
3
2
7
2
0
9
5
5
1
4
1
4
1
:
2
.
9
=
8
3
m
O
p
t
i
m
a
L
e
g
a
l
2
7
.
6
1
1
9
3
7
1
2
1
1
9
1
1
9
6
0
0
1
,
7
2
5
6
,
9
0
0
5
9
0
1
0
4
6
1
6
4
1
:
1
0
.
5
=
8
3
h
W
a
r
d
H
a
d
a
w
a
y
2
7
.
6
2
9
4
1
3
7
3
1
2
2
2
1
2
9
4
1
8
5
4
6
0
2
,
1
2
3
1
6
2
2
3
1
4
9
6
0
1
3
1
:
1
0
.
5
8
5
h
C
a
p
s
t
i
c
k
s
2
6
.
4
4
5
5
2
6
3
7
2
7
2
5
6
5
6
4
2
3
6
7
5
4
1
,
6
5
0
1
7
3
6
3
1
1
2
3
5
1
6
1
:
6
.
0
=
8
6
=
A
s
h
f
o
r
d
s
2
4
.
0
4
3
0
1
3
2
8
3
3
2
0
0
5
0
0
1
7
2
3
9
6
1
,
2
9
0
1
1
5
5
7
1
3
9
6
1
1
9
1
:
6
.
5
=
8
6
h
B
r
i
s
t
o
w
s
2
4
.
0
2
6
7
2
6
7
8
3
2
1
4
0
3
2
0
2
7
0
8
2
8
8
2
8
1
8
3
8
7
8
9
2
9
2
9
1
:
2
.
1
8
8
h
S
a
c
k
e
r
&
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
2
3
.
2
8
7
7
5
9
9
1
2
5
3
3
3
3
1
,
0
1
1
4
9
4
1
,
0
2
2
1
,
6
5
7
2
3
2
2
6
2
4
7
2
3
1
4
1
:
2
.
4
8
9
h
R
u
s
s
e
l
l
-
C
o
o
k
e
2
2
.
5
1
7
4
1
7
4
8
3
5
7
5
4
0
0
2
1
1
5
0
1
5
0
1
1
3
8
7
3
1
0
7
4
5
4
5
1
:
1
.
4
9
0
m
F
o
r
s
t
e
r
s
2
2
.
3
2
9
7
2
3
6
6
2
6
1
9
0
3
7
0
2
5
8
6
3
4
1
,
1
1
5
1
8
9
6
8
8
7
3
5
2
0
1
:
3
.
3
9
1
m
P
e
n
n
i
n
g
t
o
n
s
2
2
.
3
1
8
5
1
3
8
4
1
8
1
3
0
2
2
0
2
2
8
4
6
5
1
,
0
1
4
1
8
7
4
1
9
8
4
8
2
2
1
:
3
.
5
=
9
2
h
G
o
r
d
o
n
s
2
2
.
0
7
0
2
3
1
8
8
3
8
2
4
0
1
,
6
0
0
2
5
3
6
4
7
2
,
0
0
0
1
5
6
9
7
8
7
3
4
1
1
1
:
6
.
9
=
9
2
h
P
a
y
n
e
H
i
c
k
s
B
e
a
c
h
2
2
.
0
4
1
2
2
8
8
7
3
2
2
7
0
5
5
0
3
2
4
6
8
8
1
,
2
9
4
2
2
1
1
0
3
6
8
3
2
1
7
1
:
3
.
0
9
4
h
T
u
r
c
a
n
C
o
n
n
e
l
l
2
1
.
9
4
5
0
3
1
5
5
2
5
2
4
5
5
4
5
2
6
7
1
,
0
9
5
1
,
8
2
5
2
0
1
6
6
8
2
2
0
1
2
1
:
5
.
8
=
9
5
m
F
l
a
d
g
a
t
e
2
1
.
8
3
7
0
2
4
1
7
3
2
1
6
0
5
8
0
2
8
7
4
9
5
1
,
1
4
7
1
9
5
9
2
7
6
4
4
1
9
1
:
3
.
0
=
9
5
m
T
h
r
i
n
g
T
o
w
n
s
e
n
d
2
1
.
8
9
1
7
8
2
7
8
2
9
1
1
6
0
3
7
6
1
,
2
1
1
1
4
9
1
2
1
3
6
5
8
1
8
1
:
6
.
