Hill Dickinson and CRS post strong numbers too

The trend of law firms posting positive financial results continues, as both Ashurst and Clyde & Co report an increase in partner profits.

Revenue at Ashurst climbed 9% to £961 million in the financial year 2023-24, marking its eighth consecutive year of growth. Profits per equity partner (PEP) increased by a robust 14% to £1.33 million, surpassing the previous record of £1.17 million.

The Silver Circe player reported strong performance across all regions, with the UK, US and Middle East achieving double-digit revenue growth of 13%, 18%, and 17%, respectively.

“These results reflect the focus and commitment of our people, the trust of our clients and the successful execution of our 2027 Strategy,” Ashurst global CEO Paul Jenkins said. “We are centred on our priority industries, practice areas and markets, combined with the delivery of integrated solutions that bring together teams across legal and consulting services with our NewLaw capability.”

“This is a trajectory that really works for our business and is bearing fruit for our clients,” Jenkins continued. “Pleasingly, we are budgeting to have our first year of revenue above £1 billion in our financial year ending 30 April 2025.”

Meanwhile, UK headquartered Clydes also recorded positive numbers, with revenue climbing 10% to £845 million, marking its 26th consecutive year of growth. Profits at the firm increased by 3% to £174.4 million, while PEP rose by a little over 4% to £739,000, up from £708,000 the previous year.

This marks the firm’s second set of financial results since swallowing up insurance law specialist BLM, in a move which added some 600 lawyers to its ranks.

“Our growth this year was driven in large part by our underlying business, which benefited from strong client demand for our services across our disciplines and geographies,” commented Matthew Kelsall, Clydes’ CEO. “In the past year we have continued to invest in modernisation and made several strategic hires in energy, renewables, regulatory, finance and commercial disputes, a trend that will continue as we seek to maintain a balance across our sectors and practices.”

Elsewhere, Hill Dickinson, a global law firm based in Liverpool, saw its revenues increase by 9%, reaching £141.3 million from £129.6 million. Net profits exceeded £50 million, pending an audit.

The shipping law specialist didn’t provide a PEP figure.

The firm reported that its three main practice areas — business services, healthcare and marine — met their targets last year, with business services emerging as the largest division, generating nearly £70 million in revenue.

Finally, Charles Russell Speechlys (CRS) reported a 13% increase in firmwide revenue, reaching £218.3 million. Of this total, £174.4 million was generated in the UK, representing a 12% increase from the previous year.

UK PEP increased significantly by 27%, rising from £521,000 to £661,000. Meanwhile, the firmwide net profit saw an impressive 20.5% jump, reaching £45.9 million.

Managing partner Simon Ridpath said: “Performance and growth outside of the UK also remained strong, with a total international revenue growth of 15%. There were notable contributions from our European offices in Luxembourg, Paris and Switzerland, as well as 30 per cent revenue growth in Asia following numerous lateral hires and the launch of our Singapore office in July last year.”

Rise of 19%

Partners at Allen & Overy enjoyed an uplift of 19% in their average earnings in the financial year before the tie-up with Shearman & Sterling.

A&O Shearman released new figures today regarding A&O’s financial performance prior to the mega-merger going live earlier this year.

They show that the average profit per equity partner (PEP) increased from £1.8 million to £2.2 million, thanks to a healthy 17.2% rise in pre-tax profits, reaching £1.05 billion.

Revenues increased a more modest 3.4% from just over £2.1 billion to £2.2 billion.

Commenting on the results, Hervé Ekué, global managing partner at A&O Shearman, said:

“In the year leading up to the completion of our merger, we’re pleased to report positive growth for the firm. This is testament to our strategic focus on diversification across regions, practices, and sectors.”

The results come after A&O Shearman initially set newly qualified (NQ) associate pay at £125,000, before upping this to £150,000 a month later following similar moves by its Magic Circle counterparts.

Earlier this week the newly-formed firm posted its combined retention score, with 37 its of 56 (66%) final-seat trainees staying on.

Fellow Magic Circle player Linklaters published its results this week, reporting a 10% increase in revenues, surpassing the £2 billion mark for the first time in its history. PEP also saw growth, climbing 8% up to £1.9 million.

Magic Circle rivals all increased to £150k

Slaughter and May has confirmed salary increases for its trainees but is still “carefully considering” pay boosts for newly qualified (NQ) associates, after all its Magic Circle rivals raised their rates to £150,000 in recent weeks.

