#MeToo: SRA puts foot down on non-disclosure agreements

#MeToo: SRA puts foot down on non-disclosure agreements

With the profession rocking from multiple allegations of sexual harassment against law firm partners recently, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has today (12 March) taken action to combat the misuse of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

In a warning notice on the regulator’s website, the SRA has stipulated that NDAs would be improperly used if they sought to prevent a person from reporting misconduct to the police or other prosecution or regulatory authority.

According to the notice, the new guidelines also aim to stamp out the threat of litigation as a means of stopping people from disclosing misconduct. Specifically, the SRA has warned against using defamation proceedings as a threat ‘where such a claim is known to be unsustainable’.

While not explicitly incorporated into the SRA’s handbook, the regulator has cautioned that failure to comply with the new terms will run the risk of disciplinary action.

In a press release, the SRA has cited a ‘widespread reporting of the perception that NDAs, alongside cultural issues within some firms, are resulting in low levels of reporting of inappropriate sexual behaviour’. Between November 2015 and October 2017, the SRA received 21 complaints relating to these kinds of behaviour.

SRA chief executive Paul Philip commented: ‘The public and the profession expects solicitors to act with integrity and uphold the rule of law. And most do. NDAs have a valid use, but not for covering up serious misconduct and in some cases potential crimes.’

Baker McKenzie was most recently caught up in controversy at the beginning of this year, as it emerged it had sanctioned a partner following an allegation of sexual assault. A settlement was agreed with the junior lawyer who raised the complaint, which included confidentiality obligations on the firm and complainant.

The first connection between law firms, sexual harassment and NDAs emerged when magic circle outfit Allen & Overy (A&O) was reportedly involved in a historic incident over the Harvey Weinstein scandal.

A&O was named in an Financial Times article as brokering an NDA with Zelda Perkins, an assistant of the Hollywood producer who accused him of sexual harassment in 1998. Perkins later broke the NDA after speaking out late last year.

A&O declined to comment. Baker McKenzie was contacted for comment.

[email protected]

Deal watch: Global 100 elite line-up on $6bn GKN-Dana transatlantic union

Deal watch: Global 100 elite line-up on $6bn GKN-Dana transatlantic union

A group of elite firms both sides of the Atlantic, including Macfarlanes and Slaughter and May, face off as British engineering giant GKN has agreed to a $6.1bn merger of its automotive business with US-based car parts supplier Dana.

In a deal that will create one of the world’s largest auto parts providers, Macfarlanes’ corporate partners Graham Gibb and Richard Burrows acted for Dana as it announced today (9 March) that its shareholders will get a 53% stake in GKN.

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison’s corporate partner Tarun Stewart also acted for the Ohio-headquartered company, while Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom advised Dana’s board of directors with a team including M&A partners Stephen Arcano, Ann Beth Stebbins and Scott Hopkins.

Slaughters partners Martin Hattrell and Robert Innes acted for GKN alongside Cravath, Swaine & Moore.

Slaughters previously advised GKN on a £7.4bn takeover bid launched by British investment company Melrose earlier this year. Head of M&A Roland Turnill led the Slaughters team as GKN rejected the offer.

As part of its defence against the Melrose takeover bid, GKN announced earlier this month that it was going to split the two main parts of its business – its aerospace division and its Driveline unit, which supplies parts to about half of the world’s makers of passenger cars.

Melrose’s offer sparked a public debate with some worrying that Melrose would break up GKN to hike its value ahead of re-selling it within a few years. A cross-party group of MPs asked in a letter to business secretary Greg Clark that the bid be blocked, as the Pensions Regulator warned that the move could affect GKN’s ability to fund its pension scheme. Melrose now has about ten days to decide whether to raise its offer for GKN.

But GKN chairman Mark Turner said in a statement the combination of GKN Driveline with Dana ‘will create a US and UK-led global market leader in vehicle drive systems. The synergies between these two businesses and our complementary product portfolios make this a great deal for GKN shareholders.’

