CC denies claims of Rome office closure
Clifford Chance (CC) has reaffirmed its commitment to its Rome office, amid mounting speculation that the firm could pull out of the Italian capital. The office's managing partner, Guiseppe de Palma, conceded headcount in Rome had reduced in recent years but said there were no plans for either redundancies or an office closure.CC's lawyer headcount in Rome has reduced by 35% over the past two years, falling from 40 to 26. Numbers have also dropped across the firm'scombined Rome and Milan presence, reducing from 175 lawyers on 31 January, 2007 to 145 lawyers on 31 January, 2009 - a decline of around 17%.
February 19, 2009 at 12:23 AM
2 minute read
Clifford Chance (CC) has reaffirmed its commitment to its Rome office, amid mounting speculation that the firm could pull out of the Italian capital.
The office's managing partner, Guiseppe de Palma, conceded headcount in Rome had reduced in recent years but said there were no plans for either redundancies or an office closure.
CC's lawyer headcount in Rome has reduced by 35% over the past two years, falling from 40 to 26. Numbers have also dropped across the firm'scombined Rome and Milan presence, reducing from 175 lawyers on 31 January, 2007 to 145 lawyers on 31 January, 2009 – a decline of around 17%.
De Palma said: "We reshaped the business for recession ahead of anyone else, looking at quality issues and headcount. We reduced headcount only through attrition and managing people in a more active way – and we are now stable in Rome."
The process began18 months ago with de Palma saying the office has been cutting costs by replacing senior lawyers with junior fee earners.
He added: "Milan is driven by banks and financialinstitutions. Rome has a few large corporations and of course the Italian Government. We are interested in the work that the Government can generate as well as these corporate clients. We look at these opportunities and we do not think we can have a credible Italian practice without an office in Rome."
This content has been archived.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 All
Freshfields Name Change Becomes Official as Company with Similar Name Dissolves
2 minute read
Leaders at Top French Firms Anticipate Strong M&A Market in 2025 Despite Uncertainty
6 minute read
EU Parliament Gives Blessing to New EU Competition Chief Ribera Rodríguez
2 minute read
Simpson Thacher Becomes Second Firm to Launch in Luxembourg in 2 Days With A&O Shearman Hires
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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