Slaughters announced that rookie pay will increase from £50,000 to £56,000 in year one and from £56,000 to £61,000 in year two, aligning the firm with the rest of the Magic Circle.

But no decision has been made yet on NQ rates. While its Magic Circle rivals have all recently increased salaries from £125,000 to £150,000, Slaughters says it is still “carefully considering” its position and will inform lawyers as soon as a decision has been reached. The Legal Cheek Firms Most List shows it currently offers an NQ rate of £125,000.

In an internal memo to associates, published by the website RollOnFriday, the firm says it has been “closely monitoring the decisions by a number of firms to increase headline NQ salaries” and that it takes matters relating to pay “very seriously”.

“[I]t is important that our approach to associate pay reflects and reinforces our values, allows us to attract and retain the best talent and ensures that we maintain our culture of excellence and collegiality in all parts of the firm,” the memo continues.

Earlier this week, Legal Cheek reported that Hogan Lovells had increased NQ salaries to £135,000 in London, leapfrogging Slaughters on the pay table.

City Law School’s James Catchpole questions exclusion of SQE students in long-awaited research

A senior figure at one of the country’s largest law schools has criticised a recent report on performance disparities among ethnic groups in law exams, arguing that its failure to consider the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) means an “enormous opportunity has been missed”.

Speaking to Legal Cheek, James Catchpole, The City Law School’s associate dean for postgraduate and professional degree programmes, said the long-awaited report had “great potential to be insightful and educate the profession on how students from ethnic minority backgrounds perform in assessments and ultimately progress into the profession.” Instead, “it appears that an enormous opportunity has been missed by it focusing on the LPC, a route that will be coming to an end, and failing to look at the appropriateness of the SQE as a method of entry or means of addressing the ‘awarding gap’”.

The research, commissioned by the regulator in December 2021 and undertaken by academics at the University of Exeter, found that differences in performance among candidates from certain ethnic groups were due to a combination of social, economic, and educational factors, rather than any single reason.

The study involved 1,200 law students, including 700 from university law degrees last year and 510 from the LPC, and conducted more than 50 in-depth interviews with students, newly qualified solicitors, law lecturers, and senior managers in law firms.

Researchers did not interview current or past SQE students because, according to the regulator, the pathway is still relatively new and lacks sufficient numbers or specific experiences to include in the report. It’s worth noting, however, that the SRA has a separate ongoing review programme of the SQE that will address issues related to equality, diversity, and inclusion, among other things.

“Whilst the SQE is only one of the components to entry, it is nonetheless the culmination of a student’s study,” Catchpole continued. “So will it help them or, as some have said, disadvantage them further? The report fails to give any insight into how any student can be supported to succeed in this new assessment.”

The report highlighted that minority ethnic students face increased discrimination and bias in educational settings, limited access to work experience opportunities, and a lack of ethnic diversity among academic staff and teaching examples. Researchers noted that this environment affects students’ sense of belonging and perception of fitting into the profession, leading to microaggressions and bias from academic staff, which ultimately impacts their learning experience.

As in previous years, the SRA’s latest education and training report showed that students from ethnic groups were less likely to successfully complete the LPC, a trend that has continued with the introduction of the SQE.

In response to the findings, the SRA has committed to bringing together education providers, law firms, and the wider legal sector to work together to address the issues identified in the report. It said it will also develop an action plan informed directly by the findings.

Continuing, Catchpole noted that the report provides evidence supporting what many have long believed about the challenges faced by aspiring minority ethnic lawyers, describing this as a “positive development”. It also gives “the profession cause to look inwardly at its recruitment and entry requirements; let’s hope that employers do genuinely give those with potential the opportunity to demonstrate that they are valuable assets to the profession”.

A spokesperson for the SRA told Legal Cheek:

“There is a widely acknowledged and long-standing difference in outcomes by ethnicity within professional legal assessments. Through this research we wanted to better understand the complexity and breadth of the underlying causes of these differences, and bring together stakeholders from across the sector to consider how we might address these.”

They continued: “The trends we are seeing in SQE results mirror those which existed for years among LPC candidates, whose experiences this research analysed. As we take forward the findings and recommendations from this research, we will increasingly consider the insights we can gain from the rich data we are gathering on SQE candidates and their performance.”

Disbarred

A former barrister at DWF has been disbarred after making false allegations in a report to the regulator against a fellow barrister, alleging homophobia, harassment and discrimination.

