Laying the foundations for growth in Mauritius

Trees in mauritius

Please give us an overview of the current legal market in Mauritius and how any recent developments have impacted your practice?

There are three recent developments that will impact the Mauritian offshore commercial market.

First, the introduction of GDPR.

Second, the termination of the 2011 joint venture between the London Court of International Arbitration and the government of Mauritius to set up the LCIA-MIAC arbitration centre for international arbitration. As of 28 July 2018, the Mauritius International Arbitration Centre (MIAC) will operate as an independent arbitration centre with rules built on the UNCITRAL model. It is built on a three-tier system, namely the government of Mauritius, an advisory board headed by Professor Emmanuel Gaillard and a secretariat which will be advised by the advisory board. The MIAC will also derive support from the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which has an established presence in Mauritius. The withdrawal of such a prestigious institution as the LCIA from the Mauritian jurisdiction will attract mixed views on the reasonableness of the Mauritian government’s ambition to establish Mauritius as a hub for international arbitration within the African region given the volatile nature of the global economy and the ferocious competition within the global village. The challenge for Mauritius will be to prove that it has the dynamics and stamina to weather the challenge ahead of it.

Third, recent announcements regarding the National Budget 2018/19 will no doubt have an impact on the corporate and dispute resolution aspects of offshore commercial practices. The changes will mean the judiciary is strengthened so that cases heard by the Supreme Court will be streamlined. A fiscal regime is being specifically tailored for banking and non-banking (i.e. offshore) institutions. For offshore practices, the taxation regime will be reviewed so as to bring it in line with prevailing international best practices. The Financial Services Commission (FSC), the regulator of offshore global business activities, will have extended powers so it may regulate custodian services, global shared services and compliance services and remove all restrictions applicable to dealings in Mauritius. Furthermore, the FSC will issue a single harmonised global business licence to be known as a ‘global business licence’ and the category 2 global business licence will be abolished by 2021, but there will be grandfathering provisions for companies incorporated before 16 October 2017. Also, a new framework will be developed to supervise management companies (i.e. companies licensed by the FSC to provide fiduciary services to global business companies).

Finally, in order to promote the growth of the FinTech sector, a National Regulatory Sandbox License Committee will be set up. In this regard, the FSC, as regulator, will be called upon to create new licensable activities, namely a custodian of digital assets licence and a digital asset marketplace licence. Through these licences, the government seeks to establish a regulated environment for the safe custody of digital assets by investors and enable the exchange of digital assets. In the same breath, the FSC will put in place guidelines on investment in cryptocurrency as a digital asset. It will ensure as well that applicants for FinTech activities have appropriate cyber-security and cyber-resilience policies and capacities.

 

What significant trends exist in the M&A market presently? Are you seeing these just domestically or internationally as well? The Mauritian market closely follows international trends in order to retain its competitive edge and while the rapid development of FinTech and blockchain globally has not yet affected the market, it is definitely being tracked by the industry so that we are ready to get started when needed. The Appleby Mauritius and Cayman offices were involved in the setting up of the revolutionary digital identity token sale by SelfKey, which is a transformative blockchain-based digital identity solution.

 

What are the three biggest challenges to practising M&A in Mauritius at the moment? The challenge is to remain competitive and be up to date with global trends. The market is highly dynamic and our laws need constant monitoring to ensure that in the interests of our economy and our ambition to be an international financial hub for the African region, we are in a position to offer the right standard of services to the international business community. Achieving a balance between the need to have a solid legal system amid the non-stop threat of money laundering and a certain flexibility to accommodate novelty is a tough challenge.

 

What are your predictions for M&A in Mauritius over the next five years? If adopted as outlined here, the measures of the National Budget 2018-2019 will lay the foundations for the next stage of Mauritius’ growth into a solid international financial centre with an increased amount of activity on its M&A landscape and a solid legal structure to support this growth and combat the threat of money laundering.

A maturing Myanmar

Please give us an overview of the current legal market in Myanmar and how any recent developments have impacted your practice?

The legal market has been developing rapidly since Myanmar opened to foreign investment in 2011. A number of international firms headquartered in both common and civil law jurisdictions, such as Japan, England and Singapore, have opened local offices in the past few years, bringing diverse, international legal expertise to Myanmar.

Legal training in Myanmar has traditionally favoured litigators over corporate lawyers (the training for lawyers focuses on handling litigation matters in court), which has limited the development of local corporate law practitioners. However, with the greater training opportunities available at international firms, Myanmar is expected to steadily develop its local legal talent.

There have been a number of recent developments that have impacted our practice in Myanmar, which relate to the rapid pace at which Myanmar has been updating its laws relating to M&A since opening to foreign investment. In particular, Myanmar implemented a significant reform of its company law on 1 August 2018 with the entry to force of the Myanmar Companies Law (MCL). This law replaced the 1914 Myanmar Companies Act (MCA), which had remained largely unchanged for over a century.

The MCL modernises the MCA (for example, improving companies’ ability to manage their capital structure), and provides foreign investors with greater options to efficiently structure and manage their investments. The MCL is also expected to improve corporate governance and transparency in Myanmar by imposing stricter duties on directors and officers, and through the implementation by the companies registrar (DICA) of a computerised companies’ registry. This system will improve corporate filings and compliance, and any person may inspect DICA’s registers and records on payment of the prescribed fees set out in Notification No. 57/2018, issued by DICA on 9 July 2018.

The MCL also liberalises some important restrictions on foreign investment. In particular, companies in Myanmar are classified as ‘Myanmar companies’ or ‘foreign companies’. This distinction is important as there are a number of legal and practical restrictions to foreign companies doing business in Myanmar. However, while a Myanmar company was defined under the MCA as a company with no foreign shareholding, under the MCL, up to thirty-five per cent foreign shareholding is permitted in such companies. This is expected to increase foreign participation in activities which were previously closed to foreign investors.

 

What significant trends exist in the M&A market presently? Are you seeing these just domestically or internationally as well?

Some leading drivers of Myanmar’s M&A market are the nation’s infrastructure deficit, the opportunities for investors to access the country’s large consumer base, and the opportunities presented by the gradual opening of the economy. While not unique to Myanmar, these factors are particularly pronounced in Myanmar given its decades-long isolation.

Myanmar has a number of infrastructure challenges. Around two-thirds of the population does not have access to the national electricity grid, and the state counsellor has specifically identified power and transportation as key sectors for development.

Pending development of Myanmar’s infrastructure, special economic zones, such as the Thilawa SEZ, have become an important base for foreign investment. Thilawa SEZ, located near Yangon, currently offers significantly better infrastructure access than other potential investment sites in Myanmar, including reliable electricity supply, telecommunications, water and sewage, and proximity to a major port.

MHM Yangon has been heavily involved in the development of Thilawa SEZ, and we continue to advise the Thilawa SEZ Management Committee on legal matters relating to licensing and approvals. We are also acting for Kamigumi Co Ltd in a port concession project for the construction of a multi-purpose terminal at Thilawa port.

Myanmar’s large consumer market of over 50 million people provides significant investment opportunities for foreign investors in a wide range of sectors. In addition, according to its 2014 census, around 55 per cent of its population is below the age of 30, indicating strong, long-term growth prospects for the market.

