Posted on

Kirkland swoops for Paul Weiss European M&A head

Gherkin

Kirkland & Ellis is set to boost its London bench with the hire of Paul Weiss’ head of European M&A, Will Aitken-Davies.

Aitken-Davies, who joined the New York firm’s ambitious London office from Linklaters in September 2023, is set to join Kirkland as a corporate partner in the City.

His practice focuses on private equity and infrastructure investor transactions, including acquisitions, carve-outs, and public M&A deals.  He recently played a key role on a transatlantic team from Paul Weiss advising Joe & the Juice on its minority investment from the Emirates International Investment Company.

‘Will is a trusted adviser to leading financial investors on sophisticated, cross‑border European transactions,’ said Jon A. Ballis, Chairman of Kirkland’s Executive Committee. ‘His arrival strengthens our market-leading team’s ability to support sponsors executing at scale across London and Europe.

Matthew Elliott, member of Kirkland’s Executive and corporate partner, added: ‘Will is a market‑leading dealmaker and a natural fit for our London private capital team. His diversity of experience leading European M&A for global sponsors and infrastructure investors will further enhance our ability to deliver integrated, top‑tier advice to private capital clients across London, Europe and the broader Kirkland platform.’

Aitken-Davies is ranked as a leading partner for high value private equity in the Legal 500 in London.

Aitken-Davies’ move comes less than three years after debt finance rainmaker Neel Sachdev led a team of high profile partner defections from Kirkland & Ellis to Paul Weiss, to launch the firm’s English law practice in London.

The bold City play saw Sachdev joined at Paul Weiss by a number of Kirkland partners including private equity partner Roger Johnson, debt finance partner Kanesh Balasubramaniam, and capital markets partners Matthew Merkle and Deirdre Jones.

Earlier this year, Kirkland & Ellis became the first law firm in history to make more than $10bn in revenue, riding a 20% increase to hit $10.56bn, up from $8.8bn last year.

Profit per equity partner (PEP) also rose by 20% to reach a record $11.1m, putting clear daylight between it and its closest rivals in the Global 100.

[email protected]

Posted on

Weil London restructuring trio leave to join Akin

Akin has hired three restructuring partners from Weil in London, including City restructuring co-head Neil Devaney.

Devaney is joining Akin as head of London financial restructuring alongside fellow partners Lois Deasey and Matt Benson.

Devaney and Deasey are both individually recognised by Legal 500 in corporate restructuring and insolvency, where Devaney is a leading partner and Deasey is a next generation partner. Both Akin and Weil are ranked in the top tier for restructuring.

All three lawyers previously spent time at Akin, with Devaney having been a partner there from 2014 to 2019. Benson was a counsel at Akin before joining Weil as a partner in 2020, while Deasey made partner at Akin that year before following the pair to Weil in 2022.

The hires see Akin continue a streak of growth in London. Last November, the firm hired private equity duo Dan Oates and Angela Becker from Ropes & Gray, while this February it brought over leveraged finance partner Adrian Chiodo from Covington & Burling.

For its part, Weil has seen a spate of recent London departures, including a three-partner team led by private funds head Ed Gander which moved to Sidley last year, and finance duo Chris McLaughlin and Alastair McVeigh, who left for Sullivan & Cromwell earlier this year.

In late 2024, the firm also saw four New York restructuring partners leave for Latham & Watkins, including restructuring department co-chair Ray Schrock, who now chairs Latham’s restructuring and special situations practice.

The departures leave Weil with just four restructuring partners in London, according to the firm’s website, including senior European restructuring partner Andrew Wilkinson, who co-headed the practice alongside Devaney.

‘Neil, Lois and Matt are advisors that leading global credit investors consistently turn to,’ said Akin co-chair and restructuring partner Abid Qureshi. ‘They bring a cross‑border sophistication that enhances the integrated US–Europe restructuring platform that’s already central to who we are as a firm.

‘Their return strengthens our entire creditor‑side franchise, from restructuring to special situations, capital solutions and hybrid capital, and ensures we can serve the same clients seamlessly across jurisdictions and the full spectrum of stressed and complex capital structure work.’

London senior partner Barry Russell added: ‘Private credit has reached institutional scale in Europe, the Part 26A regime has reshaped the restructuring toolkit, and cross-border capital structures have made integrated creditor counsel essential.’

[email protected]

Posted on

‘A glimpse into the future’ – Freshfields on how its Anthropic tie-up changes the game

In the wake of Freshfields’ landmark multi-year deal with Anthropic, Freshfields chief innovation officer Gil Perez and partner and co-head of the firm’s internal innovation and legal tech development lab Gerrit Beckhaus, explain why the firm is doubling down on its bet that frontier AI will fundamentally reshape legal services.

‘There is now an acceptance that technology is at the core of legal moving forward,’ says Perez. ‘So though a lot of firms have talked about it, not many have actually implemented it. There’s a lot of talk, no walk.’

Beckhaus (pictured right) shares that conviction and wants Freshfields lawyers to view AI as central to their workflows: ‘The mindset we are trying to instil is that for any given task, you justify why you’re not using AI to help to solve it.’

He stresses that this is not about minimising lawyers’ agency: ‘It’s not just pressing a button and sending off the results, it’s helping lawyers to do better and more impactful work.’

The deal further deepens an existing relationship between the two companies, as Freshfields separately acts as external counsel for Anthropic.

The recently announced deal represents the first time Anthropic has entered into a strategic partnership with a law firm, underlining the mutual respect that underpins the collaboration.

Perez (pictured below) explains that the arrangement will create a blueprint that Freshfields can leverage beyond its work with Anthropic: ‘Our legal team will be working directly with Anthropic’s legal team to explore how we could collaborate and set up workflows between a law firm and Anthropic, when both parties are proficient in AI. We will get a glimpse into the future and be able to then parlay that to our clients.’

A second strand of the partnership focuses on product deployment. Freshfields has already rolled out Claude Opus and Claude Sonnet across the firm, and plans to do the same with Cowork, Anthropic’s agentic AI platform.

At the same time, the firm will gain access to Anthropic’s early-access programme, giving it visibility over products still on the future roadmap.

The announcement comes just one year after Freshfields’ partnership with Google, prompting questions in some quarters about whether there is unnecessary overlap between Google Gemini and Anthropic’s Claude, which occupy similar spaces in enterprise AI.

Beckhaus argues that this optionality is precisely what gives Freshfields its competitive edge in legal tech. Rather than locking lawyers into a single ecosystem, the firm has built a proprietary platform that allows professionals to choose the tools best suited to the task.

Asked whether lawyers and business staff can choose between Claude and Gemini, he confirms they can, adding: ‘And they can use others as well. Most legal tech AI tools don’t provide that capability to choose between models. You just use the applications and that’s it.’

Where AI comes in, the question of billing soon follows, with the perennial question being whether greater efficiencies will lead to lower legal fees.

Beckhaus believes that this framing misunderstands the impact of AI. In his view, the technology is not simply reducing the time spent on tasks, it is enhancing the scope and quality of the service. ‘It’s comparing apples with oranges,’ he says. ‘Because the end product I deliver to the client today, in the due diligence space as an example, is completely different from what we did in the past.’

‘In the past, based on the agreed scope of review, we identified documents in scope and threw out other documents out of scope, because there was a limited commercially feasible possibility to really analyse them,’ he explains. ‘Today, AI allows us to digest way more data and maybe identify more risk to be analysed and mitigated.’

That said, Beckhaus acknowledges that, in certain cases, clients with a higher tolerance for risk may choose a narrower scope of review for a lower fee: ‘Again in the example of due diligence, you decide on the scope, and the level of risk you are comfortable with,’ he says. ‘In general, we are using AI anyway. The question is do we just use it to support the manual review or are there even elements that can be done solely by AI.’

And while the firm is more focused on itself than its peers, there is a confidence that the partnerships with Google and Anthropic have put Freshfields in a strong position.

As Perez says: ‘It’s a year since we made our Google announcements and still no other law firm has come out and adopted it in the same way that we’ve done. By the way, I think they’re wrong. They should look into Google and start adopting it. We’re doing the same thing again with Anthropic, and I expect other firms to follow our lead. And hence, we’re ahead of the pack.’

[email protected]

Posted on

Gibson Dunn boosts Paris with four-partner Clifford Chance funds team

Paris

Gibson Dunn has hired a seven-lawyer investment funds team from Clifford Chance in Paris, marking a significant expansion of its private capital capabilities in Europe.