The Bar Standards Board (BSB) said Barry John Harwood “failed to act with honesty and/or with integrity and behaved in a way which is likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession”.

A Bar Disciplinary Tribunal determined that Harwood had “fabricated” certain aspects of the allegations, which were deemed “serious” and were made against a colleague.

Harwood was reportedly the deputy director of DWF Advocacy, the firm’s in-house chambers, but left in 2019 shortly after making the reports to the BSB.

He was ordered to be disbarred earlier this month; however, the tribunal has only now published its full findings against him.

The tribunal heard that Harwood accused the barrister of intentionally addressing his partner as “husband” in emails, despite being aware that they were in a civil partnership rather than married. Harwood claimed this amounted to homophobia.

But it emerged Harwood had described his partner as “husband” and referred to their relationship as “married” in past WhatsApp messages exchanged with the accused.

Harwood, who was called to bar in 1998 and is former member of the Bar Council, also alleged that the same colleague had bullied another staff member by using an offensive nickname. However, the tribunal heard that the colleague had never raised any concerns about it with Harwood.

In a further complaint, Harwood said that a colleague had raised concerns with him about comments made by the same barrister on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks, as that colleague had lost a close friend in the attacks.

But the tribunal found that Harwood “had distorted and exaggerated [the colleague’s] position and his views” and there was “no basis” for what he complained about.

In reaching its decision to disbar Harwood, the panel noted the conduct was “deliberate and sustained” and “harmful to all concerned”, but particularly to one barrister. “It was also upsetting and worrying to the others who were involved… all of whom are legal professionals who were caught up in what Mr Harwood said and did, and all of whom worried about the consequences of what was happening,” the tribunal said.

Commenting on the order, a BSB spokesperson said:

“Dishonestly and deliberately making false allegations to a regulator, especially in relation to serious matters such as discrimination and harassment, is wholly incompatible with membership of the Bar and the tribunal’s decision to disbar Mr Harwood reflects this.”

Harwood was disbarred and ordered to pay costs of £5,544.

He didn’t respond to our request for comment.

Annual programme of events runs later this year

The key themes for this year’s Pro Bono Week have been unveiled, with the role of technology in enhancing access to justice set to be one of the top talking points.

Now in its 23rd year, Pro Bono Week brings together lawyers from across the UK to advocate for and encourage more legal professionals to offer free legal assistance to individuals unable to afford it.

The organisers of the event have now revealed that the central focus of the week is “The Power of Pro Bono”, encompassing three distinct themes. These are:

• Barred from justice: the powerful, everyday stories of the impact of lawyers and law students who give their time to protect the rights of those most disadvantaged in society.

• Embedding pro bono in your organisation and career: placing pro bono at the heart of everyone’s practice and hearing from those at the forefront of establishing business structures for pro bono within law firms, chambers, in house, universities and charities.

• How technology can enhance access to justice: existing and new tools to ensure pro bono is innovative and effective.

The week will showcase a series of events aimed at highlighting the significant and impactful pro bono work already underway in the UK, while also promoting new opportunities to encourage participation nationwide.

Commenting on the themes of Pro Bono Week 2024, Toby Brown, chair of UK Pro Bono Week said:

“Across the country there’s a wealth of valuable pro bono work being done every day by the UK’s legal professionals. This year’s events will focus on recognising and celebrating the difference pro bono makes to the lives of those who otherwise would be barred from accessing justice. With just six months to go until Pro Bono Week 2024, we look forward to supporting our colleagues across the sector to finalise their plans and events in the coming months.”

Serious money for 20-somethings

US law firm Quinn Emanuel has increased salaries in its London office, with newly qualified (NQ) associates now earning a staggering £180,000.

The business litigation specialist confirmed today that NQ rates will increase by 18%, soaring from an already impressive £152,000 to an eye-watering £180,000.

The hefty uplift comes just a week after Magic Circle law firm Freshfields seemingly triggered yet another City pay war by raising its NQ salary to £150,000.

It’s worth noting, however, that Quinn Emanuel currently does not offer UK training contracts, meaning today’s rise could be seen as a tactic to lure top qualifying talent from rivals through its doors.

Quinn Emanuel confirmed rises further up the ladder as well. 1PQE associates will now earn £195,000, up from £160,000, while those with 2PQE will receive £220,000. The rises take effect on 1 June.

