Stephenson Harwood closes office in Guangzhou, China
Stephenson Harwood has closed its office in Guangzhou as the UK firm reviews its strategy in the world's soon-to-be largest economy.
September 16, 2014 at 02:14 AM
2 minute read
Stephenson Harwood has closed its office in Guangzhou as the UK firm reviews its strategy in the world's soon-to-be largest economy.
The London-headquartered outfit, which has made clear its intentions to grow in Asia with bases in Hong Kong, Beijing, Singapore and more recently Seoul, is understood to have shut the base in Guangzhou as it considers local tie up options in the country.
In a statement, CEO of Stephenson Harwood Sharon White declined to specify the firm's future plans except to say it would remain in close contact with the former Guangzhou lawyers, who have set up their own PRC outfit.
"In 1994, Stephenson Harwood became one of the pioneering international law firms to set up in Guangzhou. Since then, the legal landscape in China has changed considerably and we have decided to cease operating in Guangzhou.
"Notwithstanding the cessation of our practice in Guangzhou, we will continue to maintain strong ties with the city. Our former colleagues are in the process of setting up an independent PRC law firm. We expect to maintain close working relationship with this firm, when established."
Stephenson Harwood is among a number of international firms looking at how best to tackle the China; as outbound investment from the country continues to increase and the Chinese.
The market currently prohibits foreign firms from advising on local law, but does allow options for PRC outfits to tie up with Hong Kong firms – which may include the Hong Kong branches of international players – under China and Hong Kong's Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA).
Also on the cards is the Shanghai Free Trade Zone, which is also set to allow joint venture arrangements between foreigners and locals.
It has so far sparked the interest of a number of players including Linklaters, Baker & McKenzie, Herbert Smith Freehills and Simmons & Simmons, but full details of the scheme are yet to be announced.
This content has been archived.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 AllCan Law Firms Avoid Landing on the 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLetter 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
- 1Bradley Arant, Moore & Van Allen Join Partner Promotions Parade
- 27th Circ. Rejects Liability Claims Against Freight Broker's Hiring Choices
- 3Sullivan & Cromwell Signals 5-Day RTO Expectation as Law Firms Remain Split on Optimal Attendance
- 4CLOSED: These Georgia Courts Won't Open Jan. 10
- 5Volkswagen Hit With Consumer Class Action Alleging Defective SUV Engines
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