The group includes three investment funds partners Xavier Comaills, Marie Préat and Elodie Cinconze, alongside tax partner Pierre Goyat. They are joined by of counsel Véronique de Hemmer Gudme, Benjamin Massot and Louis-Guillaume Cousin.

The team will launch Gibson Dunn’s investment funds capability in Paris – complementing existing teams in the US, London, Dubai and Hong Kong.

In addition to strengthening the US firm’s private capital capabilities, the team hire also represents a statement of intent for Gibson Dunn in Europe.

The firm hired Freshfields corporate partner Armando Albarrán in January to lead its new Madrid base, with the office formally opening on Monday (27 April). Last September, it opened in Zurich, with a new office led by international arbitration silk Christopher Harriss KC, who joined from 3 Verulam Buildings. The Spanish office is the firm’s seventh in Europe.

Commenting on the Paris hires, Gibson Dunn investment funds global chair Shukie Grossman said: ‘Paris is a critical hub for the European private capital ecosystem, and this team’s market-leading capabilities and deep client relationships enable us to support sponsors active across Europe and beyond. Together with our recent growth in London and Dubai, their addition will further reinforce Gibson Dunn’s position as a global powerhouse in the investment funds market.’

Comaills, who will lead the Paris team, is a Legal 500 Hall of Famer for private equity fund formation in France. He specialises in the formation and fundraising of private equity, infrastructure and private credit funds, as well as GP stake transactions across European markets. He joined Clifford Chance in 2013 from Ashurst, where he was a partner in the fund finance practice.

Préat, ranked as a leading partner by Legal 500, moved with Comaills from Ashurst to Clifford Chance as a senior associate, and was promoted to partner in 2023. Her practice focuses on advising sponsors and asset managers on primary fundraisings, secondary transactions, continuation vehicles and regulatory matters across private capital strategies.

Cinconze joins after eight years at Clifford Chance, where she made partner in 2024. She advises on the structuring and fundraising of pan-European private equity funds, with particular expertise in secondary transactions and continuation funds.

Goyat, a Legal 500 next-generation partner for transactional/corporate tax, spent nearly seven years at Clifford Chance, making partner in 2025. His practice focuses on the tax structuring of funds and advising on complex transactions, particularly in the energy, infrastructure and transport sectors.

Gibson Dunn has made a number of recent funds hires, notably including Duncan McKay, who joined from Fried Frank as head of fund finance in New York last November, and former DLA Piper investment funds co-chair James O’Donnell, who joined in London last March.

Paris has seen a series of high-profile partner moves in recent months, driven by the increasing interest of private capital clients in Europe. High profile moves include Ropes & Gray‘s March 2025 launch in the city with a three-partner team from Clifford Chance, as well as Latham & Watkins‘ hire of a four-partner energy and infrastructure PE team this February, also from CC.

Clifford Chance has also made hires in the French capital, bringing over a pair of partners from Orrick earlier this month.

Commenting on his team’s move, Comaills said: ‘Alongside London, Paris has become a central marketplace for primary and secondary transactions and GP stakes, notably in the infrastructure and healthcare sectors. Global sponsors increasingly require integrated counsel across Europe’s financial centers and favour European integrated platforms supported by a strong US fund formation capability. Gibson Dunn’s presence in the US and across those centers, combined with the strength of its global platform, makes it an ideal home for our practice.’

‘We are excited to bring our expertise to a firm so well positioned to deliver seamless cross-border support and contribute to the continued growth of an already world-class investment funds practice,’ he concluded.

[email protected]

Posted on

‘I’ve learned not to take keyboard warriors seriously’ – Garden Court’s Oscar Davies on practising law in the culture war

As the fallout from last year’s For Women Scotland case reshapes equality law and fuels uncertainty across workplaces and courts, non-binary barrister Oscar Davies is building a practice that extends far beyond litigation.

Davies wears many hats: ‘educator,’ ‘activist,’ ‘thought leader’ – although they’d use none of these words to describe themselves: ‘too cringe.’

A five-year call junior at London’s Garden Court Chambers, they have developed a practice across employment, human rights, commercial, and housing law, centred on advocating for trans and non-binary people and other underrepresented communities.

But Davies doesn’t limit their advocacy to the courtroom. Advising MPs on rulings, delivering DEI training to local authorities, NGOs and law firms, and spearheading equality initiatives like FreeBar’s Visibility Project are just a few of the strings to their bow.

However, they are perhaps best known for their online presence, where, under the handle @nonbinarybarrister, they advocate on the front line of the culture war, translating fast-moving legal developments into short-form content to over 30,000 followers and counting across multiple platforms.

More than a barrister

Davies hit the mainstream five years ago after an innocuous post on X to celebrate their tenancy. The title ‘Mx’ Oscar Davies, which made them the first publicly recognised non-binary barrister in the UK, drew the attention of the media, with coverage in The Times and Reuters.

‘It was a time that wasn’t as violent about trans rights’ they recall, referring to an earlier period where protections were being clarified and expanded, such as in the landmark case Mrs R Taylor v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd [2020] which extended workplace protections to include non-binary and gender fluid identities.

‘I realised I had this platform where I could be useful to people,’ Davies says. ‘I could use social media to inform my community what these cases are about, and what their rights are, because otherwise the law can be so opaque.’

But this visibility, Davies acknowledges, comes with a clear set of conditions. They are highly aware of their ‘palatability’ to a general audience: white, male-presenting and highly-educated.

‘I like to leverage my privilege, and to use it to speak out,’ they say. ‘Because people wouldn’t listen as much if I were more obviously trans, or not white.’

For Davies, the role is less about personal branding than it is extending the function of advocacy: ‘I don’t need the validation. I don’t need to be on social media to be successful,’ they say.

What matters is reach: ‘Instead of helping one client, you can help thousands of people, which is kind of cool.’

Davies is undoubtedly riding high professionally. Most recently, they have been nominated for LGBQ+ Champion of the Year at the Legal 500 ESG Awards, building off their win in the same category two years ago. More broadly, instructions have surged, a book is on the horizon, and, with a consistently busy practice, they can avoid what they describe as the ‘the bread-and-butter work’ most junior barristers rely on.

But they are also aware that theirs is not a conventional path: ‘There is a degree to which the use of social media by lawyers is seen from a traditional perspective as uncouth, or looked down upon. But the reality is that my social media has also got me better work. It’s got me better instructions, has helped me position as an expert, and I’m only five years into my practice as a tenant.’

Demand in a hostile climate

But this trajectory, Davies clarifies, is inseparable from a deterioration in conditions for trans people.

‘The uptake in work is bittersweet,’ they say. ‘Because it is at the expense of trans people. It is the result of trans people facing more discrimination.’

The turning point, they suggest, was the UK Supreme Court’s decision in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers last April, which held that references to ‘man’ and ‘woman’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex rather than acquired gender under a Gender Recognition Certificate.

A year on, Davies has witnessed profound consequences, both personally and in the public sphere.

‘The impact has been severe and devastating,’ they say. ‘Both for trans people, but also for employers who don’t know what to do in terms of policies and feel like they’re in permanent threat of litigation.’

‘Many, many cases have arisen from it. So, in terms of clarifying the law, I think it is currently as clear as mud.’

Davies is currently co-counsel alongside Garden Court’s Amanda Weston KC and Jenn Lawrence, instructed by Trans Legal Clinic in an application to the European Court of Human Rights on behalf of Dr Victoria McCloud, Britain’s first transgender judge, challenging the Supreme Court’s ruling in For Women Scotland.

Davies sees the situation as produced by a combination of media narratives, political debate and legal outcomes, with media trigger topics like sports, predation and access to toilets now reinforced in law.

‘My community is basically in fight or flight mode at the moment because of this attack which seems to come from the media, the government at times and possibly the judiciary,’ they say.

‘It’s quite disheartening when the most senior judges in the country have had an effect which is leading to potentially more harassment and more discrimination,’ they conclude.

For Davies, it’s personal. As a non-binary person, they have faced harassment like being misgendered in court and having anti-trans activists turning up at their chambers.

And Davies does not expect the broader social and legal transphobia to let up anytime soon: ‘I don’t think we are at the trough yet,’ they say. ‘It going to get a lot worse before it gets better.’

The cost of visibility

For their part, Davies’ online advocacy is an attempt to shift the discourse; a recent series called ‘Myth Busters,’ for example, serves as an informed, evidence-based challenge to stereotypes.

But, as they put it, ‘social media is a strange game, one that always comes with a degree of risk,’ and backlash is often the price of far-reaching exposure.