You can view the increases in full below:

Alex Gerbi, Quinn Emanuel’s London co-managing partner, said:

“We are very pleased to be able to reward our outstanding lawyers for the contribution they make daily to the success of our practice in London, and we are also committed to continuing to attract the very best new talent as we pursue our strategy for further growth. With that in mind, we have decided to implement material increases to our associate salaries with effect from 1 June, taking our starting salary at the NQ level to £180,000 and stepping up substantially from there as seniority increases. We believe there is no better home than our firm for the brightest and best disputes lawyers, and this decision aligns our salaries with the opportunities we offer them.”

The Legal Cheek Firms Most List shows that Quinn Emanuel’s salary increase sees it draw level with fellow US outfit Gibson Dunn, which upped NQ pay to £180,000 back in February.

Historic tie-up goes live today

The hotly anticipated mega-merger between Magic Circle law firm Allen & Overy and US outfit Shearman & Sterling officially goes live today.

The newly established firm, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling, known as A&O Shearman for short, comprises nearly 4,000 lawyers across 48 offices in 29 countries, with a combined annual revenue of around $3.5 billion (£2.9 billion).

The firms first went public with their intentions to merge in May 2023, with more than 99% of partners going on to vote in favour of the move.

Last month, Legal Cheek exclusively revealed that newly qualified associates at the firm will start on a salary of £125,000, with trainees receiving £50,000 in year one, which will increase to £55,000 in year two.

While these rates align with those previously offered at Allen & Overy, juniors joining the new firm from Shearman find themselves earning less than they had initially expected. This is because the US outfit paid £55,000 in year one, £60,000 in year two, and £145,000 on qualification.

Pre merger, A&O recruited around 80 trainees each year year, while Shearman took on 12 or so in London. It’s unclear what the new intake will be now that the firms have merged.

A&O Shearman’s headquarters is currently located at One Bishops’ Square in London (formerly A&O’s office), with plans to relocate to a much smaller space at 2 Broadgate near Liverpool Street station by 2027.

Denise Gibson, a banking partner based in London, has been appointed as the managing partner for the UK. Dave Lewis, who previously managed A&O’s New York office until earlier this year, has been appointed as co-managing partner for the US. He will share this role with Shearman’s Doreen Lilienfeld.

The firm’s new senior partner, Khalid Garousha, based in Abu Dhabi, has been serving as A&O’s interim global managing partner since July 2023. Meanwhile, Hervé Ekué, formerly head of the A&O office in Paris, has assumed the role of managing partner.

Meanwhile, former Shearman senior partner Adam Hakki has assumed roles as co-chair of the global A&O Shearman board and executive committee, along with chairing the firm’s US business. Doreen Lilienfeld, former global managing partner at Shearman, now serves as co-managing partner of the firm’s US business.

Told they’d failed SQE1 when actually they’d passed

Students who had their training contract offers rescinded are among those hit by Kaplan’s SQE1 marking error, Legal Cheek can exclusively reveal.

Yesterday, we reported that 175 students, who were initially informed they had failed either Functioning Legal Knowledge 1 and/or Functioning Legal Knowledge 2 (the two parts of SQE1), had actually passed those assessments.

Both Kaplan and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) apologised for the extraordinary blunder, attributing it to a rounding error in the calculation of the final scores.

But the fall-out may only just be beginning. Overnight it has emerged that some students who had their training contracts revoked last month after being told they had failed SQE1 had, in fact, passed the exam.

Now their firms are desperately trying to figure out what to do. For obvious reasons Legal Cheek isn’t naming the students or firms involved. We understand that graduate recruitment teams are busy assessing the various options.

Posting on LinkedIn, the City of London Law Society’s Training Committee urged “any employer with impacted candidates to look extremely carefully at the matter”. They continued:

“We anticipate that this will including proactive and speedy consideration of reinstatement of the employment status of impacted candidates, including those for whom employment has been terminated and/or offers/training contracts rescinded,” it said. “The committee is happy to meet any employers to discuss; we are keen to support.”

Mix of concern and anger

Senior figures at some of the country’s biggest law schools have responded to this morning’s news that nearly 200 aspiring lawyers were mistakenly told they had failed parts of the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE).

Kaplan and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) today apologised for a calculation error that resulted in 175 students being informed that they had failed either Functioning Legal Knowledge 1 and/or Functioning Legal Knowledge 2 (the two parts of SQE1), when in fact they had passed.

A goodwill payment of £250 is being offered to those candidates for the “upset caused by this matter”.

Reacting to today’s news, Jonny Hurst, presenter of SQE TV, branded the situation an “omnishambles”.