6
9
7
h
K
i
n
g
s
l
e
y
N
a
p
l
e
y
2
1
.
5
4
2
5
1
7
6
4
2
0
2
9
0
5
2
0
2
3
9
5
2
4
2
,
1
5
0
1
9
2
4
7
9
0
4
1
1
0
1
:
8
.
0
9
8
h
B
u
r
n
e
s
s
2
1
.
2
3
0
5
2
4
1
8
3
8
1
7
0
3
4
0
1
9
8
5
6
1
8
1
4
1
2
4
7
4
1
0
7
3
8
2
6
1
:
3
.
1
9
9
m
D
M
H
S
t
a
l
l
a
r
d
2
0
.
7
1
8
5
1
1
7
3
1
4
1
6
0
3
3
5
2
1
7
4
0
4
1
,
2
5
5
1
8
6
3
2
9
5
5
1
1
7
1
:
4
.
8
1
0
0
m
M
a
r
t
i
n
e
a
u
2
0
.
5
1
8
5
1
3
6
4
1
8
1
3
5
3
0
0
1
6
4
4
5
6
1
,
0
2
5
1
3
4
3
0
1
2
5
4
5
2
0
1
:
5
.
3
102|The Lawyer|UK 200
The
UK 200
76-100
TLS_102_a ug_uk200_t op100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 39 Pa ge 102
For further information, please contact:
Lawrence Bloom, Solicitor (nonpractising)
Jane Glassberg, Solicitor (nonpractising)
Jason Mann, Solicitor (nonpractising)
Ian Mouland ACA
Tel: 0207 269 9250 Email: info@moulandbloom.com
Web: www.moulandbloom.com
Mouland Bloom Limited, Sicilian House, 7 Sicilian Avenue, London WC1A 2QH
Experienced boutique for partners, team moves and mergers.
Our expertise includes:
20+ mergers brokered
35+ years of collective experience in senior level hires
Specialist search expertise across the full range of disciplines
Director level service at every stage of the process
Consultancy advice on fnancial and strategic issues
Our vision is clear: to operate as a strategic business partner to
our clients and to add real value to their lateral hire strategies.
We combine a thorough understanding of our clients business
and our candidates objectives with a commitment to providing
an excellent service.
TLS_103_UK200_10_di s 25/ 8/ 10 10: 50 Pa ge 1
104|The Lawyer|UK 200
The
UK 200
51-75
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Profit per equity partner (k)
Earnings per partner (k)
Net profit (m)
Profit margin (%)
Bottom of equity (k)
Top of equity (k)
Rev per lawyer (k)
Rev per partner (k)
Rev per equity partner (k)
Cost per lawyer (k)
Profit per lawyer (k)
Total lawyers
Total partners
Total equity partners
Leverage
5
1
=
R
e
y
n
o
l
d
s
P
o
r
t
e
r
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
6
0
.
0
3
2
7
3
2
7
2
0
3
4
1
3
0
5
8
0
3
0
2
9
6
8
9
6
8
1
9
9
1
0
2
1
9
9
6
2
6
2
1
:
2
.
2
5
2
h
S
p
e
e
c
h
l
y
B
i
r
c
h
a
m
5
8
.
4
4
2
8
2
7
9
1
6
2
7
2
4
5
5
7
0
2
8
8
6
8
7
1
,
5
7
8
2
0
9
7
9
2
0
3
8
5
3
7
1
:
4
.
5
5
3
h
W
e
i
g
h
t
m
a
n
s
5
6
.
2
3
5
4
1
6
6
9
1
6
2
3
3
4
1
4
1
6
5
5
5
2
2
,
1
9
5
1
3
9
2
7
3
4
0
1
0
2
2
6
1
:
1
2
.
3
5
4
m
M
a
c
l
a
y
M
u
r
r
a
y
&
S
p
e
n
s
5
2
.
5
2
6
5
2
2
7
1
3
2
4
1
4
0
3
3
0
2
2
2
7
8
4
1
,
0
9
4
1
6
9
5
4
2
3
6
6
7
4
8
1
:
3
.
9
5
5
h
H
B
J
G
a
t
e
l
e
y
W
a
r
e
i
n
g
4
9
.
