When I joined The Legal 500 a year ago, one of the main ambitions I set out was to improve diversity in our rankings and, in particular, the proportion of cited women in the UK Solicitors guide. The reason was obvious – women are under-represented at senior levels in law firms and this has also historically been the case in many of our rankings.
Unconscious bias has long served as a barrier to entry for many talented female lawyers who were in many instances not being put forward for recognition, either by their firms or peers. However, with diversity increasingly on law firms’ agenda it was important for us to play our part by raising the profile of talented female lawyers who may otherwise have gone unmentioned in our research.
So, 12 months on, and a few weeks after the launch of the 2020 UK guide, how did we do? While in some areas (shipping being an obvious example) our rankings show we still have a long way to go, in other, marquee City practices, the results show significant progress.
Leaving aside practices with traditionally strong female representation, such as employment, family and some areas of insurance, women now make up more than 20% of all ranked lawyers across a number of high-profile areas.
Our premium M&A rankings, for example, now feature 22 women, equating to more than one third of all lawyers ranked, and the proportion is similar across both mid-market and smaller M&A. Our London private equity rankings, meanwhile – which previously featured no female leading individuals – are now more than 25% female.
For context, it should be noted that these figures include more junior, next generation partners, as well as our new category of rising stars, which recognise the best up-and-coming non-partners.
However, while there is still room for improvement at the most senior level, we believe that by recognising female talent at an earlier stage of their career, we will be able to continue to track them as their career progresses and they – hopefully – reach the top tier of leading individuals in their area.
In some areas, we have already made big strides in recognising women at the top of their game, such as acquisition finance, a ranking which previously included no female leading individuals but which is now more than 20% female after the addition of seven women including Clifford Chance’s Emma Folds and Allen & Overy star Denise Gibson.
Similarly, almost a quarter of the leading individuals in our premium M&A table are now female, compared with just 5% last year, while for white collar and corporate crime, more than one in three of those ranked at the highest level are women.
Naturally, it is disappointing that in other areas there are still not enough women among our leading individuals. However, the pipeline of talent we have found at associate and junior partner level makes me confident we are now better placed to recognise the leading individuals of tomorrow. Overall, I am pleased that we have made significant progress in some areas, but fully accept that there is much more to do, particularly outside London.
So we still need your help. Our individual rankings will not change fast enough if our research team are not told about talented women – and other minority lawyers – within your ranks. While many listened to last year’s call to arms and made a concerted effort to tell us about deserving women within their firms, others simply did not. Indeed, in some quarters there remains old-school resistance to the idea that we should even be asking such questions. Tough.
This is a cause we will be continuing to push so, with the next research period just around the corner, we would encourage you to put forward more of your talented women – and other minority lawyers – for consideration in next year’s rankings. We can only go so far without you.
The Principality of Monaco is well known for the extravagant lifestyle of its high rollers; for the super-yachts that line the marina; the low tax rates; the Grand Prix (the street race, arguably, the most glamorous on the circuit); as the home of numerous high-flying residents; and, more recently, for The Legal 500’s coverage of the jurisdiction. Alright, I’m stretching, it’s more well-known as the home of Lewis Hamilton than it is for the law firm rankings. However, what is true is that we certainly didn’t take a gamble when we decided to introduce a Monaco chapter to the EMEA guide back in 2015, with firms keen to submit to the newly introduced commercial, corporate and M&A, and private client practice areas.
Monaco’s close ties with France, the country’s status as a ‘third country’ with the EU, and its membership of the Eurozone – it adopted the euro in 2002 – combined with its low tax rates have contributed to the sovereign state’s thriving financial services sector. A heavily regulated industry, banking activities in Monaco are frequently subject to, and authorised by, French banking regulations. The country’s banking activity is licensed by the French Prudential Control and Resolution Authority, which controls the activities of banks and insurance companies. Furthermore, Monaco also has a Monetary Agreement in place with the EU which ensures that the regulatory environment remains consistent with that of EU member states. One direct impact of the Monetary Agreement saw Monaco introduce further measures to tackle anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing, which came into force in July 2018. Of note was the introduction of an anonymous whistle-blower system that allows employees to report anti-money laundering breaches, as well as the introduction of new administrative penalties and criminal offences that are applicable to both senior executives and entities. Ultimately, these measures have provided a green light to creating a more secure and attractive banking environment.
Away from the banking industry, it is also a particularly exciting time in the country’s real estate sector, with the Portier Cove development impressive in both its scope and ambition. Land is particularly scarce in Monaco and, as a result, the country has been forced to be innovative and inventive in its approach to tackling this. The Portier Cove development is a $2.4bn land reclamation project which will see the seabed dredged and the land filled with imported sand before construction work begins on a new development. The completion date has been set for 2025 and will see the creation of residential and public space on what is currently the Mediterranean Sea. Residential space remains at a premium as Monaco continues to be a popular destination for jet setters drawn to the sun, opulent lifestyle, and the (equally sexy) lack of a personal income tax levied on residents – a major draw if you back yourself to clean up in the casinos of Monte Carlo.
Ayrton Senna is ubiquitous with the Monaco circuit due to his record of six race victories – the most of any F1 driver. This outright dominance is not seen in the Monaco legal market, perhaps inevitably due to its size and the number of practice areas, with a number of firms across the paddock all heavyweights in the market.
Unsurprisingly for a country considered a tax haven, the work featured in firms’ private client submissions has tended to focus on wealth management, succession planning, asset protection, and related contentious matters, with firms acting for the ultra-high-net-worth individuals that reside in the sovereign state. Reflective of the fact that a high proportion of Monaco’s residents tend to be foreign-born, practitioners in this area include those who are English, French, and US qualified.
CMS Pasquier Ciulla Marquet & Pastor and Gordon S. Blair Law Offices have sat at the top of the private client leader board since the introduction of the Monaco chapter in 2015. With a focus equivalent to the Formula One World Constructors' Championship – meaning the elite law firms in a rankings context – over the first few years following the introduction of the chapter, it was not until 2018 that we first introduced individual rankings. We recognised only two leading individuals in the inaugural private client leading individual ranking before expanding this significantly in 2019 with eight individuals now featured. We are yet to identify the bright, young prospects in the private client market and, at the moment, do not have any next generation lawyers (NGLs) for this practice area.
