City partners are getting used to being punished for commercial conflicts, according to research that shows two-thirds of firms have lost work as a result of advising a client's competitor.

The latest Legal Week/ EJ Legal Big Question survey found that 66% of respondents' firms 'sometimes' lost work for perceived commercial conflicts, with a further 2% saying that it 'often' happens. Forty-two percent said that clients 'never' sent work to rivals in response to conflict concerns.

The survey of 100 partners also suggested that clients are taking a tougher line on such issues, with 45% of respondents claiming that clients have become 'less relaxed' with regard to conflicts during the past five years, with a further 8% arguing that they are 'a lot less relaxed'. A third of those surveyed said that attitudes were largely the same.

Weil Gotshal & Manges partner Mark Soundy said: "It depends on the situation. If it is a conflict situation dealt with right at the start, then the client is normally OK. If it comes midway through the deal, they might not be happy. In those situations you would expect clients to seek some sort of retribution, but most clients are sophisticated about it as long as you are acting honourably."

Advisers stressed that clients' attitudes to commercial conflicts were closely related to their industry sector, with financial institutions taking a relaxed attitude. In contrast, clients in some industrial sectors strongly discourage firms from acting for rivals.

John Davidson, a corporate partner at Lovells, said: "For some sectors we can advise people better if we are experts in the industry and we can only be that if we act for a wider range of clients. For other sectors, where there are fewer players, they like you to be monogamous."

Ninety percent of respondents said it was reasonable for clients to expect their lawyers not to act against them, with a further 61% holding that it is also reasonable for clients to expect legal advisers not to advise clients' close competitors.