Davies speaks candidly about the hate comments and ‘pile-ons’ they receive on their posts, framing them as part of the territory: ‘I’ve learned not to take keyboard warriors seriously. If they are spending so much time on my posts and comments, all they are doing is driving my content.’

In fact, accessing those beyond their own echo chamber is part of the point: ‘While some of the comments can be passionate and scary, I’m quite glad that I’ve managed to reach those people on the algorithm, because it means I am reaching people that would not usually digest such content.’

The sound of silence

Davies is largely positive about their professional counterparts, citing the support of their chambers and their surprise at the ‘openness’ of the profession.

‘Law as a profession is definitely less traditionalist than I thought before coming into it,’ they say.

However, they make clear that willingness to engage with the issues proactively is still far from universal. ‘It is a dangerous position to be in, to put your head above the parapet,’ Davies acknowledges. ‘And I wish that lawyers would do more to speak out on these issues.’

In a social landscape increasingly defined by legally constructed boundaries, Davies argues that silence in the profession is no longer a neutral position.

‘Ultimately these issues are human rights issues, which can affect anyone. Disability rights could be next; no one is safe in that regard.’

This, they suggest, places a particular responsibility on lawyers – not just to interpret the law, but to engage with how it is being used and shaped.

‘Legal professionals are those who have helped make the framework for what we have now – the Equality Act, the Gender Recognition Act – and so there is a degree to which we have a collective consciousness when there are human rights violations happening right in front of us.’

‘Some people choose to be wilfully ignorant of these issues. And I don’t really see that as justifiable when you’re a lawyer and have a knowledge of what’s right and what’s not. That is unforgivable.’

[email protected]

Posted on

LB 100 duo take on Leigh Day in UK’s largest pollution group action

A pair of UK-headquartered firms is acting for the defendants on a river pollution claim billed as the largest ever brought in the UK, with the parties in the High Court today (27 April) for the first case management conference.

Leigh Day is representing residents and businesses surrounding the rivers Wye, Lugg, and Usk on the Welsh-English border on a collective action case against Welsh Water and Avara Foods, alleging that the companies have caused pollution in the rivers. International and environmental disputes partner Oliver Holland is leading for the claimants.

Pinsent Masons is acting for Avara, with product liability and regulation and commercial litigation partner Jacqueline Harris, from the firm’s Edinburgh office, and banking and financial services disputes partner Mike Hawthorne, in London, leading the case.

Henderson Chambers barristers were instructed by Pinsents, including Charles Gibson KC, Thomas Evans and Celia Oldham.

Avara, a poultry farming company operating in Herefordshire, supplies a number of well-known supermarket and restaurant chains including Nando’s, Tesco and McDonald’s. The claimants allege that the poultry units Avara operates in Herefordshire have polluted the rivers by releasing phosphorus from chicken manure, which has leaked into the waterways.

Kennedys is representing Welsh Water, with the claimants alleging that the utility company has released sewage into the rivers, which Leigh Day argues is the second largest source of pollution.

Head of Kennedys’ product liability and life sciences London team, Barnaby Winckler, is leading for Welsh Water.

Leigh Day states that over 4,500 local residents have joined the claim, making it the largest environmental pollution claim ever brought in the UK. LB understands that the number of claimants that has currently been reported to the court stands at 1,309.

In a statement, Holland said: ‘This first court appearance marks an important step in the Wye, Lugg and Usk pollution claim.’

He continued: ‘There has been a great deal of effort put in by the community and environmental campaigners to help drive the proceedings to this point, showing the strength of feeling from those involved about the state of the rivers. They feel that the government and regulators have not done enough to prevent the deterioration of these rivers, leaving court action as their only option to pursue environmental justice.’

‘We are hoping for a positive outcome, and to be able to look ahead to presenting our clients’ arguments in full to the High Court in due course,’ Holland concluded.

A spokesperson for Avara said of the hearing: ‘This case management conference is a procedural hearing and does not consider the merits of the case.’

‘The allegations are misconceived and reflect a misunderstanding of both our business and the wider factors affecting river health. We are confident in our position and believe the claim is unsupported by any proper scientific basis,’ they continued.

A Welsh Water spokesperson said: ‘We believe this case is misguided and risks diverting time and resources away from the shared goal of improving river water quality.’

‘Any financial penalties would directly reduce the funding available to invest in essential services and deliver the environmental improvements our customers expect,’ they concluded.

[email protected]

Photo by Rob Wicks on Unsplash.

Posted on

Pinsent Masons takes pizza the action on Franco Manca rescue deal

Pinsent Masons has advised the operating company behind UK pizza chain Franco Manca on its CVA, with the restructuring set to result in the closure of 16 restaurants.

London restructuring partner Edward Smith, who joined Pinsents from Travers Smith in September last year, led the team, which also involved real estate partner Carl Scott.

Fulham Shore, which operates Franco Manca alongside Greek restaurant chain The Real Greek, confirmed the CVA in a statement:

‘Over the last two years under our current management, we have been making strong progress against several key performance indicators, with productivity, customer satisfaction, happiness ratings, loyalty and frequency improving significantly,’ said Fulham Shore CEO Khan.

‘However, even restaurant businesses that are doing all the right things from a customer and operational perspective are not immune to widely publicised pressures impacting the hospitality industry. This includes significant increases in NI and NLW in recent history, as well as a lack of business rates relief for the restaurant sector and disproportionately high VAT in the UK compared with Europe.’

He concluded: ‘As a result of these external cost pressures, we have to make sure that we are putting our business on a sustainable footing for long-term growth and development. This is why we have taken the difficult decision to undertake a CVA for Franco Manca, which will see a minority proportion of our restaurants closing where they are no longer sustainable in this cost environment.’

Fulham Shore was acquired by Tokyo-listed Toridoll for £93.4m in 2023, with Ashurst advising Toridoll’s financial adviser Peel Hunt on the transaction.

Pinsent Masons has built a significant retail restructuring practice in recent years. Last August, it advised the Poundland board on its major restructuring plan, with Slaughter and May advising Poundland owners Pepco Group and DLA Piper advising acquirer Gordon Brothers. In 2023, Pinsents acted for wilko administrators PwC following the hardware retailer’s collapse into administration.

[email protected]

Photo from Wikimedia Commons, under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic licence. Attribution: Daniel from Glasgow, United Kingdom – The streets of London.

Posted on

Linklaters and Proskauer lead on £17.5bn financial advisory acquisition

Linklaters and Proskauer have taken the lead roles as financial advisory firm Shackleton Advisers acquires Hurst Point Group, in a deal set to create one of the UK’s largest independent financial planning firms, with combined assets under management of £17.5bn.

The deal marks the largest acquisition for UK-based financial adviser Shackleton, including both Hurst Point’s financial planning and investment management businesses. The combined entity will have 44,000 clients around the country and more than 850 employees, spread across 38 offices.

Linklaters advised Hurst Point and its majority shareholder The Carlyle Group on the sale, with a London-based team led by private equity and capital solutions partner Andrew Lynch and private equity partner John Tsui, as well as tax partner Jamie Coomber.

Lynch and Tsui previously acted for Carlyle in 2020, when Hurst Point, then known as Harwood Wealth Management, was taken private by the PE firm.

Proskauer is advising Shackleton, with a London team led by PE partner Adam Creed.

Creed also has a history working on deals involving Shackleton, including on the team that advised Lee Equity Partners on its June 2025 acquisition of a majority stake in the financial advisory firm, with Creed leading alongside fellow London PE partner Andrew Wingfield, on a team that also included London finance partner Barry Newman.

Under the terms of the deal, Carlyle will become a minority shareholder in Shackleton, while Lee Equity Partners will continue as the company’s majority shareholder.

Following the transaction’s completion, subject to regulatory approval, Shackleton non-executive chair Andrew Fisher and chief executive officer Paul Feeney will continue to serve in their respective roles at the combined business, while current Hurst Point CEO Andrew Westenberger will join the Shackleton executive committee.

Commenting on the deal, Fisher said: ‘The significantly increased scale of the Shackleton Group resulting from this acquisition will enhance our ability to invest efficiently in technology, propositions, and regulatory and compliance capabilities, for the benefit of clients, employees and shareholders.’

[email protected]

Posted on

Simmons & Simmons promotes nine new partners, with a reduced focus on London

Simmons & Simmons office atrium

Simmons & Simmons has announced nine partner promotions across its global offices, with three based in London.

While the number of partner promotions is exactly in line with last year’s round, the geographic spread is much broader this year. Of the nine promotions last year, seven were London-based, with one promotion each in Hong Kong and Brussels. This year, the firm has elevated individuals across Bristol, Abu Dhabi, Frankfurt, Dublin, Singapore and Dubai, in addition to London.