As part of the gradual liberalisation of Myanmar’s economy, on 9 May 2018, the Ministry of Commerce issued Notification No. 25/2018 setting out the criteria for foreign and local companies and foreign-local joint ventures to engage in retail or wholesale distribution in Myanmar. This clarifies the rights of foreign businesses to invest in, and liberalises restrictions on, trading activities in Myanmar, and we expect this to drive foreign investment in the trading sector, as companies seek to reach Myanmar’s growing middle class population of consumers.

 

What are the three biggest challenges to practising M&A in Myanmar at the moment?

Due diligence can be particularly challenging in Myanmar, reflecting the poor record keeping and compliance of Myanmar companies, lack of familiarity with due diligence and sensitivity to disclosing company information. Prospective acquirers are advised to engage early with potential target companies to explain the purpose and nature of due diligence procedures and build the relationships required to ensure an appropriate quality of disclosure. As noted above, this may be improved with the implementation of DICA’s computerised companies’ registry.

As with many developing and emerging markets, there also continue to be challenges navigating government processes. Verifying the particular licensing and approval requirements for a project for example, can be difficult, as this can often be based on informal and unwritten practices of responsible ministries rather than published laws and regulations.

Finally, there have been delays implementing liberalising reforms in Myanmar, due in part to fear on the part of local businesses that they will be put out of business by more established foreign competitors. For example, the MCL reform process took over five years to complete. This has delayed the opening of Myanmar’s economy, causing frustration for foreign investors and likely depriving Myanmar of much needed foreign investment and job creation.

 

How does M&A fit into the firm as a whole? Is it easy to collaborate with other teams?

While MHM Yangon’s primary focus in Myanmar is advising on inbound investments and M&A transactions, we have also been involved in high-profile work in a range of other practice areas.

In terms of M&A, we have advised on some of the most prominent transactions in Myanmar, including Kirin’s acquisition of Fraser & Neave’s 55 per cent stake in Myanmar Brewery Ltd. In addition to our M&A matters, we are advising Myanmar Agro Exchange Public Limited on its forthcoming listing on the Yangon Stock Exchange, and have also been actively working to assist Myanmar to update its laws and regulations, and establish new legal infrastructure, such as the Yangon Stock Exchange, the first modern stock exchange in Myanmar.

Our office in Yangon comprises 11 lawyers and two paralegals, including a partner qualified in Myanmar (U Win Naing), senior Japanese lawyers on the ground in Myanmar (Takeshi Mukawa and Kana Manabe), and a leading English-qualified lawyer with over 40 years’ experience in the region (Tony Grundy). In addition to U Win Naing, we have a team of five highly qualified Myanmar lawyers, three of whom studied in Japan, and one of whom worked for the Union Attorney General’s Office of Myanmar.

 

What advice would you give to the next generation of M&A lawyers?

Lawyers in Myanmar should be particularly mindful of adhering to international standards of legal practice. Myanmar can be a challenging market in this respect because of the informality of the regulatory framework and business arrangements, and the developing nature of the legal market. However, Myanmar is taking significant steps to regularise economic activity, and in such an environment lawyers should deliver international-standard quality and values to their work.

Myanmar has implemented a number of initiatives to tackle corruption and bribery and misconduct more broadly. In particular, it has been reported that the Anti-Corruption Commission of Myanmar has been active recently, initiating a number of programs with the business community and government to reduce corruption, including promoting development of a code of conduct among business.

As noted above, the MCL reform will provide a significant boost to improve corporate transparency and accountability, and the Myanmar Investment Commission has been seeking to reduce the scope for Myanmar ministries to revise laws and regulations through non-transparent practices.

 

What are your predictions for M&A in Myanmar over the next five years?

The M&A market in Myanmar will develop rapidly in the coming years on the back of the significant reforms Myanmar has implemented since opening to foreign investment, in particular the MCL, and as Myanmar’s economy matures, it is likely there will be further liberalisation.

In particular, the insurance and banking sectors are expected to be liberalised later this year. Foreign participation in Myanmar’s banking sector will be particularly important in improving the ability of companies to expand their business.

The implementation of the MCL will enable foreign investors to invest in the Yangon Stock Exchange, providing a further avenue for investors to participate in Myanmar’s economy.

As ASEAN’s newest jurisdiction to open to foreign investment, and given its significant natural resource endowments, strategic location on the Indian Ocean between India, China and Thailand, and large consumer market, Myanmar is of significant interest to investors. Myanmar’s challenge
is to what extent and at what pace it can adapt its local practices and regulatory culture to sustain and increase that interest.

Russia’s tale of cautious optimism

Please give us an overview of the current legal market in Russia and how any recent developments have impacted your practice?

The legal market in Russia and, more specifically, the M&A practice area generally follow and are influenced by the relevant economic and political drivers. Political turmoil (including continued and worsening budgetary problems), geopolitical tensions, Ruble exchange rate instability and financial sector problems, and sanctions produce a chilling effect on the Russian investment market.

The M&A market has received some stimulus, however, from the recent improvement in industrial production between 2017 and 2018, comparative cheapness of assets, and deferred demand for transactions. Still, the biggest and most important transactions seem to be focused on non-Russian assets and businesses.

Increasingly fierce competition in the legal market induces main players to
act rather aggressively in terms of pricing, trading immediate gain for long term efforts to build or strengthen relations with clients and take a bigger market share.

 

What significant trends exist in the M&A market presently? Are you seeing these just domestically or internationally as well?

The most significant trend is the increasing pricing and quality competition in first-tier law firms operating in Russia, which now include at least several domestic firms that are quite competent in international M&A transactions. At the same time, transactions are becoming more complex and therefore require increased competence and skills from engaged legal teams. Also, in-house counsel in Russia (a lot of them with past ILF experience) have become more sophisticated and are handling many aspects of M&A and joint venture projects themselves. It is part of an international trend.

 

What are the three biggest challenges to practising M&A in Russia at the moment?

As mentioned, the high level of competition and clients’ rather low pricing expectations seem to be the biggest challenges in the market. Against this backdrop, a number of domestic firms seek to redistribute market share through lobbying for introduction of restrictions on ILFs’ activities in Russia.

From a purely legal standpoint, the main risks in the area of Russian M&A remain the same: unclear tendencies in the prevailing court practice and, more generally, a big question mark over the readiness of Russian courts to apply increasingly more complex and unfamiliar corporate and contract legislation.

 

How does your M&A practice fit into the firm as a whole? Is it easy to collaborate with other teams?

The new integrated corporate, finance and investments practice is one of the dominant practices at King & Spalding. Considerable efforts are invested in building inter-practice and inter-office cooperation, and it is always easy to assemble multi-discipline teams for important projects, so that clients can
receive high-quality, yet price-efficient services. This is very much a ‘one-firm’ concept in action.

 

What advice would you give to the next generation of M&A lawyers?

First and foremost, think business and be a business partner to your clients. Second, do not put yourself in a silo, always try to master new areas of expertise. And finally, new technology can work wonders, but there is no replacement for human strategic thinking, so exercise your mind and think big.

