About

Note: Rørvik moved from BASF to Axactor Norway in August 2019.

What are the most important transactions and litigations that you have been involved in during the last two years?

The approach implemented at BASF Legal Nordic/Baltic for handling complaints and disagreements with customers and suppliers has resulted in a significant decrease in disputes finding its way to the courts, thus allowing me to focus more on implementation support in organisational matters. BASF is reshaping its organisation for a bright new future, and that unavoidably implies tearing down the old ways of thinking and working. On the transaction side, I have been providing local legal support to the project group handling the ongoing potential divestment of BASF’s global construction chemicals business and setting the stage for the proper and timely setup of BASF’s battery materials production plant in Harjavalta, Finland.

In what ways do you see the in-house legal role evolving in your region over the next few years?

More and more SMBs in the Nordic/Baltic region are now discovered the benefits of having an in-house legal function and going forward I believe even more will realise that 100+ employees and billions in turnover is not a prerequisite for an in-house legal function to have immediate impact and bring value to your company. This is a development short, medium and long term will professionalise how SMBs structure the way they work and handle disputes, to the benefit of both the companies, its shareholders and its customers and suppliers.

What would you say are the unique qualities required to be successful as an in-house lawyer in your industry?

A high degree of pragmatism, a lot of self-knowledge, being authentic and displaying it.

Do you have any effective techniques for getting the most out of external counsel, in terms of how to instruct them?

Honesty is an underrated but highly efficient technique. Being clear on what I want, how and when I want it, and how much or little time I expect to be billed have formed the basis for many mutually fruitful collaborations with external counsel in the region.

Looking forward, what technological advancements do you feel will impact the role of in-house legal teams in the future the most?

Artificial intelligence and contract generators are already impacting the way in-house lawyers work in larger countries, but I believe we may have to wait a bit longer for such tools to have a similar impact on legal work in languages without the same global reach as English, French, German and Spanish. That said I am cheering for all the legal tech pioneers out there.

What can law firms do to improve their services to the legal department?

Returning the favour in terms of honesty is paramount. The law firm’s past and recent achievements is of zero interest to me if remembering my company’s name or spending five minutes in advance getting to know the basic who, what and how of my company proves to big a challenge.

FOCUS ON:

Diversity

Gender balance at law firm partner levels is an important topic, and I believe law firms should look to the in-house legal profession for guidance. In challenging the archaic ideas on what makes a great lawyer, I believe a broader approach should be taken. Both male and female lawyers flee law firms when presented with outdated expectations on what qualities a male or female lawyer vying for partnership should be displaying. I also believe we should challenge the common perception that such outdated expectations are only held by old male partners. In my opinion and experience, the common denominator is not gender, but position of power and self-recognition of what sacrifices they had to make to get there, resulting in an unwillingness in allowing young male or female lawyers in without making equally painful sacrifices.

The ongoing movement to redefine what makes a great female lawyer in 2019 and introducing a wealth of special measures to ensure that should she opt to become a mother, she is not opting out of her career as a lawyer, is both welcome and necessary. But, if we are seeking equality, we must also redefine what makes a great male lawyer and adjust it according to the 2019 definition of what makes a good father. Introducing special treatments, incentives, fast tracks and similar for one gender only is treating the symptoms, not the disease. For every ambitious lawyer being expected to put down 90-hour work weeks to “prove his/her worth”, there is a husband/wife covering at the other end. In my opinion, law firms should treat any ambitious lawyer as if its husband/wife where an equally ambitious lawyer working in the same law firm, recognising that applying a 1950’s perception of and expectations to male lawyers with partnership ambitions will not lead to real gender balance at law firm partner levels, no matter how many 2019 measures and incentives you introduce for female lawyers with partnership ambitions. Exploiting the maximum working capacity of one to the complete detriment of the other brings us nowhere – or at least not where we want to be.

Most Scandinavian law firms are moving in the right direction but the
y are still lagging behind numerous other industries in the region and should draw inspiration on how the in-house legal profession is working to achieve equality by applying equality. It is not without cause that the in-house legal profession is packed with excellent legal minds of both genders that are deeply engaged in and passionate about the upbringing of future generations of (potential) legal professionals.