The financial markets and real estate practice saw four partner promotions, while the financial services and tax department saw three partner promotions, compared to four in total across financial markets last year. Business services and the corporate and commercial practice areas saw one partner promotion each, while the disputes team had no new partners this year, down from four last year.

This year women make up 56% of those promoted, or five of nine, compared with 44%, or four, last year.

Senior partner Julian Taylor said: ‘Each of these new partners has demonstrated outstanding talent, drive and a deep commitment to our clients and to the firm; their promotions are thoroughly deserved.’

He continued: ‘I’m also very pleased that the firm has met its target that 50% of our promotions are women, and that we remain on track for women to represent 50% of all new internal and lateral partners annually by 2029.’

Global managing partner Emily Monastiriotis added: ‘Our internal partner promotions are one of the clearest expressions of who we are as a firm. They reflect our belief in developing exceptional people, our confidence in the future we are building, and our determination to grow with ambition, purpose and integrity.’

[email protected]

The new partners are:

UK:

  • Oliver Ward, financial markets and real estate, Bristol
  • Joanne Elson, corporate and commercial, London
  • Camilla Jessel, financial services and tax, London
  • Tristram Lawton, financial services and tax, London

International:

  • Diederik Wintershoven, financial services and tax, Abu Dhabi
  • Lena Eli, financial markets and real estate, Frankfurt
  • Karen Sheil, financial markets and real estate, Dublin
  • Edward Laird, financial markets and real estate, Singapore
  • Victoria Grundy, business services, Dubai
Posted on

Freshfields concludes redundancies in Manchester, with around 20 paralegals axed

Around 20 paralegal roles from Freshfields’ Manchester business services hub were axed as a result of a round of redundancies announced in September last year.

LB understands that, after the redundancies completed in 2025 with approximately 20 paralegal roles cut, Freshfields has not planned any further cutbacks to its paralegal team in Manchester.

A spokesperson from Freshfields said: ‘As we’ve said previously, we continue to evolve our business to keep pace with a fast-changing legal market – investing in technology, building key skills in house and adapting our model to meet future client needs.’

‘Any changes that took place in 2025 were communicated directly with those affected at the time, and we do not provide breakdowns by team or location,’ they concluded.

Freshfields launched its Manchester office in 2015 as a base for its business services hub, which the firm stated aimed to deliver a ‘highly efficient service’ to clients.

The firm also operates a global support services hub in Bratislava, launched in 2022, which employed over 50 finance, HR and additional support staff.

Cuts to business services roles have increased over the last few years, as firms continue to grapple with how AI is changing workflows.

Most recently, Baker McKenzie announced cuts of up to 10% of its global business service roles, including positions in London and Belfast, following a review of its back office functions.

With over 6,000 business services staff employed across its global offices, the cuts could mean up to 600 people were made redundant by Bakers.

Clifford Chance was also revealed to be cutting around 10% of its business services roles within its London office last year. The firm reviewed around 550 roles across its finance, HR and IT departments, with roughly 50 redundancies expected as well as 35 role changes.

Additionally, Clyde & Co conducted a review of its support staff across the Asia Pacific region in December last year, and BCLP announced a ‘business modernisation programme’ last spring, that impacted around 8% of the firm’s global business population.

A number of firms operate specific business services centres outside of London and other regional hubs, including Freshfields in Manchester and Bratislava, Clifford Chance in Newcastle and A&O Shearman in Belfast.

These offices were set up in the last decade to boost productivity, but face increasing strain as AI continues to change how legal work is carried out.

Just yesterday, Freshfields also announced a multi-year partnership with Anthropic, which will see the firm expand its use of the company’s leading AI software Claude.

[email protected]

Posted on

‘Overwhelming approval’ – DLA Piper partners approve new single leadership structure

Partners at DLA Piper have voted to approve the dismantling of the firm’s long-standing Swiss verein structure, in a move to strengthen its competitive edge.

The firm announced today (24 April) that partners at DLA Piper US LLP and DLA Piper International LLP ‘overwhelmingly approved’ the proposed single leadership structure.

The plan also introduces a new global holding entity and global leadership team, led by Frank Ryan as global chair and co-CEO and Charles Severs as global co-CEO, which would sit above its existing US and international LLPs.

Also on the leadership team are Austin-based transactional practices head John Gilluly and New York-based US disputes chair Loren Brown as vice chairs, Birmingham, UK-based Sandra Wallace and Chicago-based Rick Chesley as global co-managing partners, and Benjamin Parameswaran in Hamburg as international managing director for clients.

The firm first announced plans to unify the verein in March, citing a need for greater strategic alignment. At least 75% of the international partnership and a weighted 66% of the US partnership had to vote in favour of the overhaul.

Now approved, the changes are due to take effect from 1 May, and include a move to align partner compensation and incentive schemes, and firmwide use of the US calendar year-end from 1 January 2027.

‘DLA Piper already advises clients on some of the market’s most complex local and cross-border issues, but our ambition is to bring the full strength of our platform to the market,’ Severs said in a statement.

Ryan added: ‘This alignment strengthens our ability to invest in the lawyers, teams, and technologies that will reshape competition in major legal markets.’

In a March interview with LB, Ryan and Severs stressed that the new compensation system will make it easier to recruit and retain talent, a requirement for global law firms in an increasingly competitive talent war.

[email protected]

Posted on

Fresh capital: Paul Weiss, White & Case lead as General Atlantic tops up Joe & the Juice with Abu Dhabi-backed investment

Paul Weiss and White & Case have taken the lead roles as Abu Dhabi-based Emirates International Investment Company (EIIC) has acquired a minority stake in Joe & the Juice, in a deal that values the Danish juice bar chain at $1.8bn.

Paul Weiss advised Joe & the Juice and its majority owner, US-based PE house General Atlantic, with a transatlantic team led by head of European M&A Will Aitken-Davies in London, global M&A co-chair Matthew Abbott and capital markets partner Timothy Cruickshank in New York, and capital markets partner Christopher Cummings, who splits his time between New York and Toronto.

London-based global tax co-head Timothy Lowe and tax partners Cian O’Connor and Rohit Pisal advised on tax. Also involved were antitrust partners Ross Ferguson in Brussels and Chad de Souza and Yuni Sobel in New York, and litigation department co-head Jessica Carey and litigation partners Staci Yablon and Lisa Velasquez in New York.

Danish firm Moalem Weitemeyer acted as co-counsel for Joe & the Juice, with a team led by firm founder and chair Dan Moalem, family offices and private clients team lead Sebastian Poulsen, tax partner Tobias Steinø, and M&A partner Thomas Enevoldsen.

EIIC, the investment arm of Abu Dhabi conglomerate National Holding, instructed White & Case, which field a Dubai-based team comprised of M&A partners Jan Jensen and Abdulwahid Alulama and local partner Adnan Bekdur.

Thomas Nørøxe, CEO of Joe & the Juice, said of the deal: ‘Joe & the Juice has scaled into a truly global brand, and we continue to see strong momentum across our markets. We are pleased to deepen our partnership with National Holding Group, as we pursue our international growth ambitions and bring the JOE experience to more customers around the world.’

General Atlantic – whose portfolio also includes consumer brands Shein, Depop and cosmetics label Too Faced – first acquired a $641m majority stake in the retailer from Swedish investment company Valedo in 2023, increasing its share from an initial minority investment in 2016 to 90%.

All three firms were involved on the deal. Paul Weiss and Moalem Weitemyer advised General Atlantic and Joe & the Juice respectively, while White & Case advised Valedo, with Jensen leading.

Paul Weiss recently advised General Atlantic on its 2024 acquisition of Actis, a global investor in sustainable infrastructure. Corporate partner Matthew Abbott also led on the deal.

Joe & the Juice, the health-focused sandwich, smoothie and coffee chain – known for its viral ‘Tunacado’ panini – operates more than 480 locations across 23 countries spanning North America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

According to its most recent financial report, the company brought in 3.3bn Danish krone in revenue in 2025 – roughly £380m – and opened 75 new locations, expanding into Mexico, Morocco and Turkey.

‘We have strong momentum across the business and we’re moving in the right direction towards our ambition of 1,000 stores within the coming years,’ CEO Nørøxe said in the report. ‘We’ve built a solid foundation – now it’s about accelerating from here.’

[email protected]

Posted on

The art of the buyout: how clients rank London’s top private equity teams

When it comes to the top law firms advising the elite private equity shops, success is usually measured by two metrics: deal values and deal volumes.