The situation only improves marginally when we also consider the commercial, corporate, and M&A ranking, with just one individual identified as an NGL in this area. This largely seems to be representative of the senior status of many of the lawyers in the market, with the vast majority well-established practitioners with considerable experience in the Monégasque market and, frequently, other jurisdictions. With succession planning an issue for all firms, regardless of size or location, it will be interesting to see which stars begin to emerge on the rankings grid in the years to come. n
‘Indonesia needs a financial revolution, which will ultimately democratise access to the best financial products.’ These are the words of Claudia Kolonas, founder of fintech start-up Pluang, which recently received $3m in funding from Indonesia tech giant Go-Jek and is one of 167 fintech start-ups now operating in Indonesia.
The demand for fintech is quite simple: Indonesia is the fourth most populous country in the world but half of the population (approximately 132 million) do not have access to a bank account. The country is a series of archipelago islands and many locals do not live close to a bank branch, or have the infrastructure to easily travel to one. This gap in the market is substantial, with a Redseer Report forecasting the fintech market to be worth $50bn in 2023, a major leap from its current valuation at $7bn.
Another factor at play is Indonesia’s emerging middle class and their increased spending power. Nielsen’s 2018 Conference Board Consumer Confidence Survey found that Indonesia is the third most optimistic country in the world after India and the Philippines (developing countries tend to be higher than developed). The index assesses consumers on their job prospects, spending intentions, and outlook on the economy.
‘Indonesia is increasingly seen as a market not to be missed by investors,’ says David Dawborn, senior international counsel for Hiswara Bunjamin & Tandjung, a Jakarta-based law firm which works in association with Herbert Smith Freehills.
‘It makes up more than one-third of the population in Southeast Asia so in terms of size it is definitely an attractive market for investors looking to expand in the region. For fintech players, Indonesia is also attractive because of the relatively high smartphone usage and internet penetration as well as affordable mobile data.
‘Most of the activities currently revolve around the electronic payment and online lending sub-sectors, but we are starting to see more initiatives in relatively newer sub-sectors, such as insurtech.’
Electronic payments are typically conducted through digital ‘e-wallets’, which as the name suggests is a service that allows you to make transactions and store money through an electronic device. Leading the way in this space is GoPay, a spinoff of Go-Jek – Indonesia’s first ‘decacorn’ company (valued at over $10bn). According to The Jakarta Post, transactions made using GoPay in February alone reached $6.3bn, nearly 70% of Gojek’s total transactions.
The company emerged from humble beginnings as a moped ride hailing app in 2010, which was in demand due to the notorious traffic problem in Jakarta. Coming to the close of 2019, the company is expected to raise another $2bn, with major backers for the company including Google, Mitsubishi, Visa, and Chinese gaming giant Tencent Holdings.
For online lending, a number of peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platforms have emerged where lenders and debtors are matched with one another. The figures for companies in this space are particularly impressive with the SME lending service Koinworks receiving $16.5m in funding in June, while JULO, which provides consumer loans, received $10m in funding in September. The Indonesian financial services authority – OJK – found that registered lenders have channelled $1.1bn in loans to 2.8 million borrowers since December 2016. However, the growth of P2P lending has not been completely positive with a number of cases of loan shark behaviour. These instances have encouraged the OJK to input stricter regulations on the market.
‘The challenges typically revolve around the complexity of the regulatory framework but the government and regulators are continuously trying to improve this,’ says Dawborn. ‘In fact, they have been generally supportive of fintech developments by adopting a light touch approach and partnering with fintech associations.’
In January 2019, new regulations were introduced by the OJK to create a much clearer legal framework for fintech. Key issues these new regulations addressed include consumer education, data security, and preventing any criminal activity. Fintech companies are registered through a ‘sandbox’ approach where they operate at a small scale under the authority’s supervision. The general aim is to control the rapid growth of fintech in a way that, hopefully, won’t stifle further growth and innovation.
As for the legal market, a number of law firms are capitalising on the major deals being done in this space. Indonesia has a closed legal market so many domestic firms operate in association with international firms. For example, Herbert Smith Freehills’ affiliate, Hiswara Bunjamin & Tandjung, recently advised the Chinese tech giant Taobao on a $1.1bn investment into the Indonesian e-commerce company ‘Tokopedia’; Baker McKenzie’s associated firm, Hadiputranto, Hadinoto & Partners, represented the Indonesian conglomerate Astra International on a joint venture with the Hong Kong fintech company WeLab for a separate P2P lending platform in Indonesia; and Allen & Overy’s associated firm, Ginting & Reksodiputro, advised Go-Jek on its acquisition of three of the country’s leading fintech businesses.
It’s also important to note that the major Indonesian banks have by no means turned a blind eye to the growth in fintech, and have set up venture funds that invest specifically in fintech start-ups. Bank Mandiri, the largest state-owned bank in Indonesia, has a venture fund dedicated specifically to fintech start-ups and has a budget of $37m.
Looking towards 2020 and beyond, Dawborn believes that fintech will continue to grow and expand. ‘It is an interesting sector to watch and be part of because of the constant innovation and interaction between the traditional financial services institutions and the new players.’
As a business, how has Schjødt evolved since you have been at the firm?
What has changed most over the years in Schjødt is that there is a need for the firm to be organised and run in an optimised manner, since the response time in regards to many of the assignments are often quite short. This means that the firm needs to be very effective in allocating matters to the people with the right skills and who also have the time to serve the clients within the time frame they expect or demand. Then, you also need to have lawyers who connects well with the clients.
What do you think are the top three things most clients want, and why?
First, clients want the right legal advice. Second, it applies value if the legal advice is also commercially viable (if possible).
Third, the advice must be provided within the timeframe the clients need it. If the lawyer does these three things, and otherwise is engaged in the matter and available to the client, the clients’ expectations are normally met or perhaps even exceeded.
What are the biggest challenges facing firms in Norway?
The Norwegian industry has not yet faced any big challenges, in my opinion. The market has been good, and demand for our services has been quite constant, despite the oil crises in 2014 and onwards. The way we see things is that the firms who cannot act as a one-stop-shop may experience some challenges in the years ahead. This is one of the reasons we decided to merge with the Swedish law firm Hamilton, so that we are not only a one-stop firm in Norway but in the Scandinavian region.
The merger with Hamilton is the first of its kind in the Nordic market. What led to the decision to make this move into the Swedish market and to be the first Norwegian firm to merge with a Swedish counterpart?
The main reasons for the Schjødt-Hamilton merger are that we become the first leading law firm in Scandinavia to establish operations covering both Norway and Sweden, which provides new and further growth opportunities in Scandinavia.