 

What are your predictions for M&A in Russia over the next five years?

There is a lot of liquidity held by major Russian banks and corporates, and any increase in economic and legal predictability is going to be an incentive to invest some of that liquidity. The key, of course, is availability of attractive investment projects with a predictable rate of return, but a supportive legal environment plays an important role as well. Very cautious optimism is in order. It should be mentioned that 2017/18 witnessed increased governmental supervision over acquisitions by foreign parties of stakes in Russian companies in all sectors.

Pro bono in Singapore: imbuing lawyers with a sense of public service

An increasingly vibrant culture of pro bono advice may not be the first thing that springs to mind when you think about Singapore’s legal services market. Nevertheless, during my recent trip to the Little Red Dot, many lawyers were keen to highlight their pro bono credentials and the importance such work has to their respective law firms.

Allen & Gledhill is one such example. The firm formalised its pro bono programme on 1 January 2008 to provide a structured and organised framework for its lawyers to undertake pro bono work. Prior to that date, A&G lawyers engaged in pro bono work on an ad hoc basis. Chan Hian Young has led the programme since its launch and, despite being remunerated as a partner, undertakes only pro bono matters.

‘My role is both legal and administrative – apart from advising and assisting charities, I also run a programme for volunteers,’ he says. ‘I am the only full-time lawyer helming the pro bono programme but I have a large team of enthusiastic volunteers, partners and associates alike. About 200 lawyers have volunteered under the pro bono programme.’

The focus of the programme is advising and assisting charities and institutions of a public character (IPCs), which, Hian Young explains, are essentially ‘gold-label local charities’ that are entitled to issue tax-exemption receipts to donors.

‘We think we can assist a lot more people by helping “people who help people”’

‘We selected charities and IPCs to be the focus of our programme because we noticed that while there were many pro bono schemes that are available to needy individuals, there were not any that charities and IPCs could turn to for advice and assistance’.

‘Advising charities and IPCs is an area where there is a need and in which the firm has the expertise to meet the need. We think we can assist a lot more people by helping “people who help people”.

‘In the past ten years I have helped set up and advised many charities and IPCs. When I see them in the news doing good work, I feel a sense of satisfaction that I have done my bit to make the world a better place. That feeling is unbeatable.’

A&G typically assists between 40 and 50 charities each year for work ranging from incorporation and registration as a charity, advice on wide-ranging issues like governance and fund-raising, and legal documents for projects undertaken by the charities.

In addition, the firm has committed to acting in around 50 criminal cases per year under the Law Society of Singapore’s Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS). All this work quickly adds up. Last year, the firm clocked up approximately 4,300 pro bono work hours valued at about S$2.4m (US$1.9m).

‘The firm believes that we should give back to society,’ Hian Young says. ‘Our clients and our employees also expect us to give back to society. Many of them ask about our pro bono programme and it is an important factor in the lawyer-client relationship and the employer-employee relationship.’

A&G is not the only Singapore firm with a comprehensive pro bono initiative. WongPartnership’s executive committee and managing partner (Ng Wai King) regularly meet to decide on the firm’s approach to the types of charitable work it should be involved in. Partners or associates who have areas of interest close to their hearts may also perform pro bono work under the firm’s umbrella.

A number of the firm’s partners have devoted their personal time to various charity/not-for-profit organisations, such as the Lakeside Family Services, the Home Nursing Foundation, BoardAgender, the Dover Park Hospice, and the Law Society’s Project Law Help, as well as the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre, the Leukaemia and Lymphoma Foundation, and the Singapore Association for the Deaf.

In addition, WongPartnership strongly encourages its young lawyers to volunteer at Community Legal Clinics organised by the Law Society of Singapore, the State Courts Civil Legal Clinics, and HELP Legal Clinics. Lawyers may also take on CLAS or Legal Assistance for Serious and Capital Offences (LASCO) matters.

The firm’s pro bono matters are partner led, but associates may, on their own initiative, sign up for pro bono cases with CLAS, legal aid, or any other Law Society programme, provided that when they take on a pro bono client, the matter is still managed under the care of a partner. ‘Pro bono clients are also clients of the firm and we want to ensure that all the usual compliance processes and standard of care apply to them,’ says Koh Swee Yen, a partner in the firm’s commercial and corporate disputes and international arbitration practices.

‘It is important that we do our part to foster recognition of the belief that access to justice is the right of all individuals’

‘Our aim is to contribute to society, and imbue in our lawyers a sense of public service amidst the demands of commercial practice,’ explains Swee Yen. ‘It is important that we do our part to foster recognition of the belief that access to justice is the right of all individuals, regardless of their financial means, race, gender, age, and ethnicity; and help equip the beneficiaries with basic legal knowledge and practical skills, leading to a stronger and more cohesive community.’

Corporate social responsibility (CSR), including pro bono activities, is increasingly a key ingredient considered by legal service decision makers. The Legal 500 knows from its research across various jurisdictions that in-house counsel are quizzing their instructing law firms and barristers’ chambers on their respective CSR strategies. Those firms and sets without such programmes need to think about instituting one, at the very least because it makes commercial sense to do so.

But what about Singapore’s lawyers: what do they get out of pro bono work and are there any downsides to providing free legal advice? Well, in addition to young lawyers gaining valuable additional training and experience, not to mention the good PR it can bring, Hian Young has, perhaps, the best response for encouraging a pro bono culture in your firm. ‘I am a sanguine person by nature. I have not had a bad day working on pro bono. I only remember the good days, which seems like every day.’

Seeing value in Vietnam

Please give us an overview of the current legal market in Vietnam and how any recent developments have impacted your practice?

The legal market in Vietnam is stronger and more vibrant than ever before and is growing rapidly. The growth of the legal market is a corollary of the rapid development and expansion of Vietnam’s economy, which, commencing from a very modest base 30 years ago, has been one of the stellar performers worldwide during the last 20, and in particular last ten, years.

Ever-increasing enthusiasm for Vietnam among foreign investors – particularly from Japan, Korea, and other Asian jurisdictions – has recently been matched by a rapid increase in the sophistication and financial means of local Vietnamese investors.

Foreign investors in particular are evincing ever-increasing levels of demand for experienced, high-quality, and transparent M&A advice in Vietnam.
What significant trends exist in the M&A market presently? Are you seeing these just domestically or internationally as well?

Vietnam is experiencing unprecedented levels of M&A activity during 2018.
Foreign investors continue to see excellent value propositions in successful, domestic Vietnamese enterprises. Corporate investor interest in Vietnam also continues to increase, as does the interest of investment funds of different types from jurisdictions all over the world.

In addition, the Vietnamese government’s programme of divestment of state-owned capital in Vietnamese companies has gained much traction during 2018, and many of the equity stakes on offer to foreign and domestic investors as a result are in many cases very attractive.

Most of these factors are primarily domestic in nature, except from the perspective that foreign investors continue to see value opportunities in Vietnam which are superior to those which they are able to identify in other jurisdictions.

 

What are the three biggest challenges to practising M&A in Vietnam at the moment?

