Dentons Is Investigating Its Saudi Arabia Office. Here's What We Know.
How do you impose a global code of conduct on a firm of 10,000 lawyers scattered over 70 countries? And can such far-flung offices with their distinct local cultures be expected to abide by a uniform code?
February 07, 2020 at 05:32 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
|
When you run a law firm as gigantic and far-reaching as Dentons, which is now the largest firm in the world (home to 10,000 lawyers in over 70 countries), complaints about the misconduct of partners and managers of any given office inevitably take on a local flavor.
Such is the case with Dentons' Riyadh office in Saudi Arabia.
In early January, I got a long email, complete with exhibits, from an anonymous source who claimed to be part of Dentons' Middle East practice.
This tipster had two major complaints. The first was that the Riyadh office is run by men who are polygamous and that, more disturbing, they marry and divorce impoverished, young women at will, essentially using them for short-term sexual relationships, the source wrote.
As a result, the source claimed the culture of the office was anti-women. As this source wrote to the firm last fall: "This can have a really bad effect on the ladies," adding that women there are scared of the men.
The other allegation this tipster makes is arguably even more alarming: One of Dentons' partners in Saudi Arabia has ties to Islamic extremism, the source alleges. Included in the email were exhibits of an article for Cage, a controversial Islamic organization, that was allegedly authored by one of the partners. In the article, the author called Americans "blood thirsty" and predicted the killing of Osama Bin Laden would lead to the destruction of America.
Though the article's author and the accused Dentons partner have identical names and both are British lawyers, Dentons says the partner has denied writing the article. (RollOnFriday wrote its own account of Dentons' investigation Feb. 7.)
The upshot to all these mind-spinning charges? Dentons is taking it seriously. So seriously that the firm has hired a global (not local) firm to investigate the Riyadh office. In fact, Elliott Portnoy, Dentons' global chief executive officer, is personally and directly involved in an investigation.
The firm issued this statement: "Promptly after receiving an anonymous communication containing allegations against certain personnel in our Saudi Arabia offices, we attempted to engage with the anonymous sender and initiated an investigation of the claims. Our efforts to engage with the sender of the anonymous communications have not been reciprocated. We take any allegation of violations of the law or Dentons Global Code of Conduct very seriously, and we have undertaken a thorough investigation of the claims involving both internal and external resources, which is ongoing."
Which leads to this intriguing question: How do you impose a global code of conduct on a firm of 10,000 lawyers scattered over 70 countries? And can such far-flung offices with their distinct local cultures be expected to abide by a uniform code?
While I am totally sympathetic to the women who voice concerns about working for men who practice polygamy, I'm not quite sure what can be done about it—especially because polygamy is not illegal in Saudi Arabia. Of course, Dentons can make a big, bold statement and only hire men who seem more supportive of women in their private lives, but is that realistic? As one U.K.-trained lawyer of Pakistani origin located in Riyadh told me, "I'd say 50% of the partners here are polygamous."
Meanwhile, we'll be waiting for the results of the investigation. I mean, who isn't curious about whether Dentons is harboring a partner with terrorist sympathies?
Contact Vivia Chen at [email protected]. On Twitter: @lawcareerist.
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 AllSkadden's Big China Cuts and What They Mean for the Market
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: Big Law Profits Vs. Political Values
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.