UPDATED: Herbert Smith Freehills Re-Registers as Australian Firm in Korea Ahead of Brexit
Seoul offices registered with U.K. firms may no longer be valid after Britain leaves the European Union.
March 11, 2019 at 01:46 PM
4 minute read
Herbert Smith Freehills has received approval from the South Korean Ministry of Justice on Friday to operate an office in Seoul as an Australian firm to prepare for Brexit. The Seoul office reopens after the firm closed it for four days during the approval process.^
Australian-qualified senior associate Ken Nam is the firm's new office representative in Seoul.^
Herbert Smith Freehills' six-year-old Seoul office was until March 11 registered as a foreign legal consultant office of a firm with headquarters in the U.K. Under Korean law, only law firms with headquarters in countries that have a live free trade agreement (FTA) with Korea are allowed to set up offices in Seoul.^
U.K. firms in Seoul have been operating their foreign legal consultant offices under Korea's FTA with the European Union. But as Britain prepares to leave the E.U., British firms' Seoul offices may no longer be covered by the E.U.-Korea FTA.
It is unclear whether or not the U.K. firms' Seoul offices will be allowed to continue operation after March 29, when Britain is scheduled to withdraw from the E.U. In its response to The Asian Lawyer last week, the Korean Ministry of Justice said it is still reviewing post-Brexit policy regarding foreign law firms.
One option available to the British firms is to re-register their Seoul office's licence to one from a country that has an FTA with Korea. Herbert Smith Freehills Seoul partner Mike McClure told The Asian Lawyer last week that the firm is applying to register as an Australian firm. Australia and Korea have had an effective FTA since 2014.
According to the justice ministry, in order to re-register, the government must first cancel the licence of the current E.U. FTA-based foreign legal consultant office, and the firm must then file a new application for a foreign legal consultant office based on a separate FTA. During that process, firms must suspend their legal operations in Seoul.*
"Regulators require that our office closes for legal services until the new registration is received," said McClure in an emailed statement. "We respect that requirement and see it as a short-term price to pay for the longer-term certainty to operate without issue after Brexit."*
The Korean Foreign Legal Consultant Act, the governing regulation for foreign lawyers and foreign law firms in Korea, requires firms to register their Seoul offices under a home jurisdiction where a "principal office" is located and the "highest decisions are made".
Herbert Smith Freehills' roots in both Britain and Australia afford the firm the ability to re-apply for a new licence. It is unclear whether the rest of the U.K. firms – Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Linklaters and Stephenson Harwood – are able to follow suit. The justice ministry said it will determine whether an office is a "principal office" on a case-by-case basis.
"Our team is particularly grateful to the South Korean Ministry of Justice and the Korean Bar Association for their quick consideration of our application, and to the British and Australian embassies for their support since this issue first arose," Hong Kong-based Asia managing partner Justin D'Agostino said in a statement.^
Herbert Smith Freehills' Seoul office has eight lawyers, including office managing partner Dongho Lee and disputes partner McClure, who has until March 11 been office representative.^
^Updated March 15: This story has been updated to reflect that Herbert Smith Freehills received approval from the Korean Ministry of Justice to re-register as an Australian firm on March 15 and with a statement from Asia managing partner Justin D'Agostino.
*Updated March 12: This story has been updated with a statement from Herbert Smith Freehills Seoul partner Mike McClure.
|Related Stories:
Brexit Hits UK Law Firms in South Korea; Seoul Offices May Be Forced to Close Temporarily
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 AllJapanese Boutique Marks First Foray Overseas With Singapore Opening
Clifford Chance Under Fire for Human Rights Assessment of Saudi Arabia World Cup Bid
5 minute readBaker McKenzie Appoints New India Practice Chair and Other Asia Pacific Moves
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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