Hamilton is considered the perfect match – not too big and not too small. Via the merger we become the biggest law firm in Norway. Schjødt also becomes one of the largest law firms in the Nordic countries and thereby a significant player in the Scandinavian market. We will become about 250 lawyers. Combined, after the merger, the M&A team at Schjødt will be the market leader in the Nordic region.
Why do you think it has taken so long for there to be a cross-border merger of this kind?
We know that other law firms have contemplated this, but none have had the guts to try it. When the merger was announced several of the other firms in Norway complemented us and actually told us: ‘This is impressive, only Schjødt could do this.’
What impact do you feel this will ultimately have on both the Norwegian and Swedish markets? Do you feel others will follow suit?
Maybe, it’s hard to say. If it should happen, we welcome the competition and Schjødt will have an edge as being the ‘first mover’.
Which aspects of each firm do you feel will most benefit from the merger?
We have analysed this carefully, and we actually foresee opportunities and growth possibilities in most departments of our firm. As indicated above, we believe the merger will be particularly noticeable within the M&A segment.
How will your client base benefit from the merger?
Sweden is Norway’s most important trading partner in the Nordic region. We believe clients will benefit via seamless and first-class service to clients with operations in the Norwegian and Swedish markets.
With each firm having its own unique culture, how are you approaching combining the two cultures into a cohesive firm, particularly regarding the differences between the Norwegian and Swedish legal markets? Do you think there will be any challenges?
You are right that there are some differences in cultures between the firms and also in the Norwegian and Swedish legal markets. However, these are matters that have been carefully considered, and we see them more as opportunities. The respective firms are fully aware of what is expected of each other. Furthermore, both firms really wanted this merger. We have a very strong and joint belief in both Hamilton and Schjødt that this merger will be a success and we will work hard to make it happen.
What are the key aims for the firm beyond the merger? What do you hope to accomplish going forward?
The merged firm will become a truly international law firm, with offices in three countries. While Sweden is Norway’s biggest and most important trading partner in the Nordic Region, England is Norway’s most important trading partner in Europe. Such a Scandinavian venture as the merger between Schjødt and Hamilton represents, thus provides greater growth opportunities both in Norway, Sweden, and also in England.
As administrative managing partner you lead the administration of Diaz Reus’ 27 global offices. Can you tell me a bit more about how you came to be in the role?
I have had this title for two and a half years now. I started as an associate at Diaz Reus in 2009. When I started at Diaz Reus I was the only woman attorney and the only foreigner. I am actually from Spain and I am a qualified lawyer in Spain as well as in the United States. I worked really hard as an associate. (I have plenty of stories about my early days – lots of stories of sleepless nights and cancelled vacations.) After six years I was promoted to partner. Michael Diaz, Jr, our founding partner, really believed in my work, my dedication, and my professionalism. Being the only woman partner in the Miami office, the firm’s headquarters, gave me a voice at partner level and I was able to recommend certain changes to the procedures in the firm. Those were heard and adopted. As a result, things improved. Michael Diaz, Jr appreciated that I cared so much about making things better and as a result I was promoted to administrative managing partner. I was very humbled and took that position with great honour.
It is noted that you are bilingual and able to arbitrate in both Spanish and English in Miami. Are there not many attorneys who can do this?
No, in my experience not many US lawyers can do it. Miami has become a hub for arbitration, especially for Latin American clients. Being able to have your lawyers handle an arbitration both in English and Spanish is an asset. That does not only mean being able to speak the language or understanding the culture; it also means understanding the civil law system. We have achieved that by hiring lawyers with degrees both in the US and in civil law countries such as Colombia or Spain. That gives the client a strategic and financial advantage. Hiring local counsel everywhere can get expensive, not only because that requires different retainers and fee structures, but also because clients need more staff in-house to keep track of everything. When one law firm can deliver everything everywhere, the client saves money, and who doesn’t like that?
What has changed within the firm during your time there?
A lot. When I started as an associate in 2009 the firm was an international arbitration and litigation boutique that was starting to grow. In ten years we have reached new markets and are servicing our clients in other areas of the law. We are now a full-service law firm with 27 offices in the world. In 2018 we launched the ‘DRT International Law Firm & Alliance’ to formalise our relationships with the foreign offices, and we celebrate a yearly retreat.
The firm has also grown in terms of diversity. As I said, when I started as an associate in 2009 I was the only woman lawyer and the only foreigner. It was a very different law firm from what it is now. Today our team includes both women and men, and everyone is treated the same. This is part of the culture that comes from the top. Gender-equality is a topic that I really care about, and I always try to give advice and guidance to the younger associates in that regard.
Diversity is something that the firm has worked on a lot. In fact, we believe that our diversity is our strength. If you look at our website you will see that our team is formed by people from different backgrounds and ethnicities, who speak different languages, and have different cultures. Management has certainly seen the value in having a diverse group of people (from lawyers to legal support) as a team and it has become our identity.
Do you think the hire of more female attorneys has changed the firm?
Yes, absolutely. It has brought the firm together more. I have found that women are better planners, which is a great quality as a lawyer. Also, having women on teams boosts group collaboration and improves team processes. Clients also come from all different walks of life. The more diverse we are, the more we reflect our clients, which results in better and more effective communication. Women are great at multitasking and can wear many hats. These are very valuable skills that benefit the team and the firm as a whole.
In addition to the recruitment of more diverse lawyers, does the firm get involved in other diversity-related activities?
We get involved in activities within the community. We are involved in a project with the black community in Miami. That extends to our office in Johannesburg, South Africa. Along with our local partner, we want to help the black community in their quest to achieve fairness in land ownership and land titles. In South Africa the community is 90% black, but 90% of private property is in white hands. We want to help them reach a solution to this problem. The firm has experience in this area through the representation of the Miccosukee tribe here in Florida and their initiative in Congress to enact laws whereby the property that was appropriated from the tribe was given back to them. We are transferring that knowledge and experience to South Africa to see if we can assist them in achieving the same goals.
There is also a group of black lawyers in South Africa who are creating a parallel bar association to support black lawyers and they want us to be a part of that. We are very excited about this initiative.
Is the opening of the office in Johannesburg part of an overall expansion programme or is it the only new location planned at the moment?
