Bird & Bird eyes autumn merger with Australian ally
Bird & Bird is understood to be working towards an Autumn merger with its Australian ally Truman Hoyle, according to sources close to the firms.
May 19, 2014 at 02:10 AM
2 minute read
Bird & Bird is understood to be working towards an autumn merger with its Australian ally Truman Hoyle, according to sources close to the firms.
The decision to financially integrate is understood to be subject to a partner vote, and would see the Sydney-based, 30-lawyer firm rebranded as Bird & Bird in Australia.
The UK outfit declined to comment on the possibility of a near term merger, except to say the relationship had been going "from strength to strength".
It added that when the cooperation deal was announced last March, it had made clear its intentions to extend to a full union within the next 12 months.
Bird & Bird is among a small group of firms to have chosen an alliance-first strategy in Asia, with others including Berwin Leighton Paisner (BLP) and magic circle firm Linklaters.
In February this year Bird & Bird announced a tie up with Seoul based Hwang Mok Park in South Korea, which it also said would likely develop to become a formal merger in the next two to three years.
In an earlier interview with Legal Week, China chairman Justin Walkey, who relocated to Hong Kong in October 2012 to help the firm pursue its regional expansion strategy, said the initial non-exclusive co-operation agreements were a less risky way of allowing the firm to enter new markets.
As well as allowing partners to test joint working arrangements, he said the tie-ups also gave Bird & Bird a string of local connections in its chosen geographies.
In Australia, Truman Hoyle was selected for its long relationship with the UK firm not to mention its specialisation in telecoms, technology, media and ecommerce – all areas where Bird & Bird has a strong reputation.
Together the two outfits have focused on joint marketing initiatives and growth while also considering an opening in Australia's IP hub Melbourne, though no details have been formerly announced.
However, not everyone is a fan of the merger option. One partner from Truman Hoyle said he didn't understand the rationalisation behind it given the small amount of referrals and occasional client conflicts.
Related: Bird & Bird enters Korea via partnership with local firm
This content has been archived.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
Can Law Firms Avoid Landing on the 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute read
Letter From Asia: Will Big Law Ever Bother to Understand Asia Again?
Simpson Thacher, Nishimura, Mori Hamada Assist on KKR's $4B Winning Bid in Japan
Trending Stories
- 16-48. It’s Comp Time Again: How To Crush Your Comp Memo
- 2'Religious Discrimination'?: 4th Circuit Revives Challenge to Employer Vaccine Mandate
- 3Fight Over Amicus-Funding Disclosure Surfaces in Google Play Appeal
- 4The Power of Student Prior Knowledge in Legal Education
- 5Chicago Cubs' IP Claim to Continue Against Wrigley View Rooftop, Judge Rules
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