6
3
0
2
2
1
2
1
8
3
5
1
2
6
8
0
2
2
0
8
4
9
6
8
5
5
1
3
4
7
3
2
3
9
1
0
0
5
8
1
:
3
.
1
5
6
m
P
a
n
n
o
n
e
4
9
.
5
2
2
9
1
5
1
8
1
6
1
5
4
4
0
3
2
3
2
4
8
1
1
,
4
5
6
1
9
6
3
7
2
1
3
1
0
3
3
4
1
:
5
.
3
5
7
m
D
i
c
k
i
n
s
o
n
D
e
e
s
4
8
.
8
2
1
6
1
9
3
9
1
9
1
6
1
3
0
1
2
0
0
7
2
4
1
,
3
1
9
1
6
3
3
7
2
4
3
6
7
3
7
1
:
5
.
6
5
8
h
M
i
s
h
c
o
n
d
e
R
e
y
a
4
7
.
5
4
5
0
2
6
9
1
0
2
1
2
7
5
7
5
0
3
1
7
8
0
5
2
,
1
5
9
2
5
1
6
6
1
5
0
5
9
2
2
1
:
5
.
8
5
9
m
B
o
n
d
P
e
a
r
c
e
4
6
.
0
2
3
5
1
6
3
8
1
6
1
5
8
3
0
6
1
7
0
5
9
0
1
,
4
3
8
1
4
3
2
8
2
7
0
7
8
3
2
1
:
7
.
4
6
0
=
B
l
a
k
e
L
a
p
t
h
o
r
n
4
5
.
0
1
1
6
1
1
4
6
1
3
9
9
1
4
0
1
8
8
4
4
6
8
8
2
1
6
3
2
5
2
4
0
1
0
1
5
1
1
:
3
.
7
6
1
h
D
a
v
i
e
s
A
r
n
o
l
d
C
o
o
p
e
r
4
4
.
1
2
7
8
1
7
3
8
1
8
1
5
0
4
5
0
2
5
3
5
7
6
1
,
5
3
1
2
0
7
4
6
1
7
4
7
7
2
9
1
:
5
.
0
6
2
m
M
C
o
b
b
e
t
t
s
4
3
.
8
1
3
2
1
2
5
4
9
1
0
0
2
5
0
1
8
7
5
2
8
1
,
4
1
3
1
7
0
1
8
2
3
4
8
3
3
1
1
:
6
.
5
=
6
3
h
F
a
r
r
e
r
&
C
o
4
2
.
6
4
4
2
2
5
8
1
0
2
4
2
0
0
5
6
5
2
9
1
6
4
4
1
,
9
7
2
2
2
2
6
9
1
4
6
6
6
2
2
1
:
5
.
8
=
6
3
h
W
a
l
k
e
r
M
o
r
r
i
s
4
2
.
6
5
3
5
3
2
5
1
7
3
9
1
9
0
7
0
0
2
6
5
8
3
5
1
,
3
7
4
1
6
1
1
0
3
1
6
1
5
1
3
1
1
:
4
.
2
6
5
h
T
L
T
S
o
l
i
c
i
t
o
r
s
4
1
.
0
2
8
5
1
5
2
6
1
5
1
9
0
3
9
0
2
3
0
6
5
1
1
,
9
5
2
1
9
7
3
4
1
7
8
6
3
2
1
1
:
7
.
5
6
6
m
C
l
a
r
k
e
W
i
l
l
m
o
t
t
4
0
.
8
1
6
3
1
1
8
6
1
3
1
1
0
2
9
5
1
8
5
6
0
0
1
,
2
0
0
1
6
0
2
5
2
2
0
6
8
3
4
1
:
5
.
5
6
7
h
M
R
u
s
s
e
l
l
J
o
n
e
s
&
W
a
l
k
e
r
4
0
.
6
4
0
4
2
2
7
9
2
2
2
1
5
4
5
0
3
0
1
7
3
8
1
,
8
4
5
2
3
5
6
6
1
3
5
5
5
2
2
1
:
5
.
1
6
8
m
B
e
v
a
n
B
r
i
t
t
a
n
3
7
.
7
2
8
8
2
0
0
6
1
6
1
5
0
3
4
0
2
0
4
7
8
5
1
,
7
9
5
1
7
1
3
2
1
8
5
4
8
2
1
1
:
7
.
8
6
9
h
M
H
o
w
a
r
d
K
e
n
n
e
d
y
3
7
.
0
3
0
9
1
6
2
5
1
3
1
6
0
5
0
0
2
6
1
5
3
6
2
,
3
1
3
2
2
6
3
5
1
4
2
6
9
1
6
1
:
7
.
9
7
0
h
M
o
r
g
a
n
C
o
l
e
3
6
.
0
1
9
3
1
7
5
7
1
9
1
5
8
2
1
2
2
0
8
6
6
7
1
,
0
6
0
1
6
9
3
9
1
7
3
5
4
3
4
1
:
4
.
0
7
1
m
B
r
o
d
i
e
s
3
5
.
8
3
2
3
2
0
4
9
2
5
1
9
0
4
3
0
1
8
2
5
7
5
1
,
3
0
7
1
3
7
4
5
1
9
7
6
2
2
7
1
:
6
.
2
7
2
m
S
h
e
p
h
e
r
d
&
W
e
d
d
e
r
b
u
r
n
3
5
.
3
2
4
3
1
8
6
8
2
3
1
3
8
2
5
5
2
0
1
5
6
9
1
,
0
3
8
1
5
4
4
7
1
7
6
6
2
3
4
1
:
4
.
2
7
3
m
T
h
o
m
a
s
E
g
g
a
r
3
4
.
7
1
8
2
1
4
5
7
2
1
9
2
2
8
7
2
3
1
4
8
9
9
9
7
1
8
3
4
8
1
5
0
7
1
3
5
1
:
3
.
3
7
4
M
K
e
o
g
h
s
3
3
.
0
3
0
0
1
6
3
5
1
4
1
5
0
6
1
4
2
3
2
7
6
7
2
,
2
0
0
2
0
1
3
2
1
4
2
4
3
1
5
1
:
8
.
5
7
5
h
M
B
r
o
w
n
e
J
a
c
o
b
s
o
n
3
2
.
9
2
4
4
1
2
6
4
1
2
1
1
0
3
0
0
1
6
8
4
7
7
2
,
0
5
6
1
4
8
2
0
1
9
6
6
9
1
6
1
:
1
1
.
3
TLS_104_a ug_uk200_t op100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 40 Pa ge 104
The
UK 200
26-50
The Lawyer|UK 200|105
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Profit per equity partner (k)
Earnings per partner (k)
Net profit (m)
Profit margin (%)
Bottom of equity (k)
Top of equity (k)
Rev per lawyer (k)
Rev per partner (k)
Rev per equity partner (k)
Cost per lawyer (k)
Profit per lawyer (k)
Total lawyers
Total partners
Total equity partners
Leverage
2
6
h
H
o
l
m
a
n
F
e
n
w
i
c
k
W
i
l
l
a
n
9
9
.
6
5
2
7
3
5
5
3
2
3
2
3
2
0
6
4
0
3
1
8
9
1
4
1
,
6
0
6
2
1
6
1
0
2
3
1
3
1
0
9
6
2
1
:
4
.
0
2
7
=
W
r
a
g
g
e
&
C
o
9
6
.
2
2
7
6
2
6
0
3
0
3
2
1
3
0
4
4
5
2
1
9
8
2
2
8
2
2
1
5
0
6
9
4
3
9
1
1
7
1
1
7
1
:
2
.
8
2
8
h
W
i
t
h
e
r
s
9
2
.
7
3
5
9
2
5
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
0
6
0
0
3
6
9
8
5
0
1
,
5
9
8
2
8
7
8
2
2
5
1
1
0
9
5
8
1
:
3
.
3
2
9
m
M
a
c
f
a
r
l
a
n
e
s
9
2
.
4
7
1
0
5
9
0
3
8
4
2
4
1
5
9
8
5
4
3
1
1
,
2
2
1
1
,
7
1
1
2
5
2
1
7
9
2
1
4
7
6
5
4
1
:
2
.
9
3
0
h
F
i
e
l
d
F
i
s
h
e
r
W
a
t
e
r
h
o
u
s
e
9
2
.