We are always looking at different markets – wherever our clients have needs we try to set a footprint so we can assist them seamlessly. We want to serve our clients locally and meet the clients where they are, with the capacity to assist them in everything and everywhere. I think that we have done that very well and continue to do so. But opening a new office involves careful thought and research regarding not only new hires, but also regarding the new market’s practice characteristics, rates, clients expectations, and local idiosyncrasies. The firm’s expansion programme aim is to have a local footprint in a global world.
What would you say your biggest challenges are as a firm?
The biggest challenges come from technology and client demands. Clients demand more for less, and the only way to achieve that is through technology and making processes simpler. Today there are programmes for everything from time-keeping to brief-writing. However, law is still a very conservative profession and sometimes it can be challenging to have everyone adapt to new things.
Is there anything else about Diaz Reus that you think sets you apart?
I think we are unique in many ways. All our cases have an international component: either the client is from outside the US, or the cause of action arises in another country, or the applicable law is foreign. Our cases involve complex issues of law and are intellectually challenging. They are all different and that makes it fun. We are a big law firm in terms of size and in terms of the type of cases and deals that we handle for our clients, but we do not sacrifice our family-oriented way of doing things. That reflects on the type of work we do and the attention that we devote to our clients and their legal matters. We are not a volume law firm and are lucky to be able to choose what cases we like. The culture of the firm is to make everyone feel part of the team – part of the Diaz Reus family.
Helen Donegan: Can you provide a brief overview of your tax practice group?
Dean Shulman: We have developed one of the finest transactional tax practices across all our US offices, as well as in London and Munich. As of the end of September 2019 we have 132 lawyers in the tax practice firmwide, whereas in 2014 we had about 60 tax lawyers. Our primary focus is on collaborating with our mergers and acquisitions, restructuring, investment funds, capital markets, and real estate practices to provide best-in-class service to our broad client base.
HD: Congratulations on your team’s success in the international tax rankings over the past couple of years. What would you attribute your team’s rise in the rankings to?
DS: Our rise in the rankings is the by-product of continuing to add top-of-the market tax talent into our already robust tax practice. We have augmented our historically dominating private equity M&A business with a strategic M&A business to create an unparalleled position in global M&A. Some firms have a major presence in one or the other, but to be so strong in each is rare. Add to that our restructuring and investment funds practices and it is a powerful combination and very synergistic. Having a tax group that can handle such a broad and unmatched range of transactional matters has been a critical component to the success and growth of our transactional practices. By adding star tax lawyers across all our offices, and more than doubling the size of the tax practice over the past five years, we have positioned ourselves as leaders in the transactional tax world.
HD: The Legal 500 research does consider the bench strength of law firm teams. Other than the obvious strengthening, what has been the impetus behind your lateral hires?
DS: We have consciously worked to hire fantastic tax lawyers in all of our offices at all experience levels, and believe we have been successful in doing so. In large part, this has been necessary to match the extraordinary growth the firm’s transactional practices have seen across offices.
HD: What do you think is the best way of attracting talent to your team?
DS: I think it’s convincing them that they will work in a collegial environment, with incredibly smart people on the most interesting transactions in the marketplace. Usually when lateral candidates meet our team it sells itself. The level of candidate really isn’t what we focus on – we want really smart people who work collaboratively within our group and with their colleagues across the firm in all offices. I think the proof that it has worked is we have successfully and regularly hired fantastic tax lawyers, both at the entry level as well as from our competitors, and have lost very few of our tax lawyers to competitor firms. And candidly, we aren’t huge fans of hiring partners through head-hunters. We like to hire lawyers that we know well from working on transactions.
HD: Your website says Kirkland are committed to ‘fostering an environment in which [lateral hires] are seamlessly integrated’ into the firm’s culture. How is this achieved?
DS: Frankly, we have a lot of experience integrating laterals and I think the culture of the firm is that existing lawyers realise that hiring strong laterals has been a real contributing factor to the continuing growth and success of the firm as a whole. I joined the firm about five years ago after many years at another large law firm and felt completely integrated into Kirkland within a couple of weeks of joining. I saw immediately the culture of collaboration (among home-grown and lateral attorneys), and how it was and still continues to be a secret sauce to the firm’s success. It leads to being open-minded in considering new approaches to things like business development, training, and staffing. For example, I have found at Kirkland that almost all new business efforts involve a tax lawyer – which is not necessarily the case at other firms. I have personally seen that inclusive approach to business development lead to significant new clients and business opportunities. Said differently, adding the best practices of other fine firms to existing Kirkland best practices has been a pretty potent force.
HD: How well does the tax practice group represent the firm’s overall commitment to diversity and inclusion?
DS: If you look at our lateral hires in the last few years in the tax group you can see that we take diversity seriously. We work really hard in our group to meet the challenges of – and the firm’s commitment to – diversity. Diversity and inclusiveness is important to the firm leadership, both because it is the right thing to do and also because our clients rightfully expect it. The opportunity to harness different viewpoints is always a plus in my experience, especially in an area as complicated as tax law. In the last 12 months we’ve hired terrific diverse tax lawyers in several of our offices. Kirkland continues to attract women and diverse attorneys to the firm through a combination of active on-campus recruiting, participation in diversity career fairs, and consideration of candidates from a broad base of law schools. We continually refine our initiatives to promote diverse hiring, including participating in diversity job fairs across the nation, promoting our 1L Diversity Scholars and 2L Diversity Fellowship programmes and ALLSA initiative, and expanding our mentoring programmes for women, racial/ethnic, and LGBT law students. Inside the firm, in 2018 Kirkland held 191 diversity and inclusion events, including 66 women’s leadership events, 64 LGBTQ+ events, and 61 Diversity Leadership Series and other initiative events.
HD: What do you think was your team’s greatest success in the past year? And why?
DS: There are many, but I would say it would be continuing to play a major role in the success of our transactional teams that have put us at the top of the league tables in number of transactions executed and dollar volume year after year, as well as handling the largest and most complex restructuring and investment fund matters. As an example, we are representing long-time client Bristol-Myers Squibb in the $90bn acquisition of Celgene, as well as continuing to represent many of the leading private equity firms in their fund raising and M&A activity. You don’t get into that leading position in so many areas without a world-class tax department with the breadth and expertise to handle any deal in the marketplace at the highest levels.
HD: Our Historical Data shows that, within Kirkland, your team has seen the most consistent rise in the rankings over the past couple of years. Do you undertake independent practice group activities to improve performance, or are all activities linked to efforts of the firm overall?