But those are not the only metrics that matter. Behind the mega-deals and blockbuster years of activity lie the deep relationships that drive repeat business. And while PE was once synonymous with raised voices and uncompromising negotiators, more recently the emphasis has shifted toward lawyers who facilitate deals rather than fight them. 

Data gathered during Legal 500 research sheds light on the firms doing the best job of building these relationships, drawing on a range of key metrics to identify those most highly rated for their client service. (The following data is based on referee responses from Legal 500’s high-value private equity research.)

Commercial knowledge of the sector

Kirkland & Ellis is a fixture in the upper echelons of the private equity market, and topped the London Stock Exchange Group’s deal value rankings for PE-backed M&A in 2025, advising on almost 300 deals worth a combined $274bn, more than $100bn ahead of any other firm.

Legal 500 data underlines that expertise, with clients rating it as the top firm for commercial knowledge of the sector.

The firm’s practice includes three Legal 500 Hall of Fame partners – David Higgins (pictured), Matthew Elliott and Adrian Maguire – as well as two other leading partners, Stuart Boyd and Alvaro Membrillera.

Key mandates for the firm during 2025 included advising KKR on its acquisition of European healthcare company Karo from EQT for a reported $2.6bn and leading for Advent on its £3.56bn acquisition of British multinational Reckitt’s essential homes business.

Billing: transparency and value

For billing, Ropes & Gray is the top scoring firm for value, while Linklaters ranks top for billing transparency. Notable deals for the UK firm so far this year have included advising a Blackstone-led consortium on the £1.4bn takeover of FTSE 250 manufacturer Senior, and leading for Permira and Warburg Pincus on the £2.7bn sale of wealth management group Evelyn Partners to NatWest Group.

The firm’s work on the Evelyn Partners sale came after it acted for Permira, Blackstone, and portfolio company Adevinta on the sale of its Spanish business to EQT in mid-2025.

The firm’s financial sponsors practice is co-led by partners Alex Woodward and Ben Rodham. Woodward, a Legal 500 Hall of Famer and Linklaters lifer, has broad experience advising sponsor clients on all manner of transactions from restructurings to IPOs, and has strong relationships with both Carlyle and Hg. Other key names in the team include Legal 500 leading partner Tracy Lochhead and next generation partner Ben Suen, who was made up two years ago.

Overall client service

When considering all ten of the client service metrics that Legal 500 researches, US firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher comes out top, with strong showings for resourcing, efficiency and associate quality.

The team in London is led by European private equity practice chair Gavin Gordon, working alongside other key partners such as Claire McDaid and David Arnold.

According to Gordon (pictured), the firm’s model is to work with clients across the entire spectrum, from late stage growth through to large-cap deals. ‘This means our entire team are more experienced at staffing deals appropriately because the reality is on a small deal you can’t end up with a big-cap bill,’ Gordon says. ‘It doesn’t surprise me we come out ranked well for efficiency; this is something we do day to day. We are not learning on the job.’

This spectrum of deal size and complexity gives associates ample opportunities to take on different roles and responsibilities. ‘The experience associates gain in advising on a variety of deal sizes gives them a unique skillset when it comes to working on larger deals with compressed time frames and multiple work streams across a large team,’ Gordon explains.

At the very end of 2025, the firm advised on a deal which was effectively done in seven days between Christmas and New Year – Levine Leichtman Capital Partners’ sale of its Global Loan Agency Services business to Oakley Capital – an achievement Gordon puts down to the commitment of his team. ‘Being able to bring a team that’s motivated to deliver that sort of product to a client is not easy,’ he says. ‘You have to have people invested in our business to do this.’

‘Whenever you’re doing a deal, there is a potential client on the other side of the table,’ Gordon says. ‘We never want to be seen as an impediment to any transaction and finding solutions to complex issues is an easy way to demonstrate your skillset.’

[email protected]

Photo by Jakub Żerdzicki on Unsplash

Posted on

‘The hardest part is building critical mass’ – as Big Law flocks to Dallas, what do firms need to succeed?

‘The Dallas market has shifted a lot,’ says Krista Hanvey (pictured), co-chair of the employee benefits and executive compensation practice at Gibson Dunn, and co-partner in charge of the firm’s Dallas office. ‘There’s a lot of competition, as we’re all going after the same Fortune 500 clients headquartered here.’

With a presence in Dallas since the 1980s, Gibson Dunn is part of an older guard of major US firms active in the city. Others include Sidley Austin, which entered through a merger with local firm Richards, Medlock and Andrews in 1996, Kirkland & Ellis and Reed Smith, which opened in 2018 and 2019 respectively through a clutch of local partner hires.

Over the last few years, more international firms have followed, with Simpson Thacher becoming the latest to announce a presence in the city, hiring Kirkland liability management partner David Nemecek in February to lead its capital structure solutions practice.

Meanwhile, Dechert announced a launch in January, with corporate partner Joanna Lin set to lead an office after joining from McDermott Will & Schulte as part of a 20-partner team hire that also saw the Philadelphia-headquartered firm launch in Chicago.

Latham & Watkins is widely expected to make its long-awaited entry in the city shortly. ‘There’s been a rumour for the last 12 years that Latham is coming to Dallas,’ observes one partner.

This rumour gained more traction in February this year, when the California-founded giant hired two partners in the city, recruiting litigators Taj Clayton and Scott Thomas from Kirkland and Winston & Strawn respectively.

However, Latham has not confirmed whether the hires will see it formally launch a new office in Dallas or whether they will be based in Houston. ‘Taj and Scott are just the kind of partners we want on our team, and their addition reinforces our deep connection and commitment to the vibrant Texas market and our big ambitions here,’ says Houston managing partner Nick Dhesi. ‘We are laser-focused on building the best team in this market and across our global platform to deliver outstanding results for our clients.”

Other major firms recently opening in Dallas include Paul Hastings, which launched in 2024 with its hire of an eight-partner finance team from Vinson & Elkins split across Dallas and Houston.

King & Spalding also launched in 2024, with its hire of Gibson Dunn trial lawyer Veronica Moyé, and has continued to expand this year with the addition of a total of 15 partners from Winston & Strawn, including 13 litigators and two in finance and restructuring, with all but three of the partners based in Dallas. Included among the number is Tom Melsheimer, now global head of trial at King & Spalding, described by one commentator as ‘one of the top trial lawyers in Texas, if not the top.’

A surging market

‘Everyone sees the same thing in Dallas,’ says Melsheimer. ‘A lot of business, a lot of opportunity, and a somewhat underserved legal market in terms of the big national firms.’

Many partners point to the sheer scale of the business opportunity in the city. The Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) metroplex is home to 21 Fortune 500 companies, from homegrown success stories like 7-Eleven and Southwest Airlines to national brands like AT&T, which moved its headquarters in 2008. The Texas governor’s website lists seven corporate HQ relocations to DFW in 2024, of 24 to the state in total – the most of any metropolitan area in Texas.

On top of this, a range of major banks and financial institutions have increased their investment in Dallas, with Wells Fargo opening a new campus late last year, and Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Scotiabank all launching regional hubs.

Trey Cox (pictured), global litigation co-chair at Gibson Dunn and co-partner in charge of the firm’s Dallas office alongside Hanvey, summarises the effect of this: ‘As more Fortune 500 companies and financial institutions come into the market, top 50 firms follow. With the bigger companies and the bigger law firms comes a more sophisticated set of legal services consumers. Everyone benefits from that – primarily the clients.’

This activity is already having a visible effect on Big Law in Dallas, with corporate the most active lateral hiring practice area in Dallas in 2025, according to data from legal market intelligence provider SurePoint, with 21 corporate partner hires into top 100 firms, of 62 total.

‘Dallas presents a lot of potential for law firms to build on core industry practices’

Holt Foster, who joined Willkie Farr & Gallagher from Sidley to help launch the firm’s Dallas office in 2024, and now serves as office managing partner, explains the rationale for Willkie’s move in similar terms: ‘With so many Willkie clients moving to, or expanding operations in, Dallas, Willkie felt it was important to have boots on the ground with our clients – side by side – with a first in class team of local lawyers.’

He also highlights the diversity of the Dallas market, in contrast to energy-dominated Houston: ‘Dallas has a very diverse economy with many thriving business sectors – energy, real estate, finance, technology, healthcare – the whole gamut.’

He continues: ‘Dallas presents a lot of potential for law firms to build on core industry practices, as well as cross-marketing to new clients and industries.’

