Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft, Milbank Tweed & Hadley and Morrison & Foerster are the latest in a string of international firms looking to ramp up or launch local litigation practices in Hong Kong.

The trio of US outfits, who currently have either no disputes lawyers or just a handful of international experts, say they want to hire top-end Hong Kong litigators who can also support their local corporate practices.

The trends comes as international firms try to cash in on an increase in contentious work in the region.

However, all three firms said launching the practice would depend on whether they can acquire first-rate lawyers.

"We are looking for the best, we are not going to do it if we don't get the best," said David Zemans, Asia managing partner at Milbank.

"It is really driven by a recognition that we have a wide ranging disputes practice that we have grown globally through our US and London offices. In the next 12 months would be ideal, but we really have no specific timeline as it totally depends on it being the right fit."

He said the firm was open-minded when it came to size, but anticipated having a team of least two partners to begin with.

"We wouldn't rule out a group if it's the right team, but the bigger it gets the more complicated it is. For a successful top end practice, my guess is that you would likely need to start with a couple of partners in order to have the required depth and expertise that clients are looking for."

Craig Celinker, head of disputes at Mofo, said he was also concerned with getting the right people. The firm currently has a group of two disputes lawyers in Singapore and five in Hong Kong, including two partners. Two of the lawyers are locally admitted.

"In terms of having local Hong Kong lawyers who have been here a long time practising in the Hong Kong courts, we don't have that piece yet but it's a piece we [want].

"We don't have any particular size in mind – we just want to be a full service market leader. If that was to mean having 20 lawyers in the litigation group that would be fine with us but if there were five that would be fine also."

Likewise Cadwalader, which has a smaller Asian presence with just two offices in Hong Kong and Beijing, said it was eyeing a top-end Hong Kong practice, in view of a rise in local disputes.

"We know if international and Chinese parties continue to use Hong Kong law [for corporate transactions], we're going to have more and more demand for Hong Kong local litigation capability and arbitration capabilities," said Rocky Lee, the firm's head of Asia.

"We also sometimes need a Hong Kong local opinion. It's not necessarily that we need a litigator to give an opinion, but we want to be able to say my litigator will defend that view if we have to go to court. That's the final piece that we want.

"We ideally are looking for a small team of five to six – with one partner. I would also love to have a cross border practice but we're not going to do that unless we have a base line of capability that is really litigation in Hong Kong."

He declined to give a timeline for making the hires.

The push to acquire local litigation capability has come on the back of an increase in contentious work and a desire to replicate the expertise of firms' home jurisdictions in Asia.

US outfits, many of which are viewed as latecomers to the region, have become particularly savvy in their search for dispute expertise. Examples of high-profile hires include Davis Polk & Wardwell's capture of top-ranked litigator Martin Rogers from Clifford Chance last December, and Latham & Watkins recruiment of Ing Yang Loong from Sidley Austin in March.