The comparatively early stage of development of the legal system in Vietnam is one of the key challenges to M&A practitioners, as is the comparative lack of clarity and consistency in some of the key legislative instruments which underpin the M&A market. That said, the clarity and consistency of applicable law in Vietnam has improved leaps and bounds since 2014.

Similarly, although transparency does remain somewhat of a jurisdictional concern, the overall landscape in Vietnam, from a transparency perspective, has improved markedly in recent years.

It is often a significant challenge to get foreign and Vietnamese counter-parties ‘onto the same page’, from a transaction documentation perspective, as the gap in expectations as to necessary degrees of detail and sophistication in transaction documents is often very wide.

 

How does M&A fit into the firm as a whole? Is it easy to collaborate with other teams?

The M&A practice group is one of the strongest within our firm and has had consistently very strong results during the last decade or more. Our team has no difficulty at all in collaborating with any of the other practice groups within
our firm. Such collaboration occurs frequently, for example in the context of legal due diligence investigations into target companies.

 

What advice would you give to the next generation of mergers and acquisitions lawyers?

Learn coding and become an IT/AI expert as well as an M&A lawyer!

Also, try to gain as much exposure as possible to M&A transactions in and in connection with as many different jurisdictions worldwide as possible. Cross-jurisdictional skills and experience will become increasingly in demand as the years go by.

 

What are your predictions for mergers and acquisitions over the next five years?

Vietnam’s M&A market will continue to develop and go from strength to strength, as the nation’s economy does the same. Local investors will continue to increase in prominence as their ability to compete financially with international investors increases.

The continuing equitisation and floating of state-owned enterprises and divestment of state-owned capital will give rise to a more vibrant and competitive economy, which in turn will fuel the growth in size and sophistication of the M&A market.

The legal and regulatory regime will continue to develop and improve, and the pursuit of transparency will achieve increasing levels
of success.

Vietnam is on an upward trajectory which will certainly not abate during the next five years and nor is it likely to abate for many years thereafter.

Scott Harris: no place for guarding proprietary interests

How would you define Hogan Lovells’ culture? How important is firm culture to you?

A culture which is demonstrative of the firm’s values is critical to our success. Our clients come first, so we strive to satisfy them by achieving a deep understanding of their business, industry and needs, and by providing an excellent, responsive and innovative service. As a global firm, this commitment to success can’t be achieved without a fully integrated, collaborative and diverse team working together across the world in an atmosphere of mutual respect, collegiality and friendliness.

What’s the main change you’ve made in the firm that will benefit clients?

Not so much a change, but a reinforcement of the value our firm holds in bringing to the client a truly client-focused and collaborative team. We assist our clients to address some of the most difficult legal issues in their respective industries. Achieving this invariably requires a multi-disciplinary team carrying the relevant underlying industry-specific knowledge. There is no benefit to the client in – and therefore no place for – the guarding of proprietary interests in clients by particular practice groups or partners.

What are the biggest challenges facing the firm in Australia?

This is a very dynamic and changing market in which to do business globally and domestically. This includes the current legal services landscape in Australia. It is critical to embrace the changes and be equipped to meet the opportunities, risks and disruptions to which those changes give rise. This is something for which we are recognised across the world: Hogan Lovells is ranked a top-five law firm innovator globally in the Financial Times’ Innovative Lawyers programme.

There has been a flow of international firms entering the Australian market over recent years – how do you differentiate Hogan Lovells from the rest?

As Miguel Zaldivar, our new regional chief executive for Asia Pacific and the Middle East, recently said: ‘We got the strategy right.’ When we opened our Australia offices in 2005, we did not do so via a merger like many other firms have done. We started from the ground up and have built two very successful offices, in Perth and Sydney, in line with client demand. We will continue to grow to the tune of our clients’ needs.

What do you think are the top three things most clients want and why?

Our clients want (1) fresh, innovative thinking combined with proven experience, (2) efficiency, and (3) for their law firm to truly know their business and industry. In consideration of these client priorities, we are always looking to enhance our mix of services and how we deliver them so that we are providing the best possible service to our clients.

What have you found is the best way to retain talent – both at partner and associate levels?

I’ve found that listening to our partners and associates and providing the space they need to reach their true potential is the best way to retain top talent. Mentoring at Hogan Lovells is a firm initiative in which all lawyers and partners are encouraged to participate. We believe everyone can benefit from a mentor regardless of their career stage and we have various avenues of providing mentoring to suit the various needs of our people.

Since becoming managing partner what’s surprised you most, either internally or externally?

Hogan Lovells’ presence in Australia is relatively new. I have been happily surprised at the extent of the support received, and the commitment to our success in Australia demonstrated, by my fellow Hogan Lovells’ partners and colleagues across the world. This has enabled us to very quickly impress our international clients with the seamless, quality delivery of our cross-border legal services, and open up opportunities to build deeper relationships with those clients doing business in Australia.

_

Scott Harris became office managing partner for Hogan Lovells’ Australia practice on 1 January 2018. He has been with the firm in Sydney since August 2016 and leads the firm’s business, restructuring and insolvency team for Australia.

Passing the baton

Beyond the US and UK, many legal markets remain heavily populated by law firms established as family businesses, or which – still in their first generation – remain overseen by a founding partner. More sizeable firms, too, even if they have already experienced the process of generational (and managerial) handover on one-or-more occasions, will not necessarily have institutionalised the procedure in a manner that ensures future continuity. Many markets of the Latin American region testify to this state of affairs.

There is no law against family firms, nothing that obliges institutionalisation. As Zang Bergel & Viñas’ managing partner, Carolina Zang, notes, ‘second generation re-modelled businesses are common in our industry, especially in Latin America’ and ‘constitute a coveted hand me down for legal professionals’. However, given that legal capability has not been scientifically proven to run in the blood, the family firm has, by definition, its limitations; most notably, the issue of talent retention in the face of a closed-partnership structure poses fundamental questions as to the viability of this ownership model. Even in the most successful of scenarios, ultimately, the issue of longevity will appear on the horizon. In the case of ZBV, generational handover has become an opportunity to innovate and modernise – a process that ‘by no means underestimates the previous culture but rather acknowledges the need to reload it,’ according to Zang.

On the ground, family firms in the region have been under ever-increasing pressure since the 1990s when the wave of privatisation that accompanied neo-liberal reform generated a boom in corporate legal work, which in turn saw the emergence of a new generation of primarily transactional firms established on a more modern organisational footing. Efficient and aggressive, many of these rapidly achieved the leading positions in their respective markets that they retain to this day. After the best part of two decades as key market protagonists, firm’s like Galicia Abogados and Mijares (MACyF) in Mexico, Bruchou (BFM&L) or Pérez Alati (PAGBA) in Argentina, Peru’s Miranda & Amado, Chile’s Barros & Errazúriz, or the former PrietoCarrizosa (now a founding member of regional entity PPU) and Gómez Pinzón are among those now facing the generational handover scenario.

