Dundas and Bircham Dyson Bell call off merger discussions
Dundas & Wilson and Bircham Dyson Bell have ended their merger discussions after deciding against a combination. The firms announced today (10 October) that they have concluded exploratory discussions about a tie-up after mutually coming to a decision not to seek partner approval for a potential merger.
October 10, 2011 at 12:10 PM
2 minute read
Dundas & Wilson and Bircham Dyson Bell have ended their merger discussions after deciding against a combination.
The firms announced today (10 October) that they have concluded exploratory discussions about a tie-up after mutually coming to a decision not to seek partner approval for a potential merger.
The firms said in a joint statement: "Dundas & Wilson and Bircham Dyson Bell have concluded their talks and have decided not to pursue a merger of their two firms. Collaboration on individual projects, particularly in the area of major infrastructure and energy projects, will continue."
Dundas managing partner Donald Shaw (pictured) added: "We hold one another in high regard and are naturally disappointed that serious and worthwhile discussions between us have not been more fruitful. However, as we stated, these were just steps to establish whether our previous successes in collaborating on client matters could be further developed by integrating our practices."
Bircham managing partner Guy Vincent said: "Combining two well-established and successful firms is always challenging even when, as is certainly the case here, there is substantial goodwill and business potential.
"Both firms have independently and jointly concluded that, due to differences in their operating models, the downsides outweigh the potential upsides. Although we will not be merging, we remain on excellent terms and look forward to working together on appropriate projects."
The firms first confirmed that they had held discussions about a formal tie-up last month (20 September).
For Dundas, which has offices in Edinburgh and Glasgow, a combination could have bolstered its London presence, which it has previously set out an intention to grow. The Scots firm is the UK's 49th largest law firm after seeing turnover rise 1.6% during the 2010-11 financial year to £62m, alongside a 2.5% increase in profits per equity partner (PEP) to £325,000. The firm has around 280 lawyers and approximately 80 partners.
Bircham, a single-office firm based in London's Westminster, has around 170 lawyers including almost 50 partners, and reported revenues of £31.9m for 2009-10, when PEP stood at £232,000.
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 AllRopes & Gray, Willkie Farr, KWM, Dechert Act on Xerox's $1.5B Buy in China
Freshfields, MoFo Act on $1.8B TOPPAN Deal As Japan's US Buying Spree Continues
Cox & Palmer to Merge with Benson Buffett in St. John’s, Canada’s Easternmost City
2 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