0
4
7
6
2
5
4
1
7
1
8
1
9
9
6
1
6
2
5
4
7
1
7
2
,
6
2
9
2
0
8
4
6
3
6
2
1
2
8
3
5
1
:
9
.
3
3
1
h
S
t
e
p
h
e
n
s
o
n
H
a
r
w
o
o
d
9
1
.
9
5
6
1
3
6
8
2
7
3
0
2
7
7
8
3
1
3
4
0
9
3
8
1
,
8
7
6
2
3
9
1
0
1
2
7
0
9
8
4
9
1
:
4
.
5
3
2
h
O
l
s
w
a
n
g
9
1
.
0
4
2
0
3
2
0
2
5
2
8
2
5
0
7
5
0
2
8
3
9
3
8
1
,
5
1
7
2
0
5
7
9
3
2
1
9
7
6
0
1
:
4
.
4
3
3
m
S
h
o
o
s
m
i
t
h
s
9
0
.
0
2
5
6
1
5
9
1
1
1
2
2
2
9
2
8
8
2
7
1
8
5
7
2
,
0
9
3
2
3
8
3
3
3
3
2
1
0
5
4
3
1
:
6
.
7
3
4
m
T
r
o
w
e
r
s
&
H
a
m
l
i
n
s
8
9
.
4
5
5
3
2
8
5
1
4
1
6
4
3
7
5
8
3
2
8
6
8
1
3
3
,
4
3
8
2
4
0
4
6
3
1
3
1
1
0
2
6
1
:
1
1
.
0
3
5
h
K
e
n
n
e
d
y
s
8
8
.
2
3
8
0
2
2
0
1
9
2
1
2
1
0
6
0
0
2
9
8
7
0
0
1
,
8
0
0
2
3
5
6
3
2
9
6
1
2
6
4
9
1
:
5
.
0
3
6
h
H
i
l
l
D
i
c
k
i
n
s
o
n
8
7
.
1
2
4
8
1
6
6
1
4
1
5
1
5
0
3
1
0
2
2
5
5
5
1
1
,
5
9
0
1
9
0
3
5
3
8
7
1
5
8
5
5
1
:
6
.
1
3
7
h
M
I
n
c
e
&
C
o
8
6
.
3
5
6
8
3
9
8
2
6
3
0
2
6
0
7
0
0
3
5
5
9
9
2
1
,
7
2
6
2
4
9
1
0
7
2
4
3
8
7
5
0
1
:
3
.
9
3
8
m
O
s
b
o
r
n
e
C
l
a
r
k
e
8
3
.
7
3
9
3
2
8
5
1
9
2
3
2
4
7
5
1
2
2
3
9
7
6
8
1
,
7
0
8
1
8
4
5
5
3
5
0
1
0
9
4
9
1
:
6
.
1
3
9
m
M
B
a
r
l
o
w
L
y
d
e
&
G
i
l
b
e
r
t
8
1
.
5
3
5
0
3
3
1
2
7
3
3
1
7
0
4
6
0
2
8
2
9
5
9
1
,
0
7
2
1
9
0
9
2
2
8
9
8
5
7
6
1
:
2
.
8
4
0
h
W
a
t
s
o
n
F
a
r
l
e
y
&
W
i
l
l
i
a
m
s
8
0
.
2
4
4
8
3
6
1
2
6
3
2
1
9
5
1
,
0
0
0
3
2
2
9
1
1
1
,
4
0
7
2
2
0
1
0
2
2
4
9
8
8
5
7
1
:
3
.
4
4
1
h
T
r
a
v
e
r
s
S
m
i
t
h
7
2
.
0
7
0
5
5
3
5
3
0
4
2
3
7
5
1
,
0
0
0
3
5
8
1
,
1
4
3
1
,
6
7
4
2
0
7
1
5
1
2
0
1
6
3
4
3
1
:
3
.
7
4
2
h
D
W
F
7
1
.
5
3
3
3
9
2
9
1
2
7
2
6
0
8
2
0
4
5
9
5
2
,
7
5
0
1
7
9
2
5
3
5
1
1
2
0
2
6
1
:
1
2
.
5
4
3
h
B
e
r
r
y
m
a
n
s
L
a
c
e
M
a
w
e
r
6
9
.