‘Rarely can a top leader be recruited from another firm’

Arguably, it is precisely the success (or otherwise) of the handover process that will be the true measure of these firms’ robustness as institutions. Indeed, in one sense, the handover is, quite literally, a firm learning to undertake other operations – in this case, the fundamental one of re-engineering itself for the future – with minimal disruption to the efficiency of what is does best: servicing its clients and maintaining its market presence and activity. The handover, then, is a case of changing horses mid-stream. While consciousness of institutional matters has grown dramatically over the last decade, largely spurred by the need for greater efficiency in the face of increasing competition from foreign firms, generational handover remains ‘a big issue’ for Latin American firms, but ‘one that does not usually receive too much attention until the last moment, which is, by definition, late’. So suggests Alfredo O’Farrell, former managing partner of Argentine-titan Marval O’Farrell & Mairal, who argues that the issue should not only ‘feature on a firm’s short list of priorities’ but actually be an obligation which ‘current management has on its mandatory to-do list’. Galicia Abogados’ Manuel Galicia concurs. ‘Succession planning should be regarded as one of the most relevant issues for law firms,’ he says, adding that it is of particular importance in the Mexican market due to what he terms ‘the early stage of the institutionalisation process faced by firms [in Mexico]’.

‘The key word for a successful transition is “planning”,’ suggests Galicia, ‘because forward planning is vital if effective succession-planning strategies are to be put in place.’ And while ‘each leadership transition is a unique event’ which varies from firm to firm, it is the same general challenge that is faced, Galicia remarks: ‘Getting a trusted leader to let go and help prepare the firm for the next version of its leadership structure.’

Galicia explains that his firm’s experience of the process ‘taught us that there is a limited group of partners who can be considered for a leadership role’ and who have also demonstrated a degree of management competence. In this respect, he adds, ‘we think this circumstance can be addressed by the firm’s cultivation of its future leaders by assigning young partners to roles on certain committees’, thereby ‘giving them a chance to participate in the firm’s management and to demonstrate their aptitude for and interest in management’. The generation of such a pool of potential future leaders is all the more important in the legal sector, he notes, since ‘rarely can a top leader be recruited from another firm’.

‘Uncertainty generates fear and fear results in erroneous behaviour and decision taking’

Despite the size of the firm (approximately 60 partners compared to around 30 at Galicia), O’Farrell’s experience at Marval evidenced a similarly shallow pool of potential managerial candidates. For his firm the process centred first on a thorough review of the partnership to develop a list of potential candidates; this, in turn, gave way to a strategy of growing a given candidate’s exposure to both the partnership and to various tasks or duties required of the managing partners, so as to both test certain abilities but also to consider their internal approval by fellow partners. In the model mapped out by O’Farrell, at ‘a certain moment’, management must advise those who have performed well so subsequent planning, steps and timings can be set in motion, allowing things to ‘hopefully fall naturally into place’.

As Manuel Galicia highlights, this process is all the more problematic since ‘these discussions are held among lawyers’, a cadre ‘trained to foresee what can go wrong in all transactions’, thereby generating ‘a risk because none of the partners want to sound doubtful as to the sincerity and good intentions of the other partners’.

For Galicia, mitigating such risk involved the intervention of a trusted – and neutral – external figure: ‘We asked our compensation and external strategy advisor to assist us to move forward and protect the interests of all parties through the creation of a detailed written plan.’ The resulting in a document ‘clearly defines roles, responsibilities, expectations, title and related compensation by year or phase, as well as some adjustments to our corporate governance structure,’ thereby further permitting the firm’s preparation for the future. Putting it down on paper has a secondary advantage: the avoidance of uncertainty, ‘because uncertainty generates fear and fear results in erroneous behaviour and decision taking’.

Carey & Cía’s senior partner, Jorge Carey, is no stranger to these discussions, having successfully originated the blueprint for his firm’s institutionalisation and rules of governance during a period in which the firm has emerged at the forefront of the Chilean market. ‘We’ve given this a lot of time,’ he notes, ‘the managing partner and other members of our executive committee are elected by the partners on the basis of one vote per partner with elections every three years and the partners’ votes kept secret.’ The result is the possibility of a change in management every three years as the majority of partners desire.

Carey admits that the combination of the one partner, one vote system and the fact that, typically, more young partners enter the partnership than leave due to mandatory retirement, means there were worries of a generational rift forming at the firm. Fortunately, a relatively tight spread in terms of the percentages covering all partner remuneration, further fosters the partnership’s solidity and reduces the possibility of confrontation between younger and older partners.

Acknowledging that handovers are an issue of extreme sensitivity, these rules, suggests Carey, ‘make room for an orderly succession’. Indeed, the partnership has already voted on who will be the next chairman and managing partner two years from now. Carey himself regards this as one of the most notable achievements implemented by the current management team, adding that it has been achieved ‘with a surprisingly high degree of consensus’.

In strongly institutionalised firms, succession planning is easier to implement since generational tensions are lower; younger partners recognise the value of their older colleagues, while more senior partners understand that part of their managerial mandate involves the grooming of new leaders to manage effectively and efficiently.

Ultimately, establishing an effective succession plan is never easy, but failure to do so risks the success, reputation and, ultimately, the very existence of the firm itself. Ideally the process of building institutional strength diminishes the risks run during the succession process because the firm is not overly dependent upon a reduced number of partners for its reputation and professional standing. Here, culture and traditions are central to a successful handover process, and the presence of an enduring institutional profile from which all partners benefit, and which all support, is essential.

Tips for junior lawyers on how to get published

There is a general perception that lawyers are bad at marketing themselves. Historically this is true, but things are changing for the better. In the hope of giving the next generation a leg up, this grizzled legal hack was invited to appear at the Young Barristers’ Committee’s annual workshop in June to talk about how junior barristers – those under seven years’ call – can better sell themselves to gain new work and clients.

Now, while the following tips were aimed at the junior Bar, they are just as applicable to UK solicitors, US attorneys or, indeed, lawyers almost anywhere else the world. In short, there are many ways you can promote yourself to obtain new work and enhance your reputation in the market. One of those ways is to be recognised by The Legal 500; another is to get yourself noticed by the legal and mainstream press.

How to get yourself noticed
A big part of any good journalist’s job is in identifying those potential new contributors who have something interesting to say; something different that readers would want to know about. As an example, most of you will know of The Secret Barrister; but what you might not know is that their first commissioned piece was with trade publication Solicitors Journal.
Now, that is not to say that without Solicitors Journal, The Secret Barrister wouldn’t have also been published in the mainstream press – The Newstatesman, The Independent, The Mirror and Huffington Post, among others – been named Independent Blogger of the Year (twice!), or become a best-selling author with their brilliant book Stories of The Law and How It’s Broken, but it was a first step on their path to global superstardom.

While The Secret Barrister may be the best, most recent example of what a lawyer can accomplish through the pages of the press, there are other practitioners whom you can draw inspiration from: solicitor David Allen Green, criminal barrister Matthew Scott, human rights practitioner Adam Wagner – the list goes on and you will be bound to have your own favourites.

Where do you see yourself?
The first thing you should do is figure out which publications to target: are you looking to appear in a trade title or have you set your sights on the mainstream press? And are you looking to write technical pieces or opinion pieces?