DS: One area in which we work to improve performance is by working very hard to train our younger tax lawyers through both formal and informal training and mentoring programmes. We have monthly tax lunches as well as other formal training programmes that provide substantive training in all areas of tax law. We take seriously the role of annual reviews so we can provide constructive feedback to our attorneys at all levels – and the firm overall takes the review process very seriously and we think it helps attorneys develop and take command of their careers. These activities and programmes are, in most cases, an integrated part of Kirkland’s leading attorney training programmes across the firm and all our offices.
HD: What do you think you do differently to your competitors?
DS: I think we try to think of ourselves as an integral part of our transactional practices in a way that other competitor firms may not. In other words, we are proud to be part of a world-class tax department but also feel our best and highest mission is to enhance the overall success of the firm by being an integral part of our wider transactional practices (M&A, investment funds, restructuring, capital markets, and real estate). Law firms succeed when lawyers work seamlessly together across practice areas to deliver best-in-class outcomes to clients, and that is what our tax practice does. We pay little attention to billing credit or the number of hours a lawyer bills. We care a lot more about an attorney’s ability to work collaboratively with colleagues, and to meet our clients’ needs whenever and wherever they arise.
HD: What would you say are the biggest changes or challenges on the horizon for corporate tax within the US, and how will this affect your team?
DS: We hope to see continued strength in our transactional practices because they are so diverse and international in scope. Tax reform has certainly created its complexities and challenges, not only in the cross-border tax world but also in the restructuring of troubled companies. But we have not seen a reduction in the need for our tax skill-set and, in fact, it has increased because of the significant and broad structural impact of the new law. As an example, in some cases, tax reform has made the efficient restructuring of over-leveraged companies more difficult, and our leading restructuring tax practice has become even more vital in making sure businesses can survive following a restructuring of their debt, whether in or out of bankruptcy.
Family offices have been through a period of evolution in recent years. What used to simply be a private office set up to deal with a wealthy family’s investments, usually fairly safe and traditional in nature and decided by one single family leader, is now more complex and much more exciting than ever before.
Over the last decade, Jersey has seen a significant increase in the number of family offices, not only establishing on-Island, but also migrating to Jersey from other jurisdictions. This is because families are seeing the numerous benefits of having a bespoke, personal and professional service at their beck and call, particularly given the 24/7, on-call and international lifestyles many wealthy individuals now lead.
A New Definition of ‘Family’
Jersey Finance’s 2018 report ‘Flourishing Futures: Making Succession a Success’, in partnership with Bedell Cristin (click this paragraph to view) highlighted that around US$30 trillion of wealth will change hands in the next 30 to 40 years.
The recipients of this wealth transfer are vital in shaping the way family offices operate, due to the considerably different dynamic of families compared to that of the previous generation. Families now are much more tech-savvy and expect to be able to access information whenever they need it, demonstrating a preference for communicating digitally, transacting online, and managing their finances via apps. Furthermore, new generation families are more international, with members living further apart from each other and they tend to feature more complex relationship arrangements such as same sex marriages, non-marital long-term relationships, pre-nuptial agreements and divorces.
Of course, with such a multifaceted dynamic, there is a higher chance of disagreements in where and how the family’s wealth should be invested and for what purpose. This is pertinent, given that the last year saw a continuation of family offices’ drive towards higher risk, more illiquid investments in their pursuit of yield, according to the Global Family Office Report 2018 (click here to view). As part of this, nearly half (46 percent) of the average family office portfolio is now allocated to alternative investments.
This is where the new, innovative family office comes into play; with professionals on hand to advise on a wealth management plan best suited to the whole family, with the future firmly in mind.
A Jurisdiction of Substance
High-net worth families understandably place a huge amount of importance on their jurisdiction of choice, with regulatory substance and cutting-edge professionalism coming top of their must-haves list.
In Jersey Finance’s ‘Jersey: A Clear Choice for Family Offices’ (2019) (click here to view), it is noted that there are four key aspects to a modern family office, based on demand and trends: wealth preservation, asset protection, philanthropy and privacy. Within these, technology and infrastructure, regulation and legal certainty play a vital supporting role in a successful family office arrangement.
Jersey offers a modern and sophisticated legal framework and a world-class offering of private wealth solutions, designed to suit the increasingly varied situations which families now face. These range from simple trusts and underlying company structures for UK families, through to high value and complex structures working with trusts, companies, limited partnerships and foundations for international families. In addition, the establishment of ‘virtual’ offices for ultra-high net worth families are also available, as are structures for corporates looking to support and reward staff.
Jersey has £400 billion in trusts which have been established by private individuals (Capital Economics, 2016), and an ever-increasing uptake of the Jersey Foundation. The Jersey Foundation has become a popular choice, created for charitable or non-charitable purposes, or a mixture of both. A foundation has a number of benefits. It is flexible and infinite in duration, if necessary. Foundations are clearly and unambiguously registered with the Jersey Financial Services Commission. Their council of members structures are flexible in terms of composition, and Foundations provide a ‘guardian’ safeguard, making certain that the council of members maintain a clear charitable focus. Since their launch in 2009, 384 Jersey Foundations have been formed (as at August 2019) and it is expected that with the upward popularity of philanthropy these will see further interest.
Jersey’s trust and private wealth offering is incredibly substantial, with the jurisdiction’s business community holding 1,282 members of the worldwide membership for The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP) – one of the largest branches globally – and is gradually becoming one of the most popular destinations for seeking private wealth expertise, from across the globe.
Supporting the finance and legal sector as a whole is Jersey’s robust regulatory framework and flexible yet solid legal system, which many clients find reassuring when deciding where to manage their wealth. As one of the best regulated international finance centres (IFCs), Jersey has been acknowledged by independent assessments from some of the world’s leading bodies, including the World Bank and IMF, as well as scoring top marks from the OECD on tax transparency. The jurisdiction was also subject to a Mutual Evaluation by MONEYVAL in 2016 and found to be ‘compliant’ or ‘largely compliant’, with 48 out of 49 of the FATF recommendations, the highest score amongst all states assessed.
No Longer One-Size-Fits All
Family offices come in all shapes and sizes, with varying designs and intentions, which is what has brought them back into popularity for high-net worth individuals.
Jersey Finance’s publication ‘‘The Clear Choice for Family Offices’. ’ (click here to view) highlights both the diversity of family offices currently present on the Island, as well as the compelling reasons why they have chosen to base their offices in Jersey. For instance, when discussing the legal certainty of basing a family office in Jersey, one Principal said:
“We did not choose Jersey as a jurisdiction for tax reasons. Instead, we wanted reassurance that we would be able to preserve the foundation’s wealth and make sure the assets are protected.”