4
2
2
2
1
7
1
1
3
1
8
1
2
0
2
7
0
1
8
4
5
9
3
1
,
2
1
8
1
5
0
3
4
3
7
7
1
1
7
5
7
1
:
5
.
6
4
4
h
M
c
G
r
i
g
o
r
s
6
9
.
0
2
6
3
2
1
5
1
5
2
1
1
6
0
4
1
7
1
8
9
7
2
3
1
,
2
5
0
1
4
9
4
0
3
6
5
9
6
5
5
1
:
5
.
6
4
5
m
M
i
l
l
s
&
R
e
e
v
e
6
7
.
3
3
0
7
2
6
3
1
9
2
8
2
4
4
3
5
9
2
0
6
7
5
9
1
,
1
0
9
1
4
9
5
7
3
2
7
8
9
6
1
1
:
4
.
4
4
6
m
H
a
l
l
i
w
e
l
l
s
6
7
.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
0
4
9
3
1
,
6
7
5
1
8
0
0
3
7
2
1
3
6
4
0
1
:
8
.
3
4
7
h
L
G
6
4
.
9
4
6
0
3
3
3
1
9
2
9
2
3
0
6
9
0
3
4
6
8
6
5
1
,
5
8
8
2
4
6
1
0
0
1
8
8
7
5
4
1
1
:
3
.
6
4
8
m
C
h
a
r
l
e
s
R
u
s
s
e
l
l
6
3
.
2
2
5
9
1
9
3
1
1
1
8
1
5
4
2
8
5
2
4
9
6
5
8
1
,
4
7
0
2
0
4
4
5
2
5
4
9
6
4
3
1
:
4
.
9
4
9
m
D
u
n
d
a
s
&
W
i
l
s
o
n
6
1
.
0
3
1
7
3
1
9
2
5
4
1
1
5
0
7
3
0
2
1
5
7
6
5
7
6
5
1
2
6
8
9
2
8
3
8
0
8
0
1
:
2
.
6
5
0
m
B
u
r
g
e
s
S
a
l
m
o
n
6
0
.
7
4
1
4
3
5
2
2
0
3
4
2
0
9
4
6
4
2
4
6
9
1
7
1
,
2
1
6
1
6
4
8
3
2
4
6
6
6
5
0
1
:
3
.
9
TLS_105_a ug_uk200_t op100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 41 Pa ge 105
106|The Lawyer|UK 200
Rank
Movement from last year
Estimated figures
Firm
Turnover (m)
Profit per equity partner (k)
Earnings per partner (k)
Net profit (m)
Profit margin (%)
Bottom of equity (k)
Top of equity (k)
Rev per lawyer (k)
Rev per partner (k)
Rev per equity partner (k)
Cost per lawyer (k)
Profit per lawyer (k)
Total lawyers
Total partners
Total equity partners
Leverage
1
h
C
l
i
f
f
o
r
d
C
h
a
n
c
e
1
,
1
9
7
9
3
3
6
9
8
3
5
0
2
9
4
5
1
1
,
1
3
0
4
6
3
2
,
1
3
0
3
,
2
1
8
3
2
8
1
3
5
2
,
5
8
6
5
6
2
3
7
2
1
:
6
.
0
2
m
L
i
n
k
l
a
t
e
r
s
1
,
1
8
3
1
,
2
1
4
1
,
0
7
4
5
0
7
4
3
6
2
2
1
,
5
5
5
5
4
6
2
,
4
3
4
2
,
6
7
6
3
1
2
2
3
4
2
,
1
6
5
4
8
6
4
4
2
1
:
3
.
9
3
m
F
r
e
s
h
f
i
e
l
d
s
B
r
u
c
k
h
a
u
s
D
e
r
i
n
g
e
r
1
,
1
4
1
1
,
4
0
6
1
,
3
5
0
5
8
9
5
2
6
2
7
1
,
5
0
0
5
3
3
2
,
5
7
0
2
,
7
2
3
2
5
8
2
7
5
2
,
1
4
1
4
4
4
4
1
9
1
:
4
.
1
4
=
A
l
l
e
n
&
O
v
e
r
y
1
,
0
5
0
1
,
1
0
0
9
5
1
3
8
8
3
7
6
6
1
1
,
6
5
2
5
3
3
2
,
3
2
8
2
,
9
5
8
3
3
6
1
9
7
1
,
9
6
9
4
5
1
3
5
5
1
:
4
.