While every title is different, all are looking for the same thing: good content that no one else has. So, you lose nothing by emailing the relevant editor and pitching them an idea for a piece. Just be forewarned that it is wise to read the relevant editorial guidelines before sending in any unsolicited article for publication.

Whether your article is going to appear in print or online, there are limits on how much you can write. You’ll just end up creating more work for yourself and your editor if you send in a 4,000-plus word article when only 800 words is permitted. And please, don’t be precious with your copy. The editors you’ll be dealing with are experts in their field; they know what they’re doing and how to make your article the very best it can be.

It’s also important to write in a similar voice and style to the title you are targeting. How you would write for the Financial Times should not be the same way you would write for a specialist legal magazine, like Legal Business, where the legal sector knowledge of the average reader will be quite different. Remember who your audience is: are you writing for the general public, for industry leaders, or fellow lawyers?

With that in mind, the level of detail and complexity you put into a piece should correspond with the audience you are writing for. Most titles will provide guidance on this, but as a general rule it’s best to write in plain English – even when writing about the law to fellow lawyers. Just because lawyers are used to reading legalese doesn’t mean they want to do it all the time!

And, while it is not a hard and fast rule, I would suggest you consider your own level of expertise before targeting a particular title. For example, LawCareers.net, Lawyer2B, The Lex 100 or Legal Cheek will be much more open in hearing from a junior lawyer than, say, the FT.

Rent a quote?
What if you’re not interested in providing articles, yet still want to be quoted in the press? The first thing to do is reach out to the news desk and explain what your expertise is and that you are keen to provide the title with quotes on a range of topics.

Next, if called upon to provide quotes, then you need to need to (a) be responsive and (b) give the journalist something new to think about. Over
the years, journalists will accrue a go-to list of reliable contacts that they can call upon for quotes and articles. If all you can do is parrot what a more senior practitioner has said, or that can be found elsewhere, then that is not going to be good enough for the journalist. Have an opinion, back it up, and be confident enough to sell it to the reporter as being worth including in their piece.

It’s also worth following journalists on social media, that way when they publish a story you can comment on it directly via Twitter or LinkedIn. If they have written about the UK courts’ crumbling infrastructure, then tweet them examples of what you have seen first hand, such as leaking court rooms, closed robing rooms, missing defendants and translators; explain the impact these have on your job and the justice system. If there is one thing a journalist wants it’s an easy follow-up story to take to their editor and you may be able to provide that with your first-hand experience.

I can’t stress enough the importance of social media for journalists. Deadlines are tight; everyone is trying to be first with the story and provide instant reaction to it. Waiting for press releases or for contacts to get back to you can slow down a story. That’s why many hacks use Twitter to find comment within seconds of a story breaking. So, if you see a discussion on Twitter which you can add to, then get involved – the likelihood is that it will be noticed and your tweets used in a story.

Deep throat?
Finally, say you don’t actually want press attention for yourself, but you do have a story that needs to be told, what do you do? Well, reporters use anonymous sources all the time – and it’s not as if you have to meet them at night in a dark car park wearing a trench coat and sunglasses to be one! Email, call, or direct message them on social media explaining that you want to remain anonymous. If they can verify your story through other means then what you tell them can be used as background information.

Word of warning
Although I’ve extolled the virtues of social media, it can also be a curse for the unwary lawyer. More than a few barristers and solicitors who should have known better have been caught out by posting opinions in situations where they shouldn’t. This is usually always followed by a not-too-favourable story about the ‘controversial’ comments some ‘top lawyer’ said online. The majority of journalists covering legal issues are looking for something more substantial to write about; others are quite happy to write the salacious.

So, while social media and the press can help advance a lawyer’s public profile, they can also hurt it. My advice is that before posting or submitting anything for publication – especially anything that might be deemed controversial – you should sit on it for ten minutes, read it through again, and be sure nothing you have written could be misconstrued. And finally, don’t drink and tweet – that road leads to ruin!

Richard Hoyle: What the Young Bar needs from chambers

Hand with phone photo

‘Barristers work in a high stress, often solitary environment, which has historically favoured a “stiff upper lip” approach when dealing with those who are going through personal or professional challenges. I am pleased to say that this is changing, but it will change faster if chambers encourage conversations in this area.’

That is the opinion of Richard (Rick) Hoyle, a junior specialising in commercial litigation and arbitration at Essex Court Chambers and – more importantly – the chair of the Young Barristers’ Committee. Speaking to The Legal 500 in February, Hoyle highlighted the duality of modern communication methods – both blessing and curse – as perhaps having the greatest impact on barristers’ wellbeing. ‘If you get yourself into a situation where you answer emails at 3am you’ll create an expectation that you will always answer emails at 3am.

Sometimes we will have to work those hours, but thinking carefully about where lines can be drawn is important.’ The Essex Court tenant also called on senior members of the Bar to support and help institute wellbeing initiatives, rather than thinking of such policies as ‘a little bit fluffy’, as they have historically been seen in some quarters. ‘Some senior people practised at a time when the pace of life was perhaps a little bit slower and the demands, again, were different.

But it is becoming increasingly accepted at the higher end of the profession that wellbeing is important.’ Hoyle suggested sets launch mentoring schemes where junior barristers can talk to either a senior clerk, who does not directly clerk them, or a more senior member of chambers, when in need of someone to turn to. This is especially important for those barristers who are unable to leave their work at the front door and switch off at the end of a long day.

‘Barristers have a tendency to live their cases and it can become all encompassing,’ he said. ‘The stresses of a criminal practitioner are very different from those of a commercial practitioner but they are both high-stress environments. We need to concentrate on taking a step back and keeping things at arm’s length.

It is about creating a space to have a better work-life balance and enabling barristers to switch off from their work.’ Called in 2013, Hoyle – who is listed by The Legal 500 as one of the top ten commercial juniors under eight years’ call, and described as ‘very bright, pragmatic, and works well with junior and senior team members’ by his peers – was elected to the Bar Council for a three-year term, commencing January 2016.

In November 2016 he was elected vice chair of the Young Bar for 2017 and succeeded as chair on 1 January 2018. Speaking at the annual Legal Practice Management conference in February, the Young Bar chair outlined a number of issues which those barristers up to seven years’ call presently require from chambers, including: support in the transition from pupillage to tenancy; the involvement of juniors in sets’ decision making; as well as ‘active consideration’ of new ways of working and how best to respond to future opportunities and challenges.

Support for young barristers during their transition from pupillage to tenancy is extremely important, said Hoyle. ‘No doubt the person in question will be ecstatic to have heard that they are being taken on in chambers, but that feeling is quite likely to be replaced, rapidly, by feelings of uncertainty about a great number of issues – personal finance and tax, how chambers really functions, and how to engage with the clerks, to name but a few. ‘It is easy to assume that whilst pupils are clearly and obviously vulnerable, those who have made the cut are somehow just okay to get on with things,’ he added. ‘A chambers getting its approach to support right, does not make those assumptions.