“It’s hard to fathom, isn’t it?” he wrote on LinkedIn. “Some of these candidates will have lost training contracts, which may, after all, now be recoverable. Others will have incurred considerable financial losses, such as accommodation costs and cancelled course fees. And then there are those who may have made significant life decisions off the back of January’s SQE1 ‘fail’. All will have been put through unnecessary distress and anxiety and my heart goes out to each and every one of you.”

“As someone who has been in legal education for over 15 years, I can appreciate how easy it is for a small error to have such far-reaching consequences,” said Hurst.

“The compensation being offered to the affected candidates (£250) will be a drop in the ocean to most. It certainly won’t cover many of their financial losses or the untold negative affect on their mental health. Looks like the SQE is as tough to administer as it is to pass,” Hurst continued.

In a statement to Legal Cheek, BPP’s dean, Jo-Anne Pugh, added, “We are aware of the error and are providing support to the affected students”.

Also reacting to the news, The University of Law‘s deputy vice-chancellor law, Professor Peter Crisp told us:

“Our concern is with those of our students whose future careers may have been impacted by this error. This includes those who may have been reliant on a positive result to secure a training contract. We are working closely with those students affected and our client firms to ensure they are appropriately supported.”

Meanwhile, BARBRI Global’s managing director Lucie Allen said she was concerned by today’s news and that “whilst this is positive for the students who have now passed, it is worrying that an error on this scale has happened”.

“Students will have been impacted in all sorts of ways which are significant and need to be thoroughly reviewed and understood,” she told Legal Cheek. “I am not sure the compensation offered addresses the extent of the repercussions experienced. BARBRI have put in place measures to support students and urge anyone impacted to reach out.

Finally, The College of Legal Practice issued a statement on LinkedIn expressing its deep disappointment, highlighting that the error will have greatly affected students’ wellbeing, confidence and finances. “We are seeing increased levels of anxiety both from our students and those thinking about taking the SQE and this will add to those concerns,” it said.

Dr Giles Proctor, the law school’s CEO, also commented on our coverage of the story.

“The latest from the Solicitors Regulation Authority in terms of their continuing problems with their running of the SQE, Proctor said. “Mistakes do occur and have quite rightly been addressed in this case. However, there is a wider issue emerging here around the dialogue from the SRA with firms, providers and students and how concerns are listened to and addressed.”

“More clear communication is needed and a sense of careful planning and discussion rather than just ploughing on with the same systems,” Proctor continued. “Otherwise, the really important stakeholders in all this, the students undergoing SQE, will continue to be under huge pressure and suffer from mistakes like this.”

Questions remain over whether blunder led to TC offer cancellations

Kaplan and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) have apologised this morning after it emerged that 175 students were incorrectly told they had failed parts of their Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) assessments.

The results for the January 2024 SQE1 assessments have been “reissued” to correct an error by Kaplan in the calculation of students’ scores. The issue came to light as result of students appealing their original scores.

As a result of the error, 175 students who were originally told that they had failed either Functioning Legal Knowledge 1 and/or Functioning Legal Knowledge 2 (the two parts of SQE1) have, in fact, passed those assessments.

News of the exam marking blunder comes just weeks after Legal Cheek exclusively revealed that some students had their training contract offers revoked due to failing the January sitting of SQE1.

At a press briefing this morning, Legal Cheek asked both Kaplan and the SRA if they were aware of any instances where a student’s training contract offer was revoked due to the error.

Zoe Robinson, director of qualifications at Kaplan, said that at this stage, it is not aware of any candidates who have had their training contracts rescinded due to this error, but acknowledged the possibility. She confirmed that Kaplan would collaborate with any affected candidates to ensure they are adequately compensated for any impacts caused by the error.

Explaining how the error occurred, Kaplan and the SRA said: The way the results were presented was new for January’s SQE1 — rather than results being shown as a percentage mark, candidates were given a standardised score out of 500. The mistake was made when implementing this change. It was unique to the January 2024 results — no previous SQE assessments are affected. It was discovered by Kaplan through general checks conducted during the appeals period.”

The error doesn’t impact the overall pass/fail outcome for the other 6,451 candidates who took the assessment. However, certain candidates may notice alterations in their scores or their placement within quintiles. Quintiles classify candidates into five groups, with the top 20% seated in the top quintile, and so forth.

All 6,626 candidates who took SQE1 in January have been contacted by Kaplan and all results from this sitting have been reissued to candidates.