5
5
=
D
L
A
P
i
p
e
r
5
8
1
.
0
5
2
7
3
0
8
1
0
0
1
7
2
2
5
1
,
5
0
0
2
5
0
8
9
9
3
,
0
7
4
2
0
7
4
3
2
,
3
2
2
6
4
6
1
8
9
1
:
1
1
.
3
6
=
L
o
v
e
l
l
s
5
4
2
.
0
6
6
3
5
1
5
1
6
0
3
0
4
1
5
8
3
0
3
8
8
1
,
5
1
0
2
,
2
4
0
2
7
3
1
1
4
1
,
3
9
8
3
5
9
2
4
2
1
:
4
.
8
7
h
H
e
r
b
e
r
t
S
m
i
t
h
4
4
9
.
9
8
6
2
6
4
6
1
1
7
2
6
4
4
0
1
,
0
2
5
4
2
6
1
,
7
7
8
3
,
3
0
8
3
1
5
1
1
1
1
,
0
5
6
2
5
3
1
3
6
1
:
6
.
8
8
m
M
S
l
a
u
g
h
t
e
r
a
n
d
M
a
y
4
3
9
.
0
1
,
8
4
0
1
,
7
9
8
2
2
8
5
2
1
,
0
5
0
2
,
1
0
0
7
9
0
3
,
4
3
4
3
,
5
4
4
3
8
0
4
1
0
5
5
6
1
2
8
1
2
4
1
:
3
.
5
9
=
E
v
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
3
5
5
.
2
5
1
7
3
3
2
7
0
2
0
2
7
5
8
7
2
2
9
2
1
,
1
3
1
2
,
6
1
2
2
3
4
5
8
1
,
2
1
7
3
1
4
1
3
6
1
:
7
.
9
1
0
=
N
o
r
t
o
n
R
o
s
e
3
0
7
.
0
4
8
6
4
0
0
9
2
3
0
2
8
3
9
5
0
3
0
1
1
,
1
1
6
1
,
6
2
4
2
1
1
9
1
1
,
0
1
9
2
7
5
1
8
9
1
:
4
.
4
1
1
=
A
s
h
u
r
s
t
2
9
3
.
0
6
8
9
5
2
6
1
0
3
3
5
3
6
2
9
4
0
3
6
6
1
,
3
0
2
1
,
9
5
3
2
3
7
1
2
9
8
0
1
2
2
5
1
5
0
1
:
4
.
3
1
2
=
S
i
m
m
o
n
s
&
S
i
m
m
o
n
s
2
5
1
.
0
4
6
1
3
8
4
5
9
2
3
2
4
0
8
5
0
3
3
2
1
,
1
5
1
1
,
9
7
6
2
5
5
7
7
7
5
6
2
1
8
1
2
7
1
:
5
.
0
1
3
=
C
M
S
C
a
m
e
r
o
n
M
c
K
e
n
n
a
2
1
4
.
4
4
5
3
3
8
3
4
6
2
1
2
0
0
5
0
1
2
9
1
1
,
5
2
1
2
,
1
2
3
2
2
9
6
2
7
3
8
1
4
1
1
0
1
1
:
6
.
3
1
4
=
P
i
n
s
e
n
t
M
a
s
o
n
s
2
0
6
.
0
4
1
0
2
5
6
4
6
2
2
2
4
0
6
0
5
2
2
3
7
4
9
1
,
8
2
3
1
7
4
5
0
9
2
2
2
7
5
1
1
3
1
:
7
.
2
1
5
h
B
i
r
d
&
B
i
r
d
2
0
1
.
8
4
6
6
3
2
7
3
8
1
9
2
8
4
7
6
6
2
7
3
9
4
3
2
,
4
9
1
2
2
2
5
1
7
3
8
2
1
4
8
1
1
:
8
.
1
1
6
h
C
l
y
d
e
&
C
o
1
9
2
.
0
6
0
5
4
3
0
5
5
2
8
2
8
6
8
8
5
3
3
7
1
,
1
7
1
2
,
1
1
0
2
4
2
9
6
5
6
9
1
6
4
9
1
1
:
5
.