With customers including Fiat Chrysler and Volkswagen, GKN’s auto parts business generated £5.3bn in sales last year. According to the terms of the deal, GKN’s shareholders will now own around 47% of the new business, which will operate as Dana Plc, have its domicile in the UK and continue to trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

[email protected]

Macfarlanes launches white-collar practice with Eversheds team head hire

Macfarlanes launches white-collar practice with Eversheds team head hire

Macfarlanes has today (9 March) announced that Eversheds Sutherland corporate crime head Neill Blundell will be joining the firm in a move that will see him spearhead the launch of corporate crime and investigations practice at his new firm.

Blundell will focus on corporate criminal investigations and compliance advice, with particular emphasis on regulatory issues. Regarding the move, senior partner Charles Martin said: ‘The introduction of criminal offences across a broad spectrum of regulation affecting our corporate clients – such as bribery, the Criminal Finances Act and environmental matters – makes this area of work a really important one.’

Martin added the move for Blundell reflects a desire to provide complete specialist services on white-collar crime and develop the practice further. ‘If we could find someone outstanding in the market, it meant we could provide these needed services ourselves’.

For Eversheds Sutherland, the move means the departure of a department head who had been with the firm since 2008 and worked on high-profile investigations and proceedings brought by the Financial Services Authority and the Serious Fraud Office. He has been involved in some of most significant investigations around Libor, FX, misleading the market and foreign bribery. Zia Ullah, an experienced corporate crime lawyer, will now take over the leadership of the corporate crime and investigations group at Eversheds Sutherland.

The move extends a rare spell of transfer activity for Macfarlanes, which recently saw Bronwen Jones leave the firm after 14 years to Reed Smith.

[email protected]

City of angels: Baker McKenzie launches in LA with Hogan Lovells team hire

City of angels: Baker McKenzie launches in LA with Hogan Lovells team hire

Baker McKenzie has opened its ninth US office in Los Angeles after recruiting a five-partner employment and litigation team from rival global firm Hogan Lovells.

As the firm looks to beef up its numbers in the region as part of its 2020 strategy, two of Hogan Lovells’ former partners launched the office on 08 March.

Hogan Lovells local head of employment Robin Samuel will operate from the office, alongside litigator Barry Thompson and Hogan Lovells counsel Joe Ward.

Two other disputes partners the firm has hired from Hogan Lovells, Mark Goodman and Ethan Miller, will operate out of Bakers’ existing San Francisco base.

‘We are solidifying our roots in a market where many California-based Fortune 500 companies have a presence,’ said the firm’s North American managing partner Colin Murray. ‘Los Angeles is also an increasingly important gateway for our clients in Asia.’

He added: ‘Our new partners will take on significant commercial and employment litigation as well as class action cases for clients across multiple industries.’

Previously operating as separate profit pools, Bakers moved to bring its North American outposts into an integrated business five years ago, but had to draft special deals for its Dallas and Washington DC arms before these agreed to join the grouping.

[email protected]

Gender disparity underlined as Law Society reveals stark gap in perceptions over equality

Gender disparity underlined as Law Society reveals stark gap in perceptions over equality

It appears the recent wave of awareness over the treatment of women in all industries has done little to dispel ingrained beliefs in law. A survey of nearly 8,000 – mostly female – lawyers conducted by the Law Society has found that three quarters (74%) of male lawyers perceive there has been progress on gender equality within the legal profession, while less than half (48%) of their female counterparts agree.

Coinciding with International Women’s Day the survey, released today (8 March), sheds light on the perceived progress of gender equality in the legal profession, with unconscious bias cited as the most prevalent obstacle to women reaching senior positions.

Just 11% said unconscious bias training is carried out within their organisation. With 7,781 lawyers, including 5,758 women, 554 men and 1,449 whose gender was unknown, the Law Society has lauded the survey as the ‘largest ever on gender equality in the legal profession’.

91% of respondents believed flexible working was critical to improving diversity and inclusivity within the legal profession. However, under half (43%) said that diversity and inclusion training was consistently enforced within their firms. Despite a majority being aware of a gender pay gap in their organisation, only 16% identified ‘visible steps’ taken to address it.

