In-house legal teams grow by a third in 12 months
The size of the average in-house legal team across EMEA countries has increased by a third over the past year, according to research from legal recruiter Laurence Simons.
July 30, 2014 at 07:08 PM
2 minute read
The size of the average in-house legal team across EMEA countries has increased by a third over the past year, according to research from legal recruiter Laurence Simons.
Internal legal departments now comprise 16 lawyers on average, up from 12 in 2013 and 10 in 2012. Over a quarter of departments said they have already recruited externally in 2014, and two thirds expect their team will increase further in size over next two years.
None of the 107 legal departments polled anticipated a fall in headcount by 2016.
The poll, which included departments across a range of industries including life sciences, technology, telecommunications, banking, manufacturing, engineering and retail, indicates that the expansion of in-house legal teams is being driven by rising internal budgets, with 45% of departments expecting internal spend to grow over the next year.
It also points to an increase in specific areas of specialism such as taxation, with the number of internal departments carrying out tax work doubling from 8% to 16% between 2012 and 2014.
In-house teams remain primarily focused on corporate and commercial activity though, which is now practiced by 87% of internal departments, compared with 86% in 2013.
Worldwide, the average legal department has grown in size by 57% in the past two years, increasing from 35 lawyers in 2012, to 52 in 2013 and reaching 55 this year.
Naveen Tuli, managing director of Laurence Simons, said: "These findings suggest the recession still lies in the back of employers' minds when it comes to outsourcing legal work, which is reflected in a continued shift towards expanding and investing in in-house legal teams.
"Many firms are choosing to take a long term perspective by hiring more internal staff and increasing legal expenditure, rather than send out work to private practices. From a budgetary standpoint, fixed workforces allow for greater stability when it comes to planning and forecasting compared to the ad-hoc casework often carried out by law 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This content has been archived.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
© 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 AllGCs Responsible for Gender Balanced Boardrooms Under New EU Rules
A Dark Future of Deepfakes and Disobedient AI: What GCs Foresee For 2050
3 minute readTrending 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