Ernst & Young to offer legal advice in China through local affiliation
Ernst & Young (EY) has launched a legal services arm in China by incorporating local firm Chen & Co into its network. In accordance with PRC regulations, which restrict international firms from practising local law on the ground, EY has created an affiliation with the Shanghai-based firm, as opposed to a shared-ownership structure, in a bid to tap China's growing legal services market.
February 20, 2014 at 03:21 AM
2 minute read
Ernst & Young (EY) has launched a legal services arm in China by incorporating local firm Chen & Co into its network.
In accordance with PRC regulations, which restrict international firms from practising local law on the ground, EY has created an affiliation with the Shanghai-outfit, as opposed to a shared-ownership structure, in a bid to tap China's growing legal services market.
Chen & Co, a 75-lawyer firm founded in 1998, will remain a separate, licensed Chinese firm but is ultimately expected to move into EY's offices in the Shanghai World Financial Centre.
Most of the lawyers are located in Shanghai, though it also has satellite offices in Beijing and Hong Kong.
Among its core practices are capital markets, corporate, antitrust, disputes, real estate, bankruptcy, IP and banking and finance.
EY, one of the world's 'big four' accounting firms, is not alone in its bid to tap China for legal work. Deloitte has also moved into the country through a similar set up with Qin Li law firm – also a licensed Chinese entity that specialises in cross border work.
Outside of China, EY's existing Asian offering includes a handful of partners on the ground in Japan, affiliation arrangements in India and approximately a 40-lawyer practice in Australia.
The firm is also looking to grow its legal services arm in South East Asia, and in December hired former Herbert Smith Freehills partner John Dick to help launch the venture.
It is in the process of applying for foreign law firm licences in Singapore and Vietnam, where the planned offices would be subsidiaries of EY Law in Australia.
EY was not available for comment.
This content has been archived.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 All
A&O Shearman, Cleary Gottlieb Act on $700M Dunlop Tire Brand Sale to Japan's Sumitomo
Latham, Simpson Thacher and Brazilian Duo Ride Uptick in LatAm M&A
Kim & Chang, Freshfields, A&O Shearman Take Top Spots for Highest Collective Deal Value as APAC M&A Grew By Just 1% in 2024
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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
