Back in June 2009, in the wake of news that Norton Rose was set to take over mid-tier Australian firm Deacons, Legal Week noted the wall of negativity that greeted the City stalwart's trip down under.

Gauging the feedback following Norton Rose's dual takeover of Canada's Ogilvy Renault and leading South African practice Deneys Reitz reveals an interesting shift – while there is plenty of sniping, there is now more grudging admiration and some of the doubters seem to be rather going through the motions.

Some other things have changed since last year. Norton Rose is understandably keen to badge the move as a continuation of its 'headlights' strategy – its core industry focus. On one level this is true. The deal gives the combined group more global clout in key areas like energy, infrastructure and natural resources.

It also reinforces the firm's position in Asia, which was a key strategic imperative of the Deacons deal, positioning Norton Rose to service emerging economy clients looking to secure energy and commodity assets.

The deal also obviously functions as a rerun of the Deacons play: Norton Rose found a value in securing a major acquisition in legal markets that struggled to go international, but produce excellent lawyers and have wider strategic significance. As first-mover in such jurisdictions you also secure much goodwill from local lawyers frustrated at the limitations of their domestic markets and have a shot at picking up real bargains.

Yet, in many respects the 'business as usual' line is utterly misleading. While Deacons could be viewed as an opportunistic one-off, the latest acquisition takes the firm into uncharted territory. So reductive has the strategy been in global law it was until very recently deemed that there can be only two strategies: diffuse networks like a Baker & McKenzie or White & Case, or the highly centralised model of the global magic circle. Norton Rose has edged into new ground for a large City firm by combining something of both approaches.

It is hard to see this as anything but a calculated bet on the future of global law. Had Norton Rose kept attacking the market as a UK-driven partnership there would have been a limit on how far it could have realistically advanced. This sharp tilt in its strategy gives the firm a shot at aiming so much higher.

There can be no doubt that taking on so many deals so quickly is a far riskier proposition than last year's Australian move. The risk potential will climb again as Norton Rose turns its attention to the market it clearly now has in its sights: the US, where it hopes to bring in a major deal. It's an audacious bet but one I suspect many rivals realise it has a real shot of pulling off.

For more, see: