Herbert Smith & Freehills near June vote as Weil rethinks referral links
Partners at Herbert Smith and Australia's Freehills are set to vote on the firms' potential tie-up next month, with the pair planning for a 1 October integration date. The firms are expected to vote simultaneously on the deal in the second half of June, with the union set to go live four months later.
May 10, 2012 at 02:02 PM
2 minute read
Weil reviews Freehills links as merger vote looms with City leader
Partners at Herbert Smith and Australia's Freehills are set to vote on the firms' potential tie-up next month, with the pair planning for a 1 October integration date.
The firms are expected to vote simultaneously on the deal in the second half of June, with the union set to go live four months later.
Initially the two firms will be financially independent, although the intention is to merge in the longer term, but this could require a separate partner vote further down the line.
The deal, which appears similar in structure to Ashurst's tie-up with Australia's Blake Dawson, is understood to be less popular with partners in Herbert Smith's London headquarters than with those in Asia, although partners are expected to grant it the 75% majority required to go ahead.
The union was initially planned to go live on 1 July, tying it in with the Australian firm's financial year end. However, this has been pushed back due to the complexities of working out the deal.
Herbert Smith's proposed deal with Freehills has prompted Weil Gotshal & Manges to reconsider its referral relationship with the Australian firm. The New York-based firm has operated a semi-formal relationship with Freehills for a number of years, with Freehills' corporate partner Jim Theodore based in the US firm's Manhattan office alongside one associate since 2010.
New York corporate partner Fred Green is leading the review, which is expected to result in the agreement being terminated.
One Weil partner told Legal Week: "The truth is that we cannot refer work to a firm such as Herbert Smith because it is a major competitor in Europe and Asia. We have to contemplate other ways of accessing the Australian market – we are more exposed to it than most US firms."
This content has been archived.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 AllFreshfields, 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
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
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