Given the size of this survey, it seems likely it will feature in a larger project being undertaken by the Law Society to detail obstacles to diversity within the legal profession.

Christina Blacklaws, the Law Society vice president, said: ‘I am a passionate believer in equality. Where there is inequality, I will not flinch from tackling it. While more and more women are becoming lawyers, this shift is not yet reflected at more senior levels in the profession. Our survey and a wider programme of work during my presidency in 2018-19 seek to understand progress, barriers and support remedies.

‘With our Women in Leadership programme, the Law Society is committed to giving women and men in law the tools to make positive changes towards gender equality.’

[email protected]

The Lex 100 Student Feedback Survey – We Want to Hear From You!

The Lex 100 Student Feedback Survey - We Want to Hear From You!

We want to hear your thoughts on The Lex 100. What do you like? What do you find useful? What would you like to see more of? Whatever your opinion, we want to hear from you!

All your responses will be collated and analysed to bring you the best and most useful version of The Lex 100. So go ahead and take part today.

Sidley Austin launches London life sciences practice with senior hire from Bristows

Sidley Austin launches London life sciences practice with senior hire from Bristows

Sidley Austin has today (6 March) announced the recruitment of Marie Manley, formerly of Bristows’ life sciences team, as it launches its own practice in the City.

Manley will now lead Sidley’s life sciences team in London, which will focus on areas such as medical device and drug regulation, intellectual property and private equity and will play a pivotal role in providing services to Sidley’s global life sciences clients.

Manley has a long track record in representing biopharma companies before English and EU courts and led Bristows’ sector regulatory practice, with particular experience on the issues arising from life cycle of medicinal products, including advertising, product liability and competition. Described as ‘a tenacious litigator’ in the current edition of The Legal 500 UK, Manley’s appointment represents a new direction for Sidley’s London branch, despite a wider reputation for life sciences work in the US.

The managing partner of Sidley’s London office, Matthew Dening, heralded the acquisition, stating: ‘Marie’s deep understanding of the EU and UK regulatory climates and her extensive experience in contentious proceedings will enhance our offering to life sciences clients.’

Manley said she the move reflects ‘a new and exciting platform to grow and develop my practice and assist my clients in a globalised world where bio/pharma companies are facing multiple cross-border challenges in which consistency of approach in all key jurisdictions is paramount.’

Sidley’s move comes against the backdrop of a strong London showing, with 2017 bringing a 14% City revenue hike to £85.7m. At the end of 2017, the firm also tapped Simpson Thacher & Bartlett for a pair of private equity specialists in London.

[email protected]

White & Case First Year Two-Day Insight Scheme – Apply by 31 March

White & Case First Year Two-Day Insight Scheme - Apply by 31 March

In May White & Case will be holding a two-day insight scheme specifically for first year students thinking about pursuing a career in law.

The first day is designed to help introduce participants to the many areas of law, the different types of Firms and help confirm or dispel any myths associated with becoming a lawyer. Participants will also receive useful guidance on ways in which they can begin to strengthen their future applications and have the opportunity to meet different members of the Firm informally over lunch and drinks. The second day is spent work shadowing with one of the trainees which will provide you with an insight into the day-to-day role of a trainee solicitor at White & Case.

White & Case is a global law firm with over 2000 lawyers worldwide. The firm’s network of 43 offices provides a full range of legal services of the highest quality in almost every major commercial centre and emerging market. They are proud to represent some of the world’s longest established and most respected names alongside many start-up visionaries. The training contract consists of four six-month seats, one of which will be in Finance and another of which will be guaranteed to be overseas. This could be in one of the following offices: Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Dubai, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Milan, Moscow, New York, Paris, Prague, Singapore, Stockholm, and Tokyo.

Apply by 31 March

Good Governance Gone Bad

Good Governance Gone Bad

Did you hear about the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010? What about the 2015 Volkswagen emissions scandal? Poor working conditions at Sports Direct and the collapse of BHS? Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade, the chances are these headlines won’t be news to you. 

