Herbert Smith, Gleiss Lutz and Stibbe terminate alliance
Herbert Smith and its alliance partners Gleiss Lutz and Stibbe have formally confirmed the termination of their partnership today (22 December), to take effect from the close of this year. The three firms will end their alliance agreement on 31 December 2011, with a view to winding down their joint marketing and branding as soon as possible, the firms said in a statement today.
December 22, 2011 at 07:04 AM
2 minute read
Herbert Smith and its alliance partners Gleiss Lutz and Stibbe have formally confirmed the termination of their partnership today (22 December), to take effect from the close of this year.
The three firms will end their alliance agreement on 31 December 2011, with a view to winding down their joint marketing and branding as soon as possible, the firms said in a statement today.
It is understood that the one-year non-compete clause included in the alliance agreement still stands.
It is also understood that Herbert Smith will not open an office in Germany until 2013 at the earliest.
The firms' statement said: "Herbert Smith, Gleiss Lutz and Stibbe confirmed today that their alliance will be formally terminated with effect from 31 December 2011.
"The three firms intend to maintain the strong relationships formed over the ten years that the alliance has been operating. The termination will not affect those clients whose matters are jointly handled by the firms, who will continue to work together on a non-exclusive basis."
Herbert Smith first announced its withdrawal from the alliance with its European partners last month in the wake of its failed merger bid with the two firms. The move came less than a week after partners at Germany's Gleiss and Benelux firm Stibbe decided against pursuing a merger with Herbert Smith at meetings held over the weekend of 19-20 November.
The news follows plans outlined by Herbert Smith earlier this month to launch a base in New York next year to focus on international arbitration, investigations and cross-border disputes.
In an internal note to staff, senior partner Jonathan Scott also said that the firm will look to to open in Francophone Africa, Korea and Germany.
This content has been archived.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, Paul Hastings, White & Case, Freshfields advise on Top German Deals
2 minute readBlocking of $14B Nippon US Steel Deal Will Not Dampen Japan-U.S. M&A, Lawyers Say
Milbank’s Capital Markets Partner Leaves for China’s Han Kun in Hong Kong
Trending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
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