Regulatory approval enables firm to broaden client services, attract wider pool of top talent and be more agile.
LONDON – Global law firm Reed Smith today announced that it has become the first international law firm to convert to an Alternative Business Structure (ABS), after receiving approval from the UK’s Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Unlike the traditionally regulated law firm model, the ABS permits law firms to be managed and/or owned by individuals who are not legally trained, to provide services beyond traditional legal advice and even to receive external investment. This means, in part, that such firms can benefit from talent within their partnership from any field and thereby amass a wider range of commercial acumen and technical expertise to support clients.
The ABS conversion is a change in regulatory status that has no impact on the existing corporate structure of the firm; Reed Smith remains an LLP, although its membership will include a corporate vehicle. It applies to the firm’s UK LLP incorporating partners in the UK, France, Greece, UAE and China. The firm’s single partnership and single global profit pool will remain unaffected.
Tamara Box, Reed Smith’s EME managing partner, said: “We are incredibly proud to be at the forefront of modernisation of big law. As the first international law firm to convert to an ABS, we are future-proofing our business and now have the agility to immediately seize new opportunities – in tech, big data and other specialised consultancy services – that will help us drive our clients’ businesses forward.
“Our clients’ needs have changed. In this era of digital transformation, they are looking for a strategic service provider that can go beyond just providing advice on the black letter law but rather one that can assist in solving any challenge they face to help them achieve their business goals.
“Whether that solution comes from individuals with a legal background or not is irrelevant. We are currently a firm of 3,000 people, and we recognise that the fruits of our labour come from our entire global workforce. We want to ensure that we can retain and attract the very best talent across the board, and the ABS enables this for us.”
The introduction of the Legal Services Act in 2007 first enabled UK law firms to convert to ABS. In the United States, only in Washington, D.C. are individuals without legal qualifications allowed to be law firm partners, but states such as California, Utah and Arizona are pushing for regulatory reform to permit ABS models.
where are all the lawyers ….almost farcical to ask that question ….for me the Margeret Bazley legal aid reforms …..the Legal Services Agency capping of hours , increasing compliance costs in unpaid times of LSA application reporting …the inconsistencies / uncertainties of income, same in the Ministry of Justice contract provider negotiations …. dare I say the poster social justice advocates having done some of “XYZ” of the private lawyer survival competition move asap to secure tenure judiciary., gold plated retirement super ; ..the exhorbitant [when compared with Ozzie States; costs of electronic legal data base accessibility ie Queensland $50 per month cf NZ 400 per month) …increasing fixed costs ( office/chambers, car parking) ….all of this ……and an increasing clientele who in addition to proper self-interest often demonstrate, in almost perfect parallel line with societies “me first” mentality… an increasing sense of entitlitus entitlement to rolls royce service at whose cost… all in competition with non-criminal lawyering , legal polyanna , business government and local govt employee ; and to cap it off inthe name of “increasing pubic confidence a NZLS complaints services which can simply hammer a practitioner into the ground and thats just investigative stage without any kind of quick and speedy alternate dispute resolution and without any “merit to grievance” screen process of complaints….community law centres doing, and indeed seemingly taking pride, in, no representation since their inception ( with local Law Societies encouraging this)
… and despite new funding I see no change in that …. all of this meant in 2012 I for one , and many others ceased all criminal pro bono work, and after 21 years Level 1 criminal legal aid with its inherent pro bono aspects ; and in terms of civil litigation access to justice is in my view an exponential increasing rich versus poor divide and this scenario I describe poor civil litigant as anyone earning less than 50K gross…this alone my 33 years of concurrent High Court and above litigation experience which tells me when coupled with the “costs” awards regime, the new “civil electronic casebook protocol” means access to justice has evolved to such a level of high preisthood gatekeeping social justice litigation is a nonfunny joke….there needs to be a return to what 1910 Privy Council rules provided ( and was law in this country until Supreme Court Act) of in forma pauperis throughout the jurisdictions with a prelim before judge / justice that gives that party that issue an imprimatur of principled justice issue needing of trial of fact and law which neither lack of money nor lack of advocate status ought prevent happening