Tesco bore - the acronym-heavy revolution is already here
I have a confession: the whole Legal Services Act (LSA)/Tesco law thing bores me terribly. Legal Week was so quick off the mark to cover the saga that my interest was exhausted by the point the profession started taking it seriously. The jargon, the acronyms, the thicket of regulation, the personal injury – it's too much even for an industry anorak to sustain attention. And yet the success of the LSA's authors in cloaking historic reform of the UK's £25bn legal market in torturous language should not obscure how fundamentally the profession is being – and already has been – shaken up.
January 26, 2012 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
I have a confession: the whole Legal Services Act (LSA)/Tesco law thing bores me terribly. Legal Week was so quick off the mark to cover the saga that my interest was exhausted by the point the profession started taking it seriously. The jargon, the acronyms, the thicket of regulation, the personal injury – it's too much even for an industry anorak to sustain attention. And yet the success of the LSA's authors in cloaking historic reform of the UK's £25bn legal market in torturous language should not obscure how fundamentally the profession is being – and already has been – shaken up.
You only have to look back to the context of the Act's creation to see how substantially it has already remade the legal industry and encouraged an environment in which innovation could, if not quite flourish, then no longer be actively resisted. Often that has had little to do with the actual rules. Many of the alternative models could have been deployed in some form well before the Act came into force. Volume arms, legal processing, accountancy-linked networks, companies offering legal advice – in various guises they have been previously tried.
But the LSA – together with a tough commercial environment and a subtle but perceptible shift in the buying habits of bluechip clients – has fostered an environment in which such models can begin to gain currency and probably soon will start to provide a credible alternative to major law firms. And hopes that the revolution will sweep the high street only to stop conveniently at the barricades of the corporate legal market are also wishful thinking – too many people are targeting the business sector, and companies are already heavy users of volume legal services.
Will the future be about investment in law firms or retailers offering law? It's far from certain. Investing in core partnerships is so difficult that there seems to be more interest in minority stakes or project finance-style structures. And many financiers seem to be (probably rightly) turning their attention now towards non-law firm structures such as document creation firms or legal process outsourcers.
But while it's often said that commercial law firms are in denial about the coming revolution, generally I don't think that's true. There is conservatism, yes, but also a wider acceptance now that something radical is happening that law firms will have to increasingly factor into their plans. In many cases that may well mean stealing ideas and models from non-traditional legal rivals.
Whether that will be enough to counter the market-disrupting forces that will surely emerge is impossible to say at this stage, but those who dismiss the profession easily often end up looking foolish. Law firms are certainly too ready to find reasons to keep doing business the same way, but they are also stuffed with intelligent and motivated people and, as organisations, have the proven ability to hustle fast when change is demanded. Which is just as well, because it's demanded now.
- For more, see this week's in depth analysis on alternative business structures
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 AllMcDermott Hits Paul Hastings In London Again As Macfarlanes Also Swoops For Talent
2 minute readRe-Examining Values: Greenberg Traurig's Executive Chairman on the Lessons of the Pandemic
4 minute readDiversity Commitments Feel Hollow When Firms Cosy Up to Oppressive Regimes
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Uber Cannot Be Held Vicariously Liable for Driver's Alleged Negligent Conduct
- 2TikTok Law and TikTok Politics
- 3California Supreme Court Vacates Murder Conviction in Infant Abuse Case
- 4New York’s Proposed Legislation Restraining Transfer of Real Property
- 5Withers Hires Lawyers, Staff From LA Trusts and Estates Boutique
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