Another noted that the IFCs strong connectivity credentials helped them decide Jersey was the right jurisdiction for them: “Jersey feels like an extension of London – I can leave Jersey and fly to London and be at the London family office within 2 ½ hours. The family members also visit often and can fly commercially or fly over in their private plane.”
Family offices, though differing in nature, all tend to have one or two things in common. One is that, while they may have several family offices in multiple jurisdictions, they see Jersey as the main hub for their family’s wealth as well as the additional concierge services which manage travel, schooling and other family-based administration. Another common thread is that of philanthropic investment, which is often a key consideration for modern ultra-high net worth families. This is usually included in the overall work of a family office based in Jersey, and some family offices specifically choose to base their philanthropic arm in the jurisdiction due to its clear expertise and investment in this area.
According to the Global Family Office Report 2018, nearly two-thirds of next generation heirs are expected to take over within the next 10 to 15 years, and the future of how wealth is managed is becoming increasingly intertwined with purpose. The report found that more than 1/3 of family offices already invest in impact investing, and 39% expect that the next generation will increase their allocations to socially responsible or environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing in future.
With such trust in Jersey’s talent pool and professionalism as an IFC, wealthy families frequently find themselves coming to see Jersey as a safe, secure and private jurisdiction to set up a home in too. One example, the patriarch of a first generation ultra-high net worth family, moved to Jersey with his family over 10 years ago. They chose Jersey due to lifestyle, the high-quality education options available and the ease of travelling to and from the UK, and then set up a private company in Jersey, which subsequently became regulated.
It seems that with many of the next generation of investors gradually taking up management or executive roles within the family office structure, the new trends for philanthropic and alternative investments must be considered key priorities within the private wealth community. Legal professionals, in particular, need to ensure they are ahead of the rapidly developing impact investment space as well as being aware of the complex dynamic which wealthy families now present.
It may be evolving faster than ever before, but family offices are probably going through their most challenging and exciting time yet and jurisdictions like Jersey are ready and armed with specialist knowledge to help families look to the future with confidence.
With a career in financial services spanning four decades, Joe has a strong commitment to the future success of the industry in Jersey.
Joe commenced his professional life in the banking sector, rising to the position of CEO of Jersey and the Isle of Man for a major bank, which included responsibilities for trusts and investments. In recent years, he expanded his focus as Director of Financial Services within the Government of Jersey, where he worked closely with industry and regulator to ensure the Island’s position as a leading international finance centre (IFC). Before joining Jersey Finance in February 2019, Joe was working to establish high-reputation regulatory frameworks and business models for IFCs in the Middle East and Africa.
The Isle of Man is widely considered to be a well-regulated jurisdiction with a robust regulatory framework overseen by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). Businesses across a variety of fields are licensed, regulated, and overseen to undertake business by the FSA or alternatively are, since the introduction and implementation of the Designated Businesses (Registration and Oversight) Act 2015, regulated by the FSA in relation to compliance with the Island’s anti-money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) legislation.
Businesses caught by the expanded level of regulation are not just financial businesses but a whole array of non-financial businesses and professions, such as lawyers and accountants as well as estate agents and tax advisors, to name just a few. With tighter regulation there are, however, more chances of breaches occurring within businesses. There also appears to be an ever-increasing number of regulatory offences hitting the statute books, many of which remain within the criminal courts and have custodial penalties. It is not only companies and businesses, however, that are at risk, directors and officers can be held personally liable for breaches in addition to the company or other legal structure.
The FSA message is that it is not sitting waiting to catch businesses out and its overall intention is to achieve compliance and foster good working relationships. However, if a breach occurs within your business you need to act in a careful and considered manner.
The FSA has publicly committed to working alongside regulated entities to ensure compliance and, where regulated entities are open and transparent with the regulator, they will not necessarily use the heavy powers of enforcement available to them. But, with international pressures from the Financial Action Task Force (‘FATF’) and MONEYVAL and the UK and Europe more generally, with regard to tighter regulation, will Isle of Man regulators really put their money where their mouths are? In January 2017, MONEYVAL published its initial mutual evaluation report on the Isle of Man which commented on the effectiveness of island-wide AML and CFT measures as well as the Isle of Man’s compliance with the recommendations by FATF. While the island was found to have robust legislation in place, there was some criticism made with regard to the enforcement of the same. Therefore, across industry, there was a concern the FSA may seek to take more regulatory action, simply to increase the enforcement numbers to satisfy international pressures. A number of amendments to the regulatory framework have also been implemented over the course of the last two years, to address other concerns and criticisms from MONEYVAL.
As anticipated, since the 2017 MONEYVAL report, there has been an increase in regulatory prosecutions coming before the court. Thus far, however, the success rate has been poor and the FSA was heavily criticised in its approach in the recent case of HMAG v MBC Limited and others. The prosecution withdrew the case against the four defendants in that case, following an application for a stay on the grounds of an abuse of process, arising from the unfairness of the FSA’s investigation into the company’s alleged breaches of the AML and CFT Code. The court similarly criticised the manner in which the FSA conducted itself in its investigation which was, it was said by the Deemster (Judge), to be wholly prejudicial to the company. Prior to any judgment being issued, the prosecutor applied to withdraw the case, although a significant costs application was made by the defendants.
More recently, the FSA initiated a prosecution against a company director for failure to report suspicions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2008 – HMAG v Monk. The Deputy High Bailiff (Summary Court Judge) dismissed the case at the committal stage, on the basis of there being insufficient evidence to support a case. The prosecution was heavily criticised for the lack of evidence of money laundering, or any criminal offence, in fact, having been committed. The dismissal has recently been upheld on appeal.
Therefore, if there was any indication of a run on prosecutions to satisfy international bodies, the lack of success and public criticism that has followed, may well have poured cold water on the same and the FSA appears to have reverted to its cooperative compliance approach.