Scott Parel (pictured), Dallas co-managing partner and global private equity co-lead at Sidley, makes a similar point: ‘Dallas is a different market than Houston with different businesses and industries, and that requires a strategic approach,’ he says.

This surge in activity across a broad range of industries has fed and been fed by state policy. ‘Texas doesn’t have a state income tax,’ notes Dallas-based Major, Lindsey & Africa partner recruiting group director Dave Beran. ‘It’s perceived as a place that’s friendly for business. You could almost compare it to somewhere like Dubai.’

‘The Texas Stock Exchange has the potential to spread like wildfire’

Another development with major potential is the establishment of the Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE) – a burgeoning rival to the two major US exchanges, Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). TXSE received regulatory approval last September, and is targeting a 2026 launch, with its physical headquarters in Dallas.

‘A major indicator of the strength of the market has been the establishment of the Texas Stock Exchange,’ says Haynes Boone chair and firmwide managing partner Taylor Wilson. ‘That’s indicative of a thriving financial market, and it’s also attracting a lot of interest from major corporations.’

Angela Zambrano (pictured), Dallas office co-lead, executive committee member, and litigation global practice group co-lead at Sidley, concurs: ‘It’s exciting. It says a lot about Dallas and the State of Texas. We have felt the shift of businesses to Texas for several years, and these changes are reflecting what drew many to our state – a genuine desire to help businesses thrive for the benefit of their stakeholders and employees.’

Whether the exchange will be a success remains to be seen – and to take on established players like the NYSE and Nasdaq will be no easy feat. But partners believe there are reasons for excitement.

‘They are trying to disrupt the status quo by making a real effort to be business-forward,’ says Zambrano. ‘Given the size of the business community and the general “can do” attitude in this state, this has the potential to spread like wildfire.’

Litigation drivers

In addition to corporate work, firms are also investing heavily in disputes, with Latham and King & Spalding both focusing their recent hiring efforts on litigators, and Paul Hastings bringing in litigators Stephanie Clouston and Matthew Durfee from Winston & Strawn at the end of last year.

According to data tracked by SurePoint, litigation was the most active practice area for hires into top 100 firms in Dallas for the three years between 2022-24, with 26 hires in 2022, 19 in 2023, and 18 in 2024. In 2025 it was the second most active practice area, with 16 hires.

King & Spalding’s Melsheimer (pictured) argues that this is driven by broader changes in the litigation world: ‘The cases are getting higher stakes and more challenging for defendants, there are bigger cases, and legal theories that allow for large recoveries, so companies are facing potential liability at a greater scale than perhaps ever before, and when they’re looking to their law firms, they want to be able to hire a firm that has a lawyer that has tried big cases. And with fewer and fewer cases being tried over the last 20 years, but the stakes of the cases that get tried being higher, there’s a shrinking pool of available talent.’

Here, too, the state’s business friendly policies are driving activity. Established in 2023 after decades of attempts, the Texas Business Court currently serves five jurisdictions across Texas, with a focus on high-value business disputes.

‘There’s a chance Texas becomes the new Delaware’

‘It’s a sea change in the litigation world,’ says Russell Lewis, Houston partner in charge at Baker Botts. ‘It’s driving a lot of these commercial disputes to the business courts.

It’s supposed to take some of the burden off the traditional courts, which are often quite backloaded. That backload in part is because of this influx of people and companies to Texas.’

Collin Cox, Houston co-partner in charge at Gibson Dunn, concurs: ‘The business courts are another place where demand is expressing itself. It’s really exciting. It’s a great development for us.’

Mike Absmeier (pictured), co-managing partner at Houston disputes boutique Gibbs & Bruns, sees potential: ‘There’s a chance Texas becomes the new Delaware,’ he says, referencing the long-established dominance of the Delaware Court of Chancery in high-stakes corporate governance litigation.

If it happens, though, this will be in the future – partners note that the Texas Business Court has not yet generated a major increase in new claims.

How to open in Dallas

Texas is home to a thriving ecosystem of disputes boutiques, with smaller firms prominent in both Houston and Dallas.

This means that, as elsewhere, some national and international firms see a boutique tie-up as a potential entry point to the market. But examples of success are relatively rare.

Ashley McKeand Kleber (pictured), Absmeier’s co-managing partner at Gibbs & Bruns, argues that boutique firms provide unique opportunities to develop talent, pointing to a culture where ‘young lawyers are given opportunities early, so it’s not a surprise for our clients or for judges to see young lawyers up and active in the courtroom or in depositions.’

Absmeier goes further: ‘I get inquiries about mergers all the time, but it’s not something we’re interested in. For us to merge, you’d need all our partners to say, “Heck yeah! Let’s change our name, leave our office, change our culture.” It’s not going to happen.’

‘With so many large blocks of attorneys moving in Dallas, Willkie felt the best strategy was to selectively target premier transactional partners’

Instead. many recent launches in Dallas have seen firms combine lawyers from a clutch of competitors – an approach that many argue makes it easier to integrate a new office into a firm’s existing culture.

‘In an effort to ensure we had a successful opening in Dallas, we studied the market for almost two years,’ says Willkie’s Foster (pictured).

Willkie announced its launch in May 2024 with a trio of hires from Haynes Boone, but also brought over four partners who had joined the firm since 2018 from Kirkland, Sidley, legacy Shearman & Sterling, and King & Spalding, with Foster joining that June, also from Sidley.

Since then, the firm has built out its office with hires from a range of firms, most recently including corporate partners Jesse Betts and Jessica Hammons from Akin and Nathan Meredith from A&O Shearman, all of whom joined the firm last July.

Foster explains the strategy behind this approach: ‘With so many recent firm mergers and large blocks of attorneys moving in Dallas, Willkie felt the best strategy was to selectively target some of the premier transactional partners in Dallas and build around them.

‘Opening in a market like Dallas comes with real challenges; the hardest part is building critical mass in an already tight talent market’

‘Now, almost two years into it, with 30 attorneys and growing, we feel that we picked the right approach for Dallas.’

Foster also notes issues for firms opening in Dallas: ‘While the diverse economy in Dallas makes it a very attractive destination for law firm expansion, it also presents some obstacles when trying to create synergies among lateral partners.’

Foster stresses that new hires must complement each other: ‘Building a new office by bringing together lawyers from various firms with significantly diverse practices can really create long-term obstacles for successful integration, cross marketing and market share, because there is no core theme among their respective practices,’ he says.

Sidley’s Parel, who joined his firm from Weil in 2013, alongside Zambrano, makes a similar point: ‘Opening in a market like Dallas comes with real challenges; the hardest part is building critical mass in an already tight talent market. But that’s also what makes it meaningful. When you’re able to assemble the right team in that environment, it signals long-term commitment and strength.’

The strategy is certainly popular: of the recent firms to open in Dallas, Willkie, Paul Hastings, and King & Spalding have all made prominent hires from a range of different firms – with many of these hires already noted as market-movers.

And partners are optimistic about the city’s future. ‘You don’t need a proof of concept to be in Dallas,’ says Melsheimer. ‘Texas generally and Dallas specifically are among the most thriving legal markets in the United States. Dallas makes all the sense in the world.’

[email protected]

‘The energy capital of the world’ – why the global and US elite are betting on Houston

Posted on

Northern England’s first GC Powerlist revealed: Man Utd, Liverpool, Greggs and Travelodge among in-house leaders

General counsel from companies including Adidas, Manchester United, Asda and Odeon Cinemas are among a line-up of leading in-house lawyers to have been named in Legal 500’s first-ever Northern England GC Powerlist.

The list, which officially launched yesterday at a reception at Manchester’s Midland Hotel, includes more than 100 senior in-house lawyers based across the north of England.

Legal leaders from leading British and global corporations were selected for inclusion in the list based on their contributions to their company or industry sector over the last year, with the research drawing on input from their peers, the private practice partners they instruct, and the Legal 500 GC Powerlist research team.

Legal heads at 101 unique companies have been awarded a place on the list, with multiple spots for lawyers at larger corporations such as Aviva, Barclays and Lloyds Banking Group.

The launch event was introduced by Eversheds Sutherland global co-CEO Keith Froud (pictured), who paid tribute to the growing influence of in-house counsel working in the key business centres across the North.

Twelve FTSE 100 companies are represented on the list, including Autotrader, BAE Systems, Croda, DCC, Experian, HSBC, IMI and United Utilities, with strong representation from companies in the financial services, manufacturing, retail and technology sectors.

Legal heads at household name retail and consumer goods brands include Fraser Group head of legal Emma Reid, B&M general counsel Alex Simpson and Debenhams GC Sarah Petrie, who has led the company’s legal team through a busy period which has included a rebrand and a major refinancing.