What you might not be aware of, however, is that at the heart of these stories lie some fundamental governance failures. A lack of oversight by senior management or questionable decisions taken by a company’s board of directors can lead to disastrous results.

We’ve written about company secretaries and their role as governance professionals before. Sometimes described as ‘the conscience of an organisation’, the role is undoubtedly an important one. Having a seat at the boardroom table means that company secretaries are privy to otherwise confidential meetings. They are exposed to the highest-ranking individuals within an organisation and to the most far-reaching decisions that they make.

“You are part of shaping what corporate governance looks like, not just for your company but for the FTSE and for other private companies, which I think is quite unique”, says Adaeze Okike, senior chartered secretary at Aviva plc. She adds: “One of the best things about my job is seeing the impact of good governance on the business”.

“If applied fairly, honestly and appropriately, good governance can directly contribute to long-term business sustainability” says Caroline Sibanda, company secretarial assistant at EY. “More accountability and greater transparency ultimately improves trust in corporations”.

At first glance, it’s not obvious what good governance actually is. It’s certainly not something which is easily defined (the UK Corporate Governance Code legislation is extensive!) and it is seldom celebrated. Good governance is, in a sense, invisible for it ultimately manifests itself in the smooth running of an organisation. Most of the time we only become aware of good governance by its absence.

“We’ve seen examples of bad governance recently”, says Adaeze. “For example what happened in BHS and Sports Direct. This can have an impact on employees and customers”.

It is usually only when such a story is uncovered that we are made aware that there has been a failing in the governance of that company. As Tesco chairman Sir Richard Broadbent said of the retailer’s accounting scandal in 2014: ‘things are always unnoticed until they have been noticed’. So it is with good (and bad) governance.

Take Sports Direct, for example. In 2017, the sports retailer was accused of a multitude of failings in relation to its working conditions. These included forcing workers to work unpaid overtime and creating a culture of fear whereby staff were afraid to take sick leave for fear of losing their jobs. There were even allegations of permanent contracts being offered in return for sexual favours.

Following an investigation, a report by the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee stated that Sports Direct founder Mike Ashley had to be held accountable for the company’s failings. It was suggested that Ashley, a frequent visitor to the Shirebrook warehouse where the unsavoury practices were commonplace, must have long been turning a blind eye. That, ‘or there were some serious corporate governance failings which left him out of the loop’ asserted committee chairman Ian Wright.

In 2014 it emerged that Tesco had overstated its pre-tax profits by £263m as a result of a failure by the retailer’s finance chief, managing director and food commercial head to correct inaccurately recorded income figures. The result was that £2bn was wiped off Tesco’s share price and all three men were charged with fraud by abuse of power. The subsequent trial was interrupted four months in when one of the defendants suffered a heart attack, with the Serious Fraud Office set to decide whether to continue the trial imminently.

It shows that seemingly minor governance failures, such as accounting mistakes or not paying minimum wage, can fast turn into high-profile issues. And the consequences for an organisation, both financial and reputational, can be significant.

“There is a gap between governance in principle and governance in practice”, says Caroline. “While legislation and voluntary codes guide companies towards appropriate conduct and hold them to a high standard, the most significant onus is on companies themselves to, not only abide by the law, but fully embrace the spirit and intentions underpinned them. I would encourage a continued focus on how current governance practices may be failing to fulfil their intended purpose and determine the necessary and appropriate actions to bridge the gap”, she suggests.

And it’s not just corporates. One of the reasons behind the collapse of charity Kids Company in 2015 was poor governance. The charity’s board had failed to properly address risk, set the strategy and keep the executives accountable. The situation was exacerbated by the dominant and rather difficult personality of the CEO and founder of Kids Company which led to a lack of internal challenge.

So where do company secretaries come in? Good governance is supported and enabled by company secretaries. Through their daily responsibilities they directly contribute to creating an environment which supports good decision making and which avoids creating a scandal of the aforementioned proportions.