Robinson said:

“We are committed to putting this right for candidates, and sincerely regret and apologise for the impact this has had for those affected. A goodwill payment of £250 is being offered to those candidates who were incorrectly told they had failed an assessment in recognition of the upset caused by this matter. In addition, we recognise that individual candidates who received the incorrect outcome may have been impacted by this in different ways. We would encourage candidates in this group, who have incurred losses as a direct result of this error, to contact our Candidate Services Team to outline your circumstances and each will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. We have set up a dedicated email address for this purpose — SQE1Jan24@kaplan.co.uk.”

Paul Philip, Chief Executive at the Solicitors Regulation Authority, who oversee the SQE and qualification route for solicitors, said:

“We are really disappointed by this error and apologise to the candidates who have been affected. Our immediate priority has been making sure the error has been put right as swiftly as possible, and the impact on candidates is recognised and addressed. We will be doing a full review with Kaplan of how the error occurred, and redoubling efforts on assurance, so we can reduce the risk of an error happening again.”

This isn’t the first example of issues with marking SQE exam papers, although not quite at this scale. In September 2023 Kaplan apologised to students after it identified an “isolated error” with the marking of a small number of SQE2 assessments.

The news comes just days after the SRA confirmed SQE1 and 2 fees will rise by 5% to £1,888 and £2,902, respectively.

Open letter

Four former Supreme Court justices are among the 600 lawyers and legal academics who have signed an open letter to the Prime Minister, urging the UK to halt the export of weapons to Israel.

The 17-page letter sent to Rishi Sunak this week highlights “significant developments” concerning the ongoing situation in Gaza, and goes on to remind the government of its obligations under international law.

These developments include the January 26 provisional order of the International Court of Justice, which the signatories say supports their view that there is “a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza”. It also notes the the UN and international aid agencies’ warnings of “imminent famine”.

Notable signatories to the letter include former Supreme Court president Baroness Hale, along with Lords Wilson, Sumption, Carnwath, and several former Court of Appeal judges, nearly 70 KCs, and over 240 solicitors. A host of legal academics from various law schools across the country have also endorsed the letter.

It goes on to say that the UK government is obligated under international law to undertake five actions, including “suspend[ing] the provision of weapons” to Israel and “impos[ing] sanctions upon individuals and entities who have made statements inciting genocide against Palestinians”.

It further urges Sunak to effectively work towards securing a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and to take all available measures to ensure the safe delivery of aid

The signatories also call for the 2030 Road Map for UK-Israel bilateral relations to be suspended and to “initiate a review into the suspension of the UK’s bilateral trade agreement with Israel and consider the imposition of sanctions”.

There have been several open letters penned by lawyers in relation to the Israel-Hamas conflict.

A group of Jewish lawyers, including former Supreme Court president Lord Neuberger, called on Israel to be guided by international law in its response to the Hamas terror attacks. The group recognised that Israel has a right to self-defense, but it also stated that “just as international law provides the means for categorising and criminalising the barbaric acts of Hamas, so too does it provide a framework for governing how Israel must respond”.

Elsewhere, in another open letter back in November 2023, a group some 800 lawyers urged the government to urgently advocate for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza.

Previously 50%

Gowling WLG has become the latest law firm to adjust its office attendance policy, increasing the minimum requirement from 50% to 60%.

The “small but important change” comes nearly three years after the firm trialed a variety of flexible working initiatives as part of scheme dubbed Agile+. Options included allowing lawyers to adjust their start and finish times, compress their working weeks, and allocate up to 50% of their time to work from home.

Gowling has now confirmed that “legal teams” will be required to spend at least 60% of their time in the office, with firm chair Andy Stylianou citing benefits for both the business and the career development of its lawyers. The change will take effect in May.

Stylianou said: “As a firm we’ve offered agile working for several years now, including before the pandemic. We always keep our agile approach under review to ensure we are delivering the very best for our clients and fostering a strong team culture, alongside flexibility for our people.”

“We know from our experience over the last year or so that more regular time in the office supports collaboration, helps our people build their skills and experience by working side-by-side with colleagues and ensures that our culture continues to thrive,” Stylianou said.

He continued: “So from May 2024 we will be making an adjustment and asking that our legal teams spend at least 60 per cent of their time in the office. We see this as a small but important change that will benefit both the business and our people as they build their skills and careers.”