Sports and media companies are also well represented on the list, with seven legal heads at Premier League football clubs, including Newcastle United GC John Devine, Manchester United GC Martin Mosley, Liverpool FC GC Jonathan Bamber and Simon Cliff, the GC of Manchester City Football Club parent company City Football Group.

Energy, utilities and infrastructure companies comprise a significant portion of the list, with representation from Siemens Energy, United Utilities, Northern Powergrid and Sellafield Limited.

View the full GC Powerlist: Northern England.

[email protected]

Posted on

Vinson & Elkins bets on London – New York – Houston ‘triangle’ for growth

‘I see this firm as having real strength in a triangle: London, New York and Houston,’ says Vinson & Elkins London head of transactions, Ben Higson (pictured).

The Texas-founded firm, which now has 14 offices across the world, has benefitted from this geographic balance, Higson maintains: ‘There is no other firm in the world that has the strength we have in Texas that also has the strength we have in New York and London.’

Although the firm doesn’t break down its financial performance by office, last year’s results for the business globally suggest the ‘triangle’ is working. In 2025, V&E grew its firmwide revenue by 7.8% to reach $1.13bn, its biggest increase in revenue since 2021. Meanwhile, profit per equity partner (PEP) climbed by just over 12% to $4.51m.

‘We had some tremendous mandates – and that’s what’s driven the financial performance,’ says Higson.

Higson’s belief in the benefits of a strong Houston presence comes as the broader Texan market attracts increasing interest from global law firms.  Simpson Thacher announced plans to open in Dallas in February, with Dechert and Latham & Watkins also investing in the city.

V&E, however, has a deep history in the state, with offices in Austin and Dallas alongside its first – and largest – base in Houston.

Although its Texas roots have helped V&E build a strong reputation in energy and infrastructure, the firm has also been steadily building relationships with private capital clients over the years, including Apollo and Blackstone.

The firm advised Blackstone on several deals last year, including its $4bn acquisition of MacLean Power from Centerbridge Partners in December. Last March, Higson also worked alongside partners Dan Komarek in New York and Abby Branigan in Dallas, advising Apollo on its acquisition of OEG Energy Group, valued at over $1bn.

‘Through the triangle, we have developed a stronger relationship here with several private capital clients than we had before,’ says Higson, who joined the firm at the end of 2022 from Hogan Lovells.

V&E’s London office also serves as its gateway for global mandates, such as advising Bahraini energy company Bapco on its concession and joint venture arrangement with a Bahraini subsidiary of EOG Resources in September 2025.

Now Higson says the firm wants to capitalise on its investment and expand further in the City.  ‘In London, we’re in growth mode,’ he says. ‘There are two aspects to that. One is identifying where the growth areas are and the second is finding the right people to populate these areas.’ Recently, the firm hired tax partner Ed Moberly to its transactions practice from Kirkland & Ellis in London as part of these plans.

Moberly says his decision to move was influenced by V&E’s sector expertise, which he believes makes it less susceptible to market shocks. ‘I think there’s something incredibly AI‑proof about what we do,’ says Moberly.

‘Of course, we use new tools wherever they add value – but in sectors from energy to infrastructure and construction, it’s deep, domain‑specific experience that really makes the difference. That’s what allows technology to amplify – not displace – our impact,’ he adds.

Last September, V&E also hired two aviation finance partners from A&O Shearman in London, bringing in Ainsley Ireland and Harry Upcott.

Now it is looking beyond London. Notably, it recently launched in Brussels with the hire of Hogan Lovells antitrust partner May Lyn Yuen. The base marks V&E’s fifth office outside of the US. Yuen, who plans to split her time between London and Brussels, is also the first antitrust partner working in the London office.

Her hire reunites her with Higson, as the pair worked together closely at Hogan Lovells. Commenting on the launch Higson says: ‘Brussels is a really important market for a firm that has a strong transactions practice. But it also allows us to advise clients on other aspects of what they do. We want to provide our clients with a wider remit of European antitrust advice.’

Despite V&E’s recent growth, the impact of the war in Iran on energy prices and trade may pose a threat to its continued success. As Higson admits: ‘There’s a lot of uncertainty.  Uncertainty is a very difficult landscape for investors, business people, corporations and private capital to engage with. So it’s caused quite a lot of people to pause.’

That said, he maintains resilience is embedded within the energy world.  ‘This is one thing that people who are engaged in energy work are used to, because the energy markets are always uncertain. They’re always having to think ahead.’

‘I have some confidence that the nature of our firm, our reputation, and the fact that we are experts in energy and infrastructure, mean that we ought to be very well placed to continue to win work, irrespective of the uncertainty,’ he concludes.

[email protected]

Posted on

Freshfields inks multi-year partnership with Anthropic

Freshfields has entered into a multi-year partnership with Anthropic, rolling out Claude across the firm and agreeing to collaborate on development of further AI services and workflows.

The UK-founded firm has already provided access to Anthropic AI model family Claude to 5,700 employees through its proprietary general AI platform, with adoption and usage up by around 500% within the first six weeks.

The agreement will also see Freshfields collaborate with the San Francisco-headquartered AI leader to deliver ‘AI-native legal services’ as well as ‘novel legal agentic workflows.’ according to a statement.

As part of the agreement, the firm plans to expand its use to Claude Cowork, Anthropic’s agentic AI platform.

The move comes a year after Freshfields struck a separate agreement with Google Cloud to roll out Gemini with Google Workspace across the firm, as one play in what it called at the time its ‘tech-agnostic innovation strategy.’

Commenting on the Anthropic deal, Freshfields chief innovation officer Gil Perez said: ‘Partnering with Anthropic strengthens our ability to co-innovate at pace and to bring new capabilities into our work in a way that is secure, compliant and focused on client needs.’

Gerrit Beckhaus, partner and co-head of Freshfields Lab, the firm’s multidisciplinary tech solution-development team, added: ‘Our approach in the Freshfields Lab has always been to build on the best available technology. Claude’s capabilities have become an essential part of our proprietary AI-powered solutions.’

‘With this collaboration, we are going further: co-developing agentic workflows with Anthropic that can handle multi-step legal tasks end-to-end. For our clients, that translates into faster, more precise and more scalable legal services,’ he concluded.

Kate Jensen, head of Americas at Anthropic, also commented, saying: ‘Freshfields operates at the highest levels of global law. Their decision to go wall-to-wall with Claude — across legal work, business services, and now agentic workflows — is the clearest signal yet that the enterprise AI moment in professional services has arrived.’

[email protected]

Posted on

Taylor Rose fined by SRA for over £160,000

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Taylor Rose is facing a £160,059 fine from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) for breaching regulatory requirements.

The SRA began an investigation into the LB 100 firm in 2023, and found that Taylor Rose failed to adequately manage bank reconciliations and residual balances.

The regulator found that the firm had not fully reconciled its main client bank account every five weeks, that the most recent accounts contained a significant number of unreconciled items, and that these had increased every month since April 2022, and had been carried over into subsequent months. These failures meant that the firm failed to promptly return client money from June 2018 to August 2025.

The firm then entered into a compliance plan with the SRA in December 2024, from which it was released after it was deemed to have met its targets in August 2025. 

Taylor Rose acquired a number of firms from administration in the period 2018-2020, including Hertfordshire-based firm Breeze & Wyles and Southeast-based McMillan Williams, from which the firm then incurred residual balances.

The firm states that the issues identified by the SRA stem from these acquisitions.

While the SRA concluded that the fine, as well as £1,350 in costs, was an appropriate sanction for the firm, it did not identify any loss to clients, and placed the misconduct in band A, its lowest band.

Additionally, the fine was reduced by 30% following Taylor Rose’s cooperation with the SRA and implementation of remedies.

Taylor Rose operates nearly 20 offices across England, with its network spanning 775 lawyers and 88 partners. It generated £96.2m in revenue in the 2024-25 financial year – enough to place it within the top 60 UK-headquartered firms.

A spokesperson for Taylor Rose said in a statement: ‘While the issues predominantly stem from cases taken on with acquisitions of other firms between 2018 and 2020, we fully accept that we didn’t adequately deal with these issues at the time, partially due to a number of external factors impacting the capacity of our finance team.’

They continued: ‘They have now been fully resolved, and we have since put robust procedures in place to ensure strong governance of these matters.’

[email protected]

Posted on

Dechert and SFO sued for $168m in ongoing ENRC trial

Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (ENRC) has entered trial proceedings against the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Dechert, to claim a reduced figure of $168m in losses incurred during a decade-long investigation.

