Clients pledge to take tighter look at fees as City profits soar
General counsel are determined to resist sweeping fee hikes following the surge in top law firms' profits in the last financial year.
July 18, 2007 at 11:09 PM
3 minute read
General counsel are determined to resist sweeping fee hikes following the surge in top law firms' profits in the last financial year.
Clients have been quick to react to the record profit figures, with some complaining that charge-out rates are too high and others warning that the figures make them wary of instructing external counsel.
Some clients said hourly billing could come under renewed pressure, while others pledged to continue with panel arrangements in a bid to contain legal service inflation.
Mark Maurice-Jones, Kimberley-Clark's general counsel for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, said top firms have not made enough effort to meet clients' expectations on fees.
"Charge-out rates at premier firms are astronomical and get bigger all the time," he said. "I do not get the feeling that top firms are too concerned by cost."
O2 general counsel Justine Campbell said the rising profits of top firms are likely to make general counsel question their advisers. She said: "These figures make general counsel more nervous about instructing external firms and increasingly wary of hourly billing."
BT international chief counsel Gordon Moir said companies with good panels and well-defined fee structures were well-placed to avoid the rises.
Although both said they have not experienced significant fee increases, Bridgepoint Capital general counsel Barry Lawson agreed that clients are likely to be paying for some of the increased profits and National Grid general counsel Helen Mahy said more firms were asking her to exercise discretionary bonuses. "That would not have happened two or three years ago," she said.
The comments follow a strong year for the top 50 UK firms, while recent Legal Week research found that a number of clients had encountered hourly charge-out rates of more than £700, with top companies facing top-end rates for partners of £600-£800 an hour.
In-house lawyers also pointed to rising salaries in private practice as causing them problems in hiring.
Campbell said that in the past month it has become significantly more difficult to recruit the right calibre of lawyer to her in-house team.
"The pot of gold offered by top firms is very attractive," she said. "More than half-a-million in profits per equity partner is a big carrot to dangle – in-house salaries are getting left behind."
Can general counsel put the brakes on the top 50′s double-digit profits growth? Join the debate with the Legal Week Top 50 Talkback special.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGCs Responsible for Gender Balanced Boardrooms Under New EU Rules
A Dark Future of Deepfakes and Disobedient AI: What GCs Foresee For 2050
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250