Asset finance - increasingly not for every banking team
Recent weeks have seen no less than five asset finance partner moves announced, with Berwin Leighton Paisner, Ince & Co, Mayer Brown, and, most notably, Hogan Lovells all moving to strengthen their City practices. While the timing of the appointments is more down to coincidence than any single driver in the market, the moves illustrate the differing approaches to asset finance across large law firms.
April 14, 2011 at 01:44 AM
4 minute read
Recent weeks have seen no less than five asset finance partner moves announced, with Berwin Leighton Paisner, Ince & Co, Mayer Brown, and, most notably, Hogan Lovells all moving to strengthen their City practices. While the timing of the appointments is more down to coincidence than any single driver in the market, the moves illustrate the differing approaches to asset finance across large law firms.
For Hogan Lovells, the hire of high-profile Linklaters partner duo Robert Fugard and Simon Gwynne is a sign of the firm's desire to strengthen its practice outside the aviation market and build upon its international practice. Similarly, Mayer Brown's hire of former Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe European head Stuart McAlpine hands the firm its only London partner focusing purely on asset finance, with the appointment coming as part of a bid to leverage the firm's asset finance strength in Hong Kong, the US and France.
The contrast with the impact on Linklaters, then, is stark, as the departures effectively mark the firm's withdrawal from mainstream asset finance work in London. They leave the firm with no dedicated asset finance partners in the City, although banking partner Olga Petrovic will take responsibility for the practice. Petrovic says that it is not just the profitability of asset finance work that prompted Linklaters' decision to step back from the product line – although the sector is notoriously cyclical and less profitable than many areas of banking.
Rather, the decision reflects Linklaters' continued efforts to refocus its client base around both its core clients and, within that group, the core activities of those institutions, with key clients like Citigroup and Royal Bank of Scotland not putting much focus on the market. Petrovic comments: "It isn't just a question of profitability but more about the focus on clients that are important to the firm as a whole. This is consistent with the way in which a number of banks have sought to reposition their practices in recent years."
It's a position that is refuted by those with larger London asset finance teams such as Clifford Chance (CC) and Norton Rose, with the latter firm having more than 10 City partners focused on the sector. They suggest that not only are banks still lending but that there is still much value to viewing such relationships in a broader context, meaning that having a strong asset finance practice can help consolidate relationships with key banking clients and help secure mandates in other related areas.
CC, for example, has run some its Terra Firma deals with Dublin-based aircraft lessor AWAS through its asset finance team rather than corporate, while Norton Rose counts transport as a key sector, with the firm's complementary focus on banking and finance meaning asset finance sits neatly within its business. Norton Rose is also one of five firms (alongside Allen & Overy, Reed Smith, Simmons & Simmons and White & Case) to have been appointed to the 2008 legal panel of the European Export Credit Agencies (ECA) to advise in relation to new Airbus aircraft transactions involving ECA financing – appointments which will guarantee greater work levels for successful firms.
While examples of recent significant mandates seem to be few and far between, partners suggest there are enough portfolio restructurings and other mandates around to keep practices busy, even though few predict further significant moves. CC asset finance partner William Glaister comments: "We're above profitability within the firm – you just need to have the right balance and sector focus. So, for example, we do the clients' whole work – not just asset finance. Magic circle firms can do this, and do it profitably."
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
© 2024 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 AllTo Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readGOP's Washington Trifecta Could Put Litigation Finance Industry Under Pressure
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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