That said, there has been an increase in the number of restraint orders being sought under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2008, many of which are on an international cooperation basis. The process for obtaining such orders is carried out through the criminal courts and the Attorney General’s Chambers has now set up a separate arm of its prosecutions department to focus on international cooperation and mutual legal assistance requests and recover assets. There is no requirement for there to be a predicate criminal offence in the Isle of Man in order to obtain such an order. However, once again the court has heavily criticised the approach taken in these applications and in particular the lack of disclosure and transparency from the prosecutions department to the respondent. One big problem in the Isle of Man is the lack of legal funding available to challenge proceedings brought under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2008. The court, pursuant to the legislation, has a significant restriction on its powers to allow the restrained assets to be used to fund legal advice and representation in relation to the restraint order proceedings. Unlike in England and Wales, legal aid funding is not available for such proceedings in the Isle of Man, and this begs the question as to whether the Isle of Man is compliant with its international and local human rights obligations.
In September 2019, the FSA issued its new Enforcement Decision-Making Process and Settlement Procedure.
This, for the first time, documents the FSA’s approach to enforcement and how regulated entities are expected to work alongside the FSA in cases of breach. It is positive to note that this procedure continues to follow the same theme of cooperation and working alongside regulated businesses to achieve compliance. The key message from the FSA is that it is committed to further develop its culture of constructive, open, and transparent engagement with industry and other key stakeholders. There have been no known deferred prosecution agreements entered into in the Isle of Man as yet, but this step appears to be a move forward in relation to such approach, where of course the same would be appropriate. Additionally, legislation was introduced this year in order to introduce civil penalties to the enforcement powers of the FSA and there is further legislative change in progress to further widen the FSA’s enforcement powers.
Therefore, while regulation is being tightened and there appears to have been an initial flurry of activity, perhaps to satisfy external international bodies, the waters now appear to be calming and moving back toward mutual cooperation and assistance between regulated entities and the FSA, which can only be described as a positive move. There must be mutual confidence and respect between industry and the regulator to achieve good compliance across the board. Industry must have the ability to approach the regulator for assistance and report breaches, without fear of an iron fist. The recent steps taken by the FSA, if followed through in practice, should assist in such approach.
The Caribbean legal market is unlike most others in the world. The lucrative offshore jurisdiction remains a draw for international companies and foreign individuals looking to benefit from the region’s business-friendly regulations, and local markets are increasingly dedicated to moving away from the region’s reputation for secrecy following the increased scrutiny of the offshore world. This is most notably reflected in the efforts by law firms to expand their regulatory practices in line with global developments and ensure their clients are compliant with the substantial increase in legislation and regulation, most notably the new economic substance rules.
The Caribbean guide was introduced into The Legal 500 coverage in 2009 and, following substantial expansion across the 2018 and 2019 editions, the guide now covers the Bahamas, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands (BVI), and the Cayman Islands. While the jurisdiction is often closely linked with the UK offshore market (for obvious reasons), our coverage evaluates local firms alongside global offshore practices to provide a comprehensive evaluation of what the whole market has to offer. This article will cover each jurisdiction independently, looking at each legal market and the firms operating within them.
The Bahamas
The newest jurisdiction to be added to The Legal 500’s Caribbean guide with rankings established in the 2019 edition, the Bahamas attracts substantial international investment and has forged notable relationships with international financial institutions and investment funds. The jurisdiction also benefits from its status as a tax-neutral jurisdiction and position as the second highest per capita GDP in the English-speaking Caribbean.
Made up of over 700 islands, the tourism sector is the main contributor to the country’s success, accounting for roughly 60% of the national GDP. The impact of Hurricane Dorian continues to be felt, but hopes are high that tourism will encourage the recovery of Grand Bahama and the Abaco Islands, the two regions most affected by the natural disaster.
Nassau is the main legal centre in the jurisdiction, with firms also having outposts in Freeport on Grand Bahama and Lyford Cay on the west point of New Providence Island. The inaugural ranking, which reflects the overview of the market, is comprised of solely local firms with four full-service outfits currently holding the tier one position. Graham Thompson, Higgs & Johnson, Lennox Patton, and McKinney, Bancroft & Hughes make up the top tier with their Bahamas offices acting as a main base for the firms; several of the firms also have a wider Caribbean presence with Grant Thompson having an office in Turks & Caicos, Higgs & Johnson establishing itself in the Cayman Islands, and Lennox Patton opening a BVI office.
Bermuda
Bermuda stands out as a leading centre in the Caribbean for insurance work, with more insurance-linked fund managers than any other jurisdiction. The country has also become a key region for fintech companies with many funds investing in insurtech and blockchain technologies; funds are also expected to become increasingly active in the cannabis space following a recent decision to lift a regulatory ban on marijuana investment funds.
The EU’s unexpected decision to place Bermuda on the blacklist of global tax havens in March 2019 initially impacted the country’s reputation, however, further potential for stricter controls ultimately never fully materialised as the EU’s decision was reversed two months later. The global move towards transparency, stemming from incidents such as 2017’s Paradise Papers, has also led to regulatory changes including the new economic substance legislation implemented in early 2019. The act was introduced following the EU Council’s Code of Conduct business taxation resolution and requires businesses in certain industries to demonstrate adequate economic substance in Bermuda.
For the region’s international offshore firms, Appleby and Conyers have long been established in the market and have consistently received the most rankings in The Legal 500’s coverage, both in terms of overall number of rankings and the highest number of tier 1 rankings across practice areas. However, some suspect this consistent success (and potential complacency) has led to opportunities for other firms to enter the market and shake up the status quo. Walkers and, more recently, Carey Olsen have both set up bases in Hamilton in recent years (the latter making substantial hires in the last 12 months), making their mark in a traditionally stable offshore market.
At a local level, MJM, Wakefield Quin, and Cox Hallett Wilkinson are all in the mix, competing alongside the offshore firms for the highest number of overall Bermuda rankings. However, generational change and succession issues are increasingly impacting Bermudian firms including MJM, Cox Hallett Wilkinson, and ASW Law, although current outlooks seem positive.
British Virgin Islands The BVI is a key location for registering companies offshore, which in turn benefit from the jurisdiction’s tax benefits, user-friendly legal framework, and facilitative market for cross-border transactions. While the favourable tax and business approach to companies has not always played to the BVI’s favour (the majority of the companies exposed in the Panama Papers were registered in the BVI), the country is pushing away from its ‘secrecy jurisdiction’ label and demonstrating its commitment to transparency and compliance. Most recently, it has adopted the Economic Substance Act 2018, which was followed by a supplementary draft Economic Substance Code, published by the BVI International Tax Authority.
The jurisdiction also continues to weather the storm of Hurricane Irma (a topic covered in the April 2019 edition of fivehundred) with the tourism sector steadily recovering and rebuilding efforts fully underway. Although the impact of the hurricane on the legal market may have exacerbated the island’s ability to retain talent (BVI firms are increasingly having to turn to London for recruitment rounds), the legal market has also seen successes despite the disaster, with Collas Crill continuing to make notable investments into the islands following its merger with local firm Farara Kerins in 2017.
In the wider offshore market, Harneys, Walkers BVI, Conyers, Appleby, Ogier, and Maples Group all have a notable presence in the jurisdiction, with Harneys regularly leading the pack for overall firm rankings and tier 1 positions. On the local side, O’Neal Webster is the strongest domestic firm across the board, with a ranking in every practice area covered in our research. Other local firms of note include Price Demers & Co and Campbells.
The Cayman Islands
Arguably one of the most stable markets in the Caribbean, the Cayman Islands is a leading jurisdiction for investment funds with nearly 11,000 funds registered with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority, the main regulator for the jurisdiction’s financial services industry. Beyond that, the territory is increasingly prominent for digital technology and cryptocurrency work; the Cayman Islands Investment Group recently announced its plans for a cryptocurrency exchange. Outside of the financial services world, Cayman benefits from its position as a holiday destination, with the tourism sector being the other key pillar of its economy. The real estate market is also increasingly strong, with tourism driving further construction and developments.
Much like the other regions covered in The Legal 500, Cayman has been subject to the impact of the new economic substance laws, which became effective on 1 January 2019 and ensures the territory’s commitment to the EU and its position as a member of the Inclusive Framework on BEPS (OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Sharing initiatives). In the context of The Legal 500 rankings, at an international level, Maples Group and Walkers remain dominant across the region with Appleby rounding out the top three in third place for the number of tier 1 rankings over the last five years; the three firms have been consistently evenly split for the number of rankings overall.
Traditionally, Campbells has the strongest local offering, while Stuarts Walker Hersant Humphries and Solomon Harris (now Bedell Cristin following its merger in mid-2019) follow closely behind. However, for real estate work, local firms Ritch & Connolly and Bodden & Bodden regularly stand out beating out the majority of local and international firms alike in the real estate rankings.
Although sharing elements of a common history, Jersey and Guernsey are two distinct jurisdictions, separated by 28km of water, with different legal systems and bar admissions. Due to their separate legal history – with a strong infusion of historic Norman law creating a few unique points compared to the law of England and Wales – the mechanism for qualifying as a Jersey or Guernsey advocate requires specific study, unlike admission in the Cayman Islands.
Notably, in litigation, there is no method for bringing in English counsel such as in the reasonably permissive BVI or even the more restrictive Isle of Man, which has a system of temporary advocates’ licences. The Bailiwick of Guernsey also includes the smaller partially self-governing islands of Alderney and Sark, the former an online gambling hub and the latter, while small, having some degree of economic activity.
Despite a friendly inter-island rivalry, the islands cooperate on several levels, with many businesses crossing both jurisdictions. Law firms are no exception, with the past ten years seeing a period of market consolidation that has created both inter-island and transatlantic offshore firms.
Many familiar names are hybrids of cross-island firms. Carey Olsen, the merger of Carey Langlois from Guernsey and Olsens from Jersey in 2003, fused a pair of firms with several tier one rankings. This created the first real pan-Channel Islands firm. Described in 2009 as having a strategy to ‘dominate the Channel Islands’ legal market, but not to open offices in other offshore centres’, it has now changed tack thanks to offices opened on the other side of the Atlantic, and the fact it is competing with, rather than being in a best friends alliance with, Maples and Calder.
The 2009 guide also saw Mourant du Feu & Jeune from Jersey combine with Ozannes in Guernsey, although Ozannes had a creditable Jersey practice in 2009 prior to the merger. Mourant Ozannes, too, now has a presence in the BVI and Cayman. Ogier, originally a Jersey firm which expanded into Guernsey, also now has offerings in the Caribbean and Luxembourg. These three firms dominate the market, with eight, seven, and six top-tier rankings in the 2020 guide in Jersey respectively. In Guernsey, Carey Olsen comes out on top with eight top-tier rankings, Mourant Ozannes has five, while Ogier is in tier two across the board, except in dispute resolution which has just one tier of rankings.
The leading lawyer rankings in Jersey, however, is more favourable to Ogier which, with 17 rankings, comes second only to Carey Olsen with 20, and ahead of Mourant which has 13. Ten years ago, Ogier led the way with nine leading individuals to Carey Olsen’s seven; this was prior to The Legal 500’s introduction of individual rankings for newer partners and non-partners. Mourant, however, is currently in second place with 18 rankings to Carey Olsen’s 24. Another merger of note created Collas Crill from Collas Day and Crill Canavan (Collas Crill has a Caribbean presence, having merged with CARD in the Cayman Islands in 2015 and Farara Kerins in the BVI in 2017). Another example of the reverse of the transatlantic merger phenomenon occurred when Bedell Cristin merged with Cayman firm Solomon Harris over 2018-19. However, Caribbean firms have been coming in the other direction, too, with Walkers – which merged with Crills in 2006 (the same year as Appleby merged with Bailhache Labesse) – absorbing AO Hall in 2016.
The above paints the picture of a healthy market, with more firms vying for position than in other offshore jurisdictions, such as the Isle of Man or Gibraltar, where the duopoly of Appleby and Cains in the former, and Hassans in the latter, are clearly the dominant forces in each market. In Guernsey, Babbé has historically been the island’s independent standard-bearer, although, unlike in past years, its only top-tier practice is its dispute resolution.
The big difference between Jersey and Guernsey is what can be found away from the big name offshore firms. Jersey has a much stronger range of independent one-island outfits. Many of these firms could be characterised as specialised boutiques, but many offer a strong service in some or all practice areas and good relations with the smaller cadre of independent Guernsey firms for inter-island work.
Baker & Partners in Jersey is the most prominent of these in The Legal 500 rankings thanks to its position as a top-tier litigation boutique, however, a number of other firms, such as Ward Yates and Dickinson Gleeson, have respectable offerings including dispute resolution and corporate/finance work. Indeed, with the largest population of the Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories, this may not be a surprise. Perhaps the only other example of a smaller, independent firm along these lines in Guernsey is Ferbrache & Farrell, formed by mostly ex-Mourant Ozannes lawyers back in 2016.
Suffice to say, whatever your needs, both islands have a wealth of well-connected global offshore and independent firms to choose from.
