Uncharted territory - lessons and uncertainties from Halliwells' fate
In October 2008 Legal Week carried a story about a property deal by Halliwells that generated a substantial pay-out for the firm's equity partners. It seemed an unusual little story, but scarcely one of dramatic interest. In hindsight it was probably the single event that most directly led the high-profile Manchester firm to last week file a notice of its intention to appoint an administrator, effectively signalling a sale of its assets.
June 29, 2010 at 08:07 PM
3 minute read
In October 2008 Legal Week carried a story about a property deal by Halliwells that generated a substantial pay-out for the firm's equity partners. It seemed an unusual little story, but scarcely one of dramatic interest. In hindsight it was probably the single event that most directly led the high-profile Manchester firm to last week file a notice of its intention to appoint an administrator, effectively signalling a sale of its assets.
Certainly, Halliwells has appeared beset by problems over the last two years, including partner departures, redundancies and pressures from its lenders. Yet, in many ways, it was the decision to distribute a £21m property windfall garnered from its move into flagship Manchester offices that sowed the seeds of what was to come.
The deal, which was well chronicled in a 2009 piece by Legal Business, saw the majority of the windfall distributed to the firm's equity partners, with disastrous consequences for the firm.
For one, it had no effective means of locking in the equity partners, many of whom have since left the firm. Worse, it was massively divisive within the partnership, with fixed-share partners feeling that money had been taken out of the business at their expense. With the firm thinly capitalised, partners at the end of 2008 were asked to put in at least £5m into the business.
There were other issues exacerbating the pressure on Halliwells, notably a troubled takeover of James Chapman and a struggling London office. The combined result was that the entrepreneurial firm went into the downturn already substantially weakened. A firm with little or no debt soon had to wrestle with bank borrowings in the region of £20m. If nothing else, the story of Halliwells provides a reminder about how a single judgement call can have huge consequences for a firm, even in an age in which governance and risk management standards have plainly improved.
Where this will all end is hard to say, as this is largely uncharted territory. It's so rare for major law firms to run into this kind of difficulty that the distressed sale of Turner Kenneth Brown in 1995 is the closest you can find to a comparable incident.
This means there are few established procedures for selling or winding up a major law firm. Certainly, the Solicitors Regulation Authority – which is primarily focused on what happens when small firms or sole practitioners get into trouble – isn't geared up to take a proactive stance in a situation like this.
And no one really knows how practical it is to put together a deal to transfer large practices in such circumstances. Meanwhile, partners are deeply worried about what will happen to their capital and around 800 staff will be fearing for their jobs.
Click here for an extended piece on Halliwells from Legal Business
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 AllMcDermott Hits Paul Hastings In London Again As Macfarlanes Also Swoops For Talent
2 minute readRe-Examining Values: Greenberg Traurig's Executive Chairman on the Lessons of the Pandemic
4 minute readDiversity Commitments Feel Hollow When Firms Cosy Up to Oppressive Regimes
Trending 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