EC3, then the world - Clydes asserts insurance law on global stage
Cast your mind back five years ago to what seems like a different era. Clyde & Co was generating not much more than half its current revenues and Holman Fenwick Willan barely scraped into the top 40 while Ince & Co just about made the top 50. Kennedys was nowhere to be seen. Corporate markets were booming, and transaction-driven law firms were really just getting into the swing of the credit boom. Little wonder that insurance-driven law firms were overlooked as the script for global law was written – the sector was associated with nothing more glamourous than brutally executed panel reviews and misconceived cross-selling (Barlow Lyde & Gilbert's lost years and Davies Arnold Cooper's 'pillars of strength' spring to mind). Apart from the startling growth Clydes was already demonstrating, powered by global expansion and a strategy that largely went over the heads of journalists such as, well, me, there was little sign of the breed's future ascendency. Step forward, and it's a very different story, with insurance and transport law firms now having led the pack consistently since the credit crunch hit four years ago.
October 19, 2011 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
Cast your mind back five years ago to what seems like a different era. Clyde & Co was generating not much more than half its current revenues and Holman Fenwick Willan barely scraped into the top 40 while Ince & Co just about made the top 50. Kennedys was nowhere to be seen. Corporate markets were booming, and transaction-driven law firms were really just getting into the swing of the credit boom.
Little wonder that insurance-driven law firms were overlooked as the script for global law was written – the sector was associated with nothing more glamourous than brutally executed panel reviews and misconceived cross-selling (Barlow Lyde & Gilbert's lost years and Davies Arnold Cooper's 'pillars of strength' spring to mind).
Apart from the startling growth Clydes was already demonstrating, powered by global expansion and a strategy that largely went over the heads of journalists such as, well, me, there was little sign of the breed's future ascendency. Step forward, and it's a very different story, with insurance and transport law firms now having led the pack consistently since the credit crunch hit four years ago.
And surely the clearest signal of insurance law asserting itself on the wider stage is Clydes' upcoming merger with Barlows, which we assess in detail this week. On paper, at least, the deal looks impressive. On one hand, you have in Clydes one of the most successful and best-run firms in the top 50. As the smaller partner, Barlows clearly has had its issues. It had showed signs that it could stabilise itself and even go forward independently, but in truth once its aviation team quit in March, its options rapidly narrowed.
As such, throwing in with Clydes seems an admirably pragmatic response. But even diminished, it retains some excellent teams, and lopsided mergers typically work better in law firm land than the equal partner deals, which are usually beset with post-union jostling. The creation of an EC3 giant also looks set to position Clydes for a fast-consolidating insurance industry; it's an irony that insurance law firms have thrived at a point in which their clients have come under pressure.
And insurance and related trade and transport disciplines offer huge opportunities internationally, partly because other legal markets have not created similar specialist law firms. That dynamic is stark in the US, where Clydes has made the kind of no-fuss progress the magic circle can only dream of. Still, good as it looks in theory, there will be some cultural kinks to work out.
Clydes spent years rather successfully destabilising its old rival, including hiring some influential partners that will now be rubbing shoulders once again with their former colleagues. And the question remains what will happen to Clydes when its highly-regarded and long-serving senior partner Michael Payton finally stands down. Because strong as the combined Clyde & Co looks, there will be no shortage of able challengers planning to steal its lunch.
- For the full analysis, see Giant – will size make Clydes and Barlows the future of insurance law?
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 AllKirkland, Debevoise & Nishimura Advise On $8.2B Japanese Acquisition of Resolution Life
Covington Swipes Mishcon Insurance Disputes Head for New Practice Launch in London
3 minute readAsia Pacific Hires: Global Firms Kick Off Q4 with Flurry of Team Hires Across the Region
10 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Dismisses Defamation Suit by New York Philharmonic Oboist Accused of Sexual Misconduct
- 2California Court Denies Apple's Motion to Strike Allegations in Gender Bias Class Action
- 3US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 4Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 5African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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