Several firms have revised their remote working policies in the past 12 months, with US trio Ropes & Gray, Sidley and Weil all mandating at least four days in the office. Gateley, meanwhile, adjusted its policy, setting it between three and four days for lawyers, depending on their level of experience.

Elsewhere, Legal Cheek recently reported that Magic Circle firms Slaughter and May and Clifford Chance are monitoring the office attendance of their lawyers. Slaughters currently mandates three days a week either in the office, with a client, or in court, with trainees and new joiners expected to be present more frequently, while CC expects staff to spend at least 50% of their time in the office over a two week period.

Up 10%

US law firm Fried Frank has entered the London pay war with an improved salary of £175,000 for its newly qualified (NQ) associates.

The New York headquartered outfit has moved the already hefty pay packets of its NQs to a dollar-pegged £175,000, a rise of nearly 10% or £15,000 from £160,000.

The Legal Cheek Firms Most 2024 shows this fresh increase puts Fried Frank near the very top of the NQ pay table, with only Akin and Milbank offering slightly more (roughly £177,500).

Fried Frank recruits just four UK trainees each year on a starting salary of £55,000, rising to £60,000 in year two.

A raft of firms have increased pay for their juniors lawyers in recent weeks. As reported by Legal Cheek, Paul Hastings and Ropes & Gray moved to £173,000 and £165,000 respectively, while fellow US player Weil raised to £170,000. Elsewhere, White & Case, which offers 50 training contracts each year, confirmed increases for both trainees and NQs with the latter now earning salaries of £150,000.

71%

Clifford Chance has become the third Magic Circle outfit to publish its spring 2024 retention score, with 40 of its 56 final-seat trainees committing their futures to the firm.

The hands CC, which recruits around 110 trainees each year, the highest number of any firm in the City, a retention score of 71%. This marks a slight dip of the firm’s autumn 2023 performance, which saw it retain 43 of its 55 qualifying trainees, or 78%.

CC confirmed it received 52 applications and made 44 offers, 40 of which were accepted.

As with previous results, the firm player declined to provide details of the practice areas or offices the trainees will qualify into.

Fellow MC duo Allen & Overy and Freshfields have already gone public with their scores, posting results of 77% (30 out of 39) and 84% (32 out of 37).

New approach of linking sanction to salary

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has imposed a hefty fine of almost £14,000 on a solicitor convicted of drink-driving.

The sizeable financial penalty comes after the regulator tweaked its approach to punishing solicitors for certain types of misconduct. One notable change is the ability to link fines with solicitors’ salaries.

The SRA’s decision notice states that Richard Lunn, a director of Grimsby outfit Haywood Lunn & Allen, pleaded guilty to driving a car while under the influence of alcohol in November 2022.

The solicitor was fined £437 and disqualified from driving for 19 months, reduced by 19 weeks following successful competition of a driving rehabilitation course.

Lunn promptly notified the SRA of his arrest and subsequent conviction.

The regulator has now dished its own punishment, fining Lunn a hefty £13,836 — a record sanction for drink driving. Prior to the changes, fines for this type of offence would normally sit at around £2,000 mark.

The SRA initially imposed a fine of £17,295, however this was reduced on account of Lunn’s genuine remorse, early guilty plea and full cooperation with the regulator’s investigation.

Lunn also agreed to pay £1,350 costs.

Support up to 20 rookie solicitors

A new initiative has been established with the goal of providing financial support to trainee welfare lawyers throughout their training contracts.

The Supporting Social Justice Solicitors (SSJS) programme aims to provide assistance to individuals employed in the sector without legal qualifications, including paralegals and case workers.

The initiative is led by the Access to Justice Foundation (AJF) and specifically targets those whose prep and exams fees for the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) is covered by the Social Welfare Solicitors Qualification Fund (SWSQF).

The SWSQF was launched in December 2021 through a collaboration involving the City of London Law Society, SQE prep provider BARBRI, and Young Legal Aid Lawyers. The initiative recently hit £1 million in committed funding from some 30 firms and organisations.

The SSJS programme aims to extend crucial financial support until qualification by covering the salaries of trainees throughout their two-year training contracts, now often referred to as qualifying work experience.

The AJF has already contributed £100,000 to the programme but hopes to hit a target of £500,000 through partnerships and sponsorships.

The AJF said the programme aims to ensure a “steady pipeline” of social welfare lawyers by offering a route to qualification for those who may not have access otherwise. SWSQF students “often have lived experience of marginalisation and a direct connection with their communities, enabling them to identify and address specific barriers to justice”.

It hopes to support around 20 aspiring social welfare solicitors to qualify at organisations “specialised in helping the most marginalised in society”. This, it says, will deliver approximately 1,230 hours of social welfare law hours annually.

Public not at risk

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has said that there is no evidence indicating that any solicitor linked to the Post Office scandal poses an ongoing risk to the public that requires “urgent action”.

In update on Friday, the regular said it has been gathering evidence through various means, including obtaining a court order compelling the Post Office and Royal Mail Group to hand over relevant documents, and reviewing information shared publicly through the inquiry.

So far, the SRA says it has reviewed tens-of-thousands of pages of information and evidence.

Media scrutiny around the scandal has intensified in recent weeks following the airing of Mr Bates v The Post Office, an ITV drama which documents how hundreds of innocent sub-postmasters and postmistresses were wrongly accused of theft, fraud and false accounting due to a defective IT system known as Horizon.

“We will take action where we find evidence that solicitors have fallen short of the standards the public expects,” the SRA said.

“Our investigation covers multiple, multifaceted issues where there may have been potential misconduct,” it continued. “New issues and evidence are coming to light on an ongoing basis, particularly from the public inquiry. We expect further relevant evidence from the inquiry in the coming months, when it will look at issues such as the conduct of the group litigation and governance.”

“We expect to be in the best position to take any meaningful action to get the right outcome after the full facts and all the relevant issues have been aired through the inquiry,” the SRA added.

The regulator said it’s keeping its position under constant review and that at present, “we do not have evidence to show that any solicitor presents an ongoing risk to the public that needs to be addressed through urgent action”.

The inquiry into what went wrong first launched in 2020 and is being led by retired High Court judge Sir Wyn Williams. A number of lawyers have already given evidence as to their role in the prosecutions. No end date for the inquiry has been set.

77% and 97%

Allen & Overy (A&O) and Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) have gone public with their trainee retention rates for the spring 2024 season.

A&O will retain 30 of its 39 trainees due to qualify this March, handing the Magic Circle player a score of 77%. Thirty-six final seat rookies applied for NQ roles, and the firm made 33 offers. None are on fixed term deals.

This will likely be the firm’s final retention score before it merges with US outfit Shearman & Sterling later this year.

James Partridge, early careers recruitment partner and training principal, commented:

“We’re delighted that so many of our trainees have decided to remain at A&O, and further their careers at this exciting time for the firm as we merge with Shearman & Sterling to become A&O Shearman. We continue to invest in and develop our people, and this retention rate reflects the strength of our people pipeline. Congratulations to our latest cohort of qualifying solicitors.”

Meanwhile, HSF has posted a retention rate of 97% with 29 of its 30 spring qualifiers staying put. Like A&O, none of soon-to-be associates are on fixed term contracts.

David Rosen, partner and training principal, said:

“Continuing to maintain a high retention rate in what remains a competitive environment is no easy task, so I am delighted to see this trend continue. We remain committed to recruiting the best talent and building a solid career path for them and these latest figures are testament to our ability to deliver on that promise.”

The Legal Cheek Firms Most List 2024 shows A&O recruits around 80 trainees each year, while HSF takes on 65. Starting salaries currently sit at £125,000 and £120,000, respectively.

Between 100% and 21%

There was a huge disparity in pass rates among providers of the Legal Practice Course (LPC) in the year the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) was introduced, a new report has shown.

The findings, published recently by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), show success rates varied from as high as 100% to as low as just 21%.

The regulator noted a number of factors which may impact a law school’s pass rate, including student ability and engagement, teaching quality and assessment arrangements.

The report — which covers the period between September 2021 and August 2022 — doesn’t name specific LPC providers but does show two scored a pass rate of 100%. Of the 20, three had pass rates of 30% or below.

The SRA also highlights the very large differences in the size of the various providers and the number of students of different LPCs (full-time, part-time etc). LPC cohorts range from fewer than ten students to many thousands of students, spread over different locations.

The largest providers, BPP University and The University of Law, shared approximately 87% of the total number of students enrolled to take the LPC.

Overall, pass rates for the LPC fell compared to the previous year, 47.8% in 2021-22 compared to 53.5% in 2020-21. This, the SRA says, may be due to an increase in students who deferred during the pandemic, compare to previous years.

The SQE replaced the LPC as the route to solicitor qualification, although both courses are available until the latter is phased out by the end of 2032.

Last month the SRