BT advisers get 12-month extension as panel review is put on hold
BT has pushed back a long-awaited review of its global legal panel in a move that extends the terms of existing panel firms by 12 months. Advisers had been gearing up for BT's first review under general counsel Dan Fitz, who replaced former group GC Anne Fletcher in April 2010; however, they were recently told the roster had been extended until March 2013.
February 09, 2012 at 07:03 PM
2 minute read
BT has pushed back a long-awaited review of its global legal panel in a move that extends the terms of existing panel firms by 12 months.
Advisers had been gearing up for BT's first review under general counsel Dan Fitz, who replaced former group GC Anne Fletcher in April 2010; however, they were recently told the roster had been extended until March 2013.
The telecoms giant last reviewed its legal panel in 2009 when CMS Cameron McKenna won a first-time spot alongside Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Bird & Bird. The trio were selected to advise the company primarily on corporate, commercial and antitrust/regulatory matters. BT runs separate panels for real estate, litigation and employment work.
Fitz was tasked with assessing whether the company was getting value for money from its internal and external legal spend when he took up the GC post and told Legal Week in October last year that he was reviewing the operation of the panel.
At that time he said his focus would be on forming a collaborative relationship with preferred advisers rather than focusing primarily on cutting costs, as BT had in the 2009 review, which saw around 50 firms pitching for work.
A partner at a major City law firm unsuccessful in the 2009 tender round said: "We were involved in the online tender process three years ago and didn't make it because we couldn't offer the rates that BT wanted. We hope to be appointed next time around as there is a new general counsel."
This content has been archived.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 AllBird & Bird Steers Katjes in Bittersweet Dispute with Lindt & Nestlé Over Vegan Chocolate Patent
Sidley Surges, Linklaters Leaps: The Hires That Made The Headlines in 2024
5 minute readHong Kong Bourse Seeks Feedback on IPO Price Discovery, Takes Steps to Boost Capital Markets Activity
Big Four Japanese Firm Mori Hamada Launches Foreign Joint Law Enterprise, Joins Rebrand Drive
Trending Stories
- 1For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 2As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
- 3General Warrants and ESI
- 4GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
- 5Authenticating Electronic Signatures
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