National Grid to review firms ahead of panel overhaul
National Grid is to conduct back-to-back reviews of its external legal advisers, after the term for its current line-up ends on 31 March. The first 'closed' review - which will begin in the next few weeks - will evaluate cost structures and the performance of the existing 16-firm line-up, and extend the terms of the current panel for a year.
January 30, 2014 at 02:03 AM
4 minute read
Utilities giant to assess performance of 16-firm line-up as part of wide-ranging examination of legal function
National Grid is due to assess the performance of its existing panel of legal advisers with a view to extending their terms ahead of a wider review later in the year.
The utilities business will launch a 'closed' review over the coming weeks to evaluate value for money and the performance of its existing 16-firm line-up with the intention of extending the panel terms for a year. Some firms could be dropped when the current three-year term expires on 31 March.
In May the energy giant will begin an 'open market' review and invite both panel and non-panel firms to tender for a spot on a revamped roster, set to go live in 2015. A decision on the final line-up is expected by Christmas.
Both reviews are being led by UK general counsel and company secretary Karen Clayton (pictured), who took on the role in 2009 and reports into group general counsel Alison Kay.
National Grid scaled back its panel in a 2011 review, handing appointments to Allen & Overy and Linklaters as the company's main corporate advisers, while Berwin Leighton Paisner, CMS Cameron McKenna and Eversheds all won spots to advise on commercial, construction and disputes work. Other firms to take places include Irwin Mitchell, Dundas & Wilson, SGH Martineau, Dentons, Walker Morris, Squire Sanders, Bircham Dyson Bell, Brook Street des Roches, Field Fisher Waterhouse, DLA Piper and Needham & James.
"Everything is on the table," said Clayton. "The current panel has worked fine for us, but the market has changed a lot in the three years since we did our review, and there are greater savings, efficiencies and relationships we can get."
Despite being one of the largest listed companies in the UK, National Grid has a fairly modest annual legal spend of between £15m and £20m. However, it is a figure Clayton is keen to bring down further. The upcoming reviews are set to focus on reducing costs, with litigation identified as one priority.
"Like most clients, we have a whole range of cost and fee structures for different types of work, but litigation spend tends to be more on an hourly rate basis," she said. "It has been that way forever and a day, and I'm keen to move away from it."
Clayton added that the separate decisions of E.ON and Balfour Beatty to partner with Pinsent Masons as a single provider for day-to-day legal work were particularly interesting to her. "We will not be moving to a single provider – just to scotch that possibility – but it is still an interesting development and an area I would like to look at," she said.
"The changes in the way clients ask their tier one firms to sub-contract work to smaller or regional firms is another feature we will be paying closer attention to, and hardwire into the instruction."
The open market review will also follow an internal audit of the in-house legal team's capacity and remit, which Clayton said would help dictate what the company will need from its external advisers. The structure and size of the in-house team will also determine how many panel places are up for grabs.
"We have been forensically looking at the in-house value to the business for the last year, and in the summer I will be recommending a course of action to a senior group in the company," Clayton added.
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 AllLeigh Day Cleared of Wrongdoing in £55M Shell Settlement with Nigeria
2 minute readLondon Trial Against BHP for Role in Brazil Mining Disaster Begins
Trending Stories
- 1Attorney-Client Privilege: Recent Informative Decisions
- 2Here We Go Again: Trump and the Coming Civil Rights Storm
- 3'The Hubris of Big Tech': Apple Hit With California Labor Lawsuit for Alleged Free Speech, Privacy Violations
- 4Litigator of the (Past) Week: A $34.7M Defamation Win For Former Walmart Truck Driver
- 5A Major Bellwether for Trans Rights?
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