The company is seeking damages following previous court rulings that found the SFO, throughout its investigation, and retired Dechert partner Neil Gerrard, throughout his representation of ENRC which concluded in 2013, had acted unlawfully.

ENRC is now seeking $168m in compensation, reduced from $290m, for losses it incurred as a result of the investigation.

The SFO begun its investigation into ENRC in 2013 before closing it in 2023, without bringing any charges against the company. ENRC accused Gerrard of leaking news to the press in 2011 and 2013, which the company believes launched the SFO investigation.

The case, originally pursued by ENRC against Dechert in 2017 and against the SFO since 2019, is being heard at the Commercial Court, King’s Bench Division, in the second phase of proceedings this week.

The first phase of the trial was concluded in 2022, where the High Court ruled in favour of ENRC. This was appealed by Dechert and SFO, but ultimately upheld at the Court of Appeals in 2024.

In a statement, head of litigation strategy for ENRC Dmitry Vozianov said: ‘Dechert should be held to account in full for conduct that the High Court found involved grave breaches of duty to its own client. Conduct of that nature has no place in the legal profession.’

‘The SFO should likewise be held accountable for what the Court has already ruled as serious wrongdoing, including bad-faith opportunism, and for pursuing an investigation that ran for more than a decade without a single charge being brought. ENRC self-reported and cooperated, yet still faced years of unnecessary and deeply damaging process,’ he continued.

LB understands that, for losses in the phase 2 period, from March 2013 to August 2023, the SFO would seek a substantial contribution from Dechert, in line with previous splits of damages.

A spokesperson for the SFO said: ‘We strongly contest ENRC’s position and will challenge this at trial. All damages must be based on proof of loss.’

In a statement, a Dechert spokesperson said: ‘Dechert denies it is liable for any losses claimed in Phase 2 of the litigation.’

[email protected]

Posted on

‘It’s not clear what the case for reform is’ – partners react to Law Commission plans for consumer class actions

The UK government has announced plans to examine whether to introduce a new consumer class actions regime in England and Wales.

If introduced, the new regime would expand the scope for opt-out class actions, which can currently only be heard for competition claims in the Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT).

The Law Commission, backed by the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), will consider the advantages and disadvantages of a distinct consumer class action regime, alongside questions of ‘effective enforcement’ in opt-out consumer law.

Key objectives of the project as laid out by the Law Commission include ‘Improving consumers’ access to redress, both by securing redress in court and by ensuring that damages are distributed to the affected class,’ as well as ‘Promoting the efficient conduct of litigation and proportionate cost.’

The project is set to begin in autumn 2026, with stakeholder engagement forming part of an initial scoping phase ahead of a formal consultation.

Freshfields London dispute resolution practice head Andrew Austin was sceptical: ‘It’s early in this process and we’re likely some way away from any concrete proposals for change,’ he said. ‘But it’s not clear what the case is for reform: what is the evidence that consumers aren’t currently getting access to justice in consumer law cases?’

He also pointed to the extension of the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) consumer protection powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, adding: ‘In his recent letter that announced this review, the Business Secretary acknowledged that consumers already have “strong protections against exploitative behaviours”, and he emphasised the CMA’s new powers to investigate consumer detriment.’

‘The Law Commission will be able to take into account learnings from the last ten years of the competition consumer regime’

On the other hand, Hausfeld senior partner Anthony Maton welcomed the news, saying: ‘We have long advocated the widening of the competition collective regime to other areas where at present consumers cannot access justice to achieve restitution, so very much welcome the decision of the DBT to ask the Law Commission to look at consumer collectives.’

Under the terms of reference, the Law Commission will also consider the government’s conclusions in an ongoing review of the current opt-out collective proceedings regime in the CAT, in particular its assessment of whether certain sectors are ‘disproportionally targeted’ by litigants and ‘the effectiveness of distribution of damages.’

Questioning the objectivity of this framing, Maton said he was ‘slightly baffled that it is announced before the DBT’s own publication around collective redress which we have been told is imminent.

‘It is somewhat odd that the Terms of Reference seem to pre-judge the conclusions of the current DBT review into the competition regime in talking about “targeting” of defendants, the “exploitation” of actions, “evidence of pent up demand” and the questions only focus on opt out,’ he continued.

Kate Vernon, head of competition litigation at Quinn Emanuel‘s London office, expressed faith in the review process: ‘The work that the Law Commission is proposing will be able to take into account the learnings from the last ten years of the competition consumer regime and look at how Government can design a system that is effective and recognises the different roles that defendants, funders, lawyers and consumer bodies can, and will need to, play in making any new consumer redress system work.’

If it finds that such a regime would be beneficial, the Law Commission will set out proposals for the regime’s design, including how claims are defined, certification criteria and mechanisms for funding, costs and damages. It will also consider whether the proposed regime should allow for ‘opt-in’ as well as ‘opt-out’ claims.

‘It’s an early step with a long road ahead, and its importance should not be overstated’

Clifford Chance London litigation partner Maxine Mossman noted that the project forms part of a broader shift in collective litigation policy: ‘The Law Commission’s renewed focus on collective consumer redress forms part of a wider reassessment within the legal sector regarding how group claims are litigated in England and Wales,’ she told LB.

She also noted unresolved questions around the 2023 PACCAR ruling’s restrictions on percentages-based funding agreements: ‘The impact of the existing opt‑out regime for breaches of competition law is currently under review, and the position on litigation funding remains uncertain following PACCAR, notwithstanding the Government’s commitment to legislate on the issue. While the consultation is framed as an initial scoping exercise, the implications could be far‑reaching.’

Slaughter and May consumer protection head Tim Blanchard also highlighted the need to place the announcement in the context of wider developments, citing ‘the DBT’s call for evidence on the CAT’s opt-out collective proceedings regime’ and ‘the CMA’s willingness to order redress in its own enforcement cases.’

‘It is an early step though (with a long road ahead), and its importance should not be overstated,’ he added.

For Hogan Lovells litigation partner Matthew Felwick, the project was not unexpected given increasing pressure for opt-out style mechanisms: ‘Over the years the calls for an opt-out procedure have been increasing. A generic class action was rejected in favour of a sectoral approach, leading to the introduction of the CAT class action regime for competition claims. Since then, pressure has continued to mount.’

However, he was wary of the outcome of defining a ‘consumer law claim’ in the proposed regime: ‘Even if a narrow definition of consumer law is ultimately recommended, many sectors and businesses would be facing increased litigation risk. The review should be monitored closely and consideration given to responding to the scoping questionnaire or the consultation that will follow, either directly or through an industry association.’

The issue of certification has also troubled the CAT, with critics arguing that the regime has not been sufficiently tightly circumscribed. Last year, the Tribunal dismissed three parallel class actions against train operating companies alleging abuse of dominance on the grounds that they were consumer claims, not competition.

‘The risk of introducing new collective action mechanisms is that they can lead to speculative litigation and impose unnecessary costs on businesses’

Another central criticism of the CAT has been the potential for enormous commercial benefits to lawyers and funders in comparison to the returns meted out to class members following large fees. Last week, the CAT refused to certify an opt-out £382m class action claim brought by Simmons & Simmons against salmon price fixing by a group of producers on these grounds.

In its judgment, it stated that such returns can ‘distort the incentive to pursue such proceedings. This distortion arises in part because many class actions are initiated by legal teams and not by the class itself.’

Freshfields’ Austin sounded a warning note that a new opt-out regime would see these issues recur: ‘The risk of introducing new collective action mechanisms – particularly on an opt-out basis – is that they can lead to speculative litigation and impose unnecessary costs on business. I’m sure this – and the procedural safeguards that would need to apply in terms of e.g. a rigorous class certification stage, transparency around litigation funding and full protection of defendants’ rights – will be front of mind for the Law Commission.’

Funders, however, have long argued that their businesses play a crucial role in securing access to justice. And many have welcomed news of the review.

Neil Purslow, chairman of the executive committee of the International Legal Finance Association, was positive: ‘It is encouraging to see the Government tasking the Law Commission to examine ways of expanding consumer redress. Consumers and small businesses too often lack a realistic route to hold corporate wrongdoers accountable.’

Jeremy Marshall, chief investment officer at Winward Litigation Finance said: ‘For it to work in practice, it is vital that the Government recognises and protects the role of litigation funding, without which these claims can’t be brought. Funding turns legal rights into real-world outcomes, providing justice for consumers and deterring bad corporate behaviour. They should have a good look at how funders and consumer groups have worked collaboratively in Australia.’

[email protected]