It goes without saying that barristers are subject matter experts, but despite what they might occasionally try to bluff at the pub, they are not expert at everything!’ So where should sets begin when setting out to create a supportive environment for the barristers of tomorrow? ‘A proper chambers induction is a good place to start,’ suggested Hoyle, ‘whether your new tenants have been on their feet for the previous six months or whether they will be engaging with clients and clerks directly for the first time. ‘To start with, this probably involves: an explanation of a range of chambers policies, such as fair allocation of work, equality and diversity, and grievance processes; the type of case mix and case load that will be typical (and at what point the barrister can expect to start shaping those things more actively); and whether you might want or be expected to go out on secondment.’

An induction to the ‘dark arts of fee collection’, chambers rent, and pay more generally is also necessary, according to Hoyle. ‘For the last year, the Young Bar has been concerned about poor payment practices which can have a particular impact on the lives of young barristers and whether their chosen career remains a viable one.’

While the Young Bar’s main focus has been on payment of fees for work in the magistrates’ court, Hoyle said that non-payment for completed work is an issue affecting more than just those at the Criminal Bar. ‘A builder would not expect to go months and months without being paid for a job already completed,’ he said. ‘There is no reason why a barrister should.’ However, Hoyle said chambers’ should also engage in some self-reflection and consider whether they are, in fact, exacerbating the problem. ‘A business model which farms out the most junior barristers on cut price rates in order to bring in more lucrative work for senior members of chambers is wrong, unless there is a mechanism in place to cross subsidise them internally. ‘When starting out, barristers are likely to be pretty financially exposed, and this can be compounded if fees are delayed and chambers requires room rent, or chambers contributions based on fees billed rather than fees paid.

These are areas in which changes of policy can provide a real benefit to new tenants, and in which the attention of those responsible for chasing payment of fees is particularly welcome.’ The involvement of junior barristers in sets’ decision making processes is also of crucial importance to all chambers, not just those that consider themselves dynamic, modern, or forward-thinking. ‘The Bar generally has a feel of being quite flat, quite non-hierarchical, on a social level. And yet, when it comes to chambers governance, it is much the opposite.

How many times do you see the chairs and vice chairs of chambers’ committees being occupied by ageing QCs for years on end? ‘In 1783, William Pitt the Younger became prime minister aged 24, so having a young barrister or two as a committee chair or vice-chair is hardly revolutionary! These people are dynamic, flexible, and think carefully about the future. They are assets to chambers. Use them,’ encouraged Hoyle. Going further, chambers should give ‘active consideration’ to new ways of working and how best to respond to the opportunities and challenges that are presented by them, he continued. ‘Whilst self-employed barristers are members of chambers, they are also small business owners.

They are entitled to think about the risks and rewards of what they do, and to demand that the structure within which they work is doing that as well. ‘At a bare minimum, this involves regular practice meetings and informal discussions about what the barrister has been doing previously, whether they are enjoying it, whether they would prefer to be doing something different or to try to break into a new area in future. ‘The clerking and senior management team can present their thoughts on where chambers as a whole is headed, drawing on a deep pool of experience and expertise.

It is only through this kind of process that both the macro and the micro parts of chambers life can properly be considered and understood.’ Now, more than ever, is the time for more strategic thinking, continued Hoyle. ‘New and flexible ways of working present great challenges for those managing chambers. For example, should remote working be encouraged? It might improve retention rates for barristers with children as it offers greater flexibility, but it leads to empty rooms and increased isolation, as well as a potential loss of a valuable pedagogical aspect of chambers, where more junior members can just pop in and ask more senior members a question. ‘This of course plays into questions about whether chambers footprint can be reduced, whether a new lease should be entered into and for how long. And none of that, of course, is really meaningful without actually thinking about the general direction of chambers – are the fields of work of the past still desirable, or even sustainable?

Are there new areas which chambers should push to enter?’ Hoyle takes the helm of the Young Bar at a time when the Bar Council as the profession’s representative body must ask itself some hard questions. The Times reported in November 2017 that numbers of barristers under five years’ call fell by 30% in the ten years to 2015, suggesting a succession planning crisis for the self-employed Bar. ‘Young Bar numbers is a particular issue that everyone is thinking about and it is encouraging to see that those at the top of the Bar Council are taking this seriously,’ he told me.

‘There is going to be more research done on whether this is an entry to the profession problem, an attrition problem, or a bit of both. Once we’ve understood it a little better we can look at finding a solution.’

Of course, the first challenge to finding a solution is for the Bar Council and its junior wing to have buy-in from those it is constituted to represent. ‘People either say the Bar Council spams them with stuff, or that they have no idea what the Bar Council does’, admitted Hoyle. ‘I got involved because I was intrigued as to what the Bar Council was doing. I don’t think enough people are aware of the existence of the Young Barristers’ Committee. I’m hopeful we will be more visible to the people we are actually representing and if they know we are representing them then they’ll be able to give us more feedback and we’ll be more representative.’

Brazil’s ‘Turmoil period’

Please give us an overview of the current legal market in Brazil and how any recent developments have impacted your practice?

I would say the legal market is showing surprising levels of resilience and growth for a country in such a turmoil for such a long per

iod. The compound annual growth rate of our practice for the last four years ending in December 2017 puts us at a healthy positive two figure number.

That looks awesome by developed markets standards, but the Brazilian legal market could have done much better if it wasn’t for the size of the Brazilian government vis-à-vis the Brazilian economy (some studies put the government spending at 40 per cent of the internal gross product) and related impacts.

In a nutshell, given such relative size of the government, any disruption at the federal level automatically impacts business. There were plenty of disruptions during the last three to four years. From the impeachment of the former Labor party government, to the bribery scandals potentially involving the current government and, finally, the impending general elections in October 2018. Let’s call this the ‘Turmoil Period’.

Political facts and their consequences in the economy during this period most definitely affected the rhythm and number of M&A deals, as well as the high end legal industry. Industry wise, large chunks of very competent lawyers split from traditional firms and formed new competition as there was no room for up-and-coming individuals to join the partner ranks. We stayed largely at bay and did not lose relevant partners for the competition, but we do recognise there are new competitors which must be watched.

It also became clear during the Turmoil Period that there are two different types of M&A practice in the country – one focusing on the so-called middle market and the other on high-end deals.

The middle market practice continued to be strong during the Turmoil Period.
A $2 trillion dollar such as Brazil obviously encompasses an internal market which is strong enough to create deal feedback and demand enough to keep the growth at a steady pace, even in a recessive market (which was our case in 2015 and 2016 – the longest and deepest recession occurring in Brazil for 120 years).

The high-end deals, however, went through a roller-coaster drive for the past three years. Very big deals were negotiated. Many of them went through, but a significant number did not for a very simple reason – the seller was the government and the government was in a huge turmoil, without a clear drive, or having a very difficult time to approve the sale of its assets. Good examples are the Petrobrás divestment program (materialised only partially), the privatisation of the Eletrobrás system (only marginally materialised), and the privatisation programme designed by the current federal government early
on its term and never completed.

Another development worth of note is related to anticorruption. The Brazilian federal police and the public prosecutors’ office (ministério público federal) have uncovered a series of corruption scandals in some of the most important Brazilian conglomerates. There are very weak or non-existent compliance controls in many of the big players of the Brazilian market. This fact significantly changed the way foreign buyers approach M&A deals in Brazil.