“At this stage in my career, one aspect of my role that contributes to good governance is ensuring compliance through the timely and accurate filing of company accounts, confirmation statements and Persons with Significant Control information for display on the public register”, says Caroline.

Of course company secretaries can’t take it upon themselves to prevent these total corporate failings alone. But their seat at the board gives them a privileged and panoramic view usually reserved for those at the very top. And there’s a lot to be said for that. Perhaps there’s a reason they’re referred to as the conscience of an organisation.

Weil Gotshal and Debevoise see double-digit PEP hikes as Reed Smith’s top line makes a comeback

Weil Gotshal and Debevoise see double-digit PEP hikes as Reed Smith’s top line makes a comeback

Weil, Gotshal & Manges has scored an 18% global rise in profits per equity partner (PEP) as London turnover soared 33%, while Debevoise & Plimpton recorded a 17% PEP increase against a 12% revenue uptick.

Fellow US firm Reed Smith has finally returned to growth after two consecutive years of decline, increasing its top line 4% to $1.12bn in 2017. The firm’s London outpost had a particularly strong comeback, growing revenues 14% in sterling terms to £147m.

Weil’s firm-wide revenues rose 10% to $1.39bn, while PEP grew 18% to $3.64m and revenue per lawyer grew 6% to $1.24m, despite an increase in lawyer headcount and the number of equity partners.

The firm’s City arm office generated $165.4m (£128m) in revenue last year – a near 33% increase – based on the average sterling exchange rate for 2017.

A buoyant market for US restructuring work with an international element has bolstered London revenues while the firm’s leveraged finance, structured finance and private equity practices continue to grow.

Key matters for the year include advising Westinghouse Electric Company, a subsidiary of Toshiba Corp, on its $9.8bn Chapter 11 proceedings, together with the firm’s US and European offices and advising offshore drilling provider Paragon Offshore on its parallel Chapter 11 and English administration proceedings.

Other major deals for Weil include advising Oaktree Capital on the global sale of Fitness First, as well as OMERS Infrastructure on the increase of its interest in Thames Water, AMP Capital on the acquisition of the Regard Group and mandates for Antin Infrastructure.

Other key developments in London include the hire of corporate partner James MacArthur from Herbert Smith Freehills in May 2016, the addition of real estate and infrastructure finance partner Paul Hibbert from Baker McKenzie in April 2017 and real estate investment partner Anthea Bamford from Berwin Leighton Paisner in November 2017.

Meanwhile, Debevoise’s firm-wide revenue for the year was $822m, up from $735m in 2016, a 12% increase. London saw revenue rise 5% to $112.7m from $107m the previous year. PEP rose 17% to $2.8m from $2.4m.

Key litigation matters in London include advising Rolls-Royce on its Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the UK’s Serious Fraud Office.

Significantly, Reed Smith’s PEP grew 6% to $1.177m amid an expansive year marked by 55 lateral hires worldwide, the addition of a 50-strong European team from the collapse of KWM Europe and a new office in Miami.

Revenue per lawyer grew 3% to $722,000 as the firm increased its lawyer headcount overall by 1% to 1,550 including 680 partners.

‘Our sector focus has started to deliver,’ said Alexander ‘Sandy’ Thomas, re-elected managing partner for a second term last summer . ‘We had a really balanced contribution across our transactional, regulatory and contentious practices and a balanced contribution geographically.’

Thomas added that life sciences and healthcare had a particularly strong year alongside energy and natural resources. The five sectors in which the firm is committed to being ‘industry leader’ also include financial industries, entertainment and media, and shipping and transportation.

The firm handled the US and EU competition clearance for Hong Kong shipping firm OOCL in its $6.3bn acquisition by China’s COSCO Shipping, which Thomas described as a ‘great example of sector expertise’, and advised Citibank on the financing of a public infrastructure project in Colombia.

Thomas pointed to London as ‘a great expression of the strategy of the firm’. ‘We have clients here organised around our five industry sectors and we are working very closely across our practices to grow our client relationships.’

[email protected]

[email protected]