3
1
7
h
B
e
r
w
i
n
L
e
i
g
h
t
o
n
P
a
i
s
n
e
r
1
9
1
.
0
4
5
5
3
4
3
4
2
2
2
2
0
8
1
,
2
0
0
3
2
7
9
9
5
2
,
0
5
3
2
5
6
7
1
5
8
5
1
9
2
9
3
1
:
5
.
3
1
8
m
T
a
y
l
o
r
W
e
s
s
i
n
g
1
7
7
.
9
3
8
5
2
7
8
5
6
3
2
2
0
0
7
0
0
2
7
9
6
1
9
1
,
2
1
8
1
9
1
8
8
6
3
8
2
8
8
1
4
6
1
:
3
.
4
1
9
m
S
J
B
e
r
w
i
n
1
7
1
.
0
4
4
7
3
2
9
3
9
2
3
1
8
0
6
4
0
3
1
5
1
,
1
3
2
2
,
1
6
5
2
4
3
7
2
5
4
3
1
5
1
7
9
1
:
5
.
9
=
2
0
h
A
d
d
l
e
s
h
a
w
G
o
d
d
a
r
d
1
6
7
.
5
4
2
6
3
1
9
4
1
2
5
2
2
1
5
7
2
2
8
7
1
,
0
1
5
1
,
7
2
7
2
1
7
7
1
5
8
3
1
6
5
9
7
1
:
5
.
0
=
2
0
h
D
e
n
t
o
n
W
i
l
d
e
S
a
p
t
e
1
6
7
.
5
3
6
0
2
8
5
3
1
1
9
2
3
0
5
4
0
2
7
5
9
4
1
1
,
8
6
1
2
2
3
5
1
6
1
0
1
7
8
9
0
1
:
5
.
8
2
2
h
I
r
w
i
n
M
i
t
c
h
e
l
l
1
5
7
.
0
5
4
0
3
2
5
2
8
1
8
1
5
0
7
0
0
3
5
9
1
,
3
6
5
3
,
0
1
9
2
9
5
6
4
4
3
7
1
1
5
5
2
1
:
7
.
4
2
3
h
B
e
a
c
h
c
r
o
f
t
1
3
1
.
0
3
1
4
2
3
4
2
5
1
9
2
1
5
5
3
5
1
8
5
8
8
5
1
,
6
7
9
1
5
0
3
5
7
0
8
1
4
8
7
8
1
:
8
.
1
2
4
h
H
a
m
m
o
n
d
s
1
1
8
.
0
3
6
4
2
1
1
2
3
1
9
1
5
6
4
7
1
2
5
7
7
0
7
1
,
9
0
3
2
0
8
4
9
4
5
9
1
6
7
6
2
1
:
6
.
4
2
5
m
N
a
b
a
r
r
o
1
1
3
.
8
3
2
0
2
8
5
3
1
2
7
1
7
0
5
1
0
2
8
2
8
6
9
1
,
1
8
5
2
0
6
7
5
4
0
4
1
3
1
9
6
1
:
3
.
2
The
UK 200
1-25
TLS_106_a ug_uk200_t op100_e d 26/ 8/ 10 17: 41 Pa ge 106
hays.co.uk/legal
Working across a nationwide and international network of ofces, our
unique market insight and proven success helps us deliver a level of service
our clients and candidates want to use again and again.
From blue chip corporates and banks, to a full spectrum of law rms
and public sector and not-for-prot organisations, we use our deep
expertise across the legal market to nd the perfect t for you or your
organisation.
If you need a well informed opinion, advice on a specic area of
recruitment or wider stafng project, our expert consultants can
help you. Or if a new career is what you desire, our long-standing
relationships with clients will assist you in getting that important rst
introduction.
To discuss your needs in more detail, contact Yvonne Smyth
at yvonne.smyth@hays.com or call 020 7628 0301.
RECRUITING THE BEST
LEGAL TALENT
Bringing the right person together with the right job. Thats
the magic of recruitment. Its an energy that can transform
an organisation, a power that can change a life.
TLS_107_UK200_10_di s : TLS_107_UK200_10_di s 20/ 8/ 10 12: 28 Pa ge 1
TLS_108_UK200_10_di s : TLS_108_UK200_10_di s 20/ 8/ 10 12: 27 Pa ge 1