For the most part, compliance and anti-corruption, which were mere support areas in a wide due diligence practice in the past, became core areas. Law firms created practices which rapidly became a very important source of revenues. More important than that, a very relevant part of the M&A negotiations now focuses on defining indirect losses (those typically caused by corruption scandals) and MAC-related clauses. After all, a corruption scandal, for example, in a recently acquired asset has the potential to push its value close to zero.

 

What significant trends exist in the M&A market presently? Are you seeing these just domestically or internationally as well?

There are trends affecting the Brazilian M&A market which are observable internationally. From an economic perspective, the international pool of liquidity continues to be large given the good performance of the US, China and, to a certain extent, European markets. Although China has clearly defined the New Silk Road as its main area of investment, it is also true that many Chinese SOEs define Latin America, and especially Brazil, as one of their core areas for investment. We are also aware that many PE funds are right now operating the upstream market to potentially form pools to invest in Brazil. This is all beneficial to the domestic M&A market, in the sense it increases the cash available for investment in M&A deals.

On the other hand, we have challenges that are very specific to Brazil and Latin America. The first is the fact that we need to definitively pull out of the recession years and come up with sound economic policies to gain trust again. Our government must be reduced in size and concentrate in core areas of public service, such as education, security, health and basic infrastructure (in partnership with the private sector). Government expenses must be controlled. This, alone, could have a transformational effect in the M&A markets and business of corporate law firms in general. The size, value and relevance of assets which would be put into the market could have an effect which is similar to the privatisation of the telecommunications sector in Brazil in the ’90s. In a nutshell, making certain leading firms viable and significantly increasing the business of others.

Strictly from a legal perspective it is also a challenge to show the capital rich markets that the legal and regulatory environment in Brazil are stable. My perspective on this one is that Brazil has been successful, but there was a clear trend in cross-border deals to try and submit significant chunks of the legal work (mostly investment agreements and sharepurchase agreements) to foreign law, due to uncertainty surrounding local courts. While many tests and challenges to the stability of the legal environment were made – from the impeachment of the former president to the questioning of certain concession contracts by local populist markets – in general, the courts upheld the contracts. The visibility of the turmoil, though, clearly created a trend towards foreign law when possible.

I would also say that the influence of Anglo-American type contracts is a consolidated trend in Brazil. Our partners and associates all must have LLMs in leading US or UK universities and/or have worked in US or UK firms. Finally, we are now going through a Far East jurisdictions trend, sending associates to China and Japan and regularly visiting these jurisdictions.

 

What are the three biggest challenges to practising M&A in Brazil at the moment?

The first and biggest challenge has to be understanding and navigating the Brazilian tax system. The country is one of the most isolated jurisdictions in the globe and, at the same time, one of the largest. It has one of the most complicated tax systems ever devised, with taxes at the federal, state and municipal levels frequently overlapping. According to world bank data, the country is one of the most complicated tax jurisdictions. Newcomers need a premium tax counsel at the M&A stage and, after that as they regularly do business in the country.

The second challenge is bureaucracy. Although there is no foreign exchange control (in the sense of an authorisation needed for the remittance of profits, for example), foreign capital investments must be registered with the Central Bank of Brazil. The type of registry, for example, may affect the way headquarters are taxed upon sale of the investment. We have seen clients missing that little detail in the past and years thereafter going into lengthy litigation which drains their profit margin merely because red tape was not observed. One must consider and manage that from the outset.

The third challenge is, unfortunately, compliance and corruption. The recent corruption scandals clearly show that buyers must frequently submit their target companies to forensic and background checks before acquiring businesses in Brazil. After that, a thorough review of the compliance policies and the formation of a reliable compliance department is central to a successful business.

 

How does M&A fit into your firm as a whole? Is it easy to collaborate with other teams?

M&A is one of the main practices, together with litigation and tax, which you will probably find is also truth for any of traditional, large Brazilian law firms.

We strive to take every decision – even those that are purely internal – considering the needs of our most important stakeholders, which are the clients. For example, while revenue generation is an important element in the progression of the career of our partners, it is not the sole or automatic driver of our remuneration. Of course, those generating more business will, probably in the short term, benefit from such capacity (as in essence the clients tell who the best lawyers are by consistently hiring them), but we realise that silos may be created (and hard to break thereafter) if a firm makes a direct and immediate link between revenue generation and remuneration. Our remuneration system is thus built so that our lawyers send the work received from clients to those best suited to deliver it. No one will try and do work from another area just to get the invoice credits.

Our teams are built and respond in matrix with specific projects. In other words, we will consider all the project’s and client’s factors to staff a transaction without referring to internal silos (i.e. mentoring and management groups at the firm are not at all relevant to that purpose although, of course, at a more junior level, the associates tend to work more frequently with the same mentors). We usually staff by industry (some industries, such as life sciences and infrastructure, may get very specific), but for Chinese and some Europeans we will staff deals on the basis of language capabilities as well.

All-in-all, your question goes to the core of what we believe to be one of the most important elements of a successful M&A law firm, which is collaboration. Our system was designed to achieve collaboration and hence it is fairly easy to understand. Whatever best suits the client is implemented.

 

What advice would you give to the next generation of M&A lawyers?

First, our advice would be to acquire a very solid set of technical skills, preferably with the validation of a master’s degree and/or internship in a major global law firm. A solid academic background is what we define internally as a ‘must have’ set of skills. The M&A industry has very little space for technically weak lawyers. My personal perspective is that the M&A industry will only get more and more demanding with regard to technical skills. A solid academic background is very important and brings your CV through the first round of cuts. After you are in, your set of technical skills must put you pari passu with peers or above them.

Second, one needs to understand that the core business of a law firm is the client.

The work of an M&A lawyer is not only about delivering perfect works from an academic perspective. It is also about about delivering them in a timely fashion and within internationally recognised excellent service providing standards. The work product has to be technically perfect, but also correctly package for the client. In other words, on top of the technical skills you must clearly be equipped to provide services at the same levels perceived by clients in any major financial services hub worldwide.

The most important thing though, is to understand that M&A is, at the end of the day, about people. It is virtually impossible for a lawyer to deliver a project alone, as it requires thousands of hours to call a deal done. There will always be another side at the table. People will get tired and do poor work. People will make mistakes. People will crack under pressure. M&A lawyers, by the very nature of their work, are forced to lead from the front and will have to deal with these situations. It is very important to acknowledge the fact that you have to have interpersonal skills. This is possibly the most challenging element of being a successful M&A lawyer but, at the same time, as one gets more senior, the most important.

 

What are your predictions for M&A in Brazil over the next five years?

I tend to think the M&A industry will go through a relatively strong growth cycle, assuming the right economic measures will be taken by the next federal government, which will be elected in the impending 2018 presidential elections. This is because there is very little room for fiscal stability to be achieved other than reducing the presence of the government in the economy. That means a cycle of concessions and privatisations which, alone, have the potential to increase the level of M&A business. The level of private-to-private M&A also could very much increase as a result of more orthodox economic policies and a continued upholding of the rule of law, which, again, despite all appearances, has occurred in the country. But, again, that all depends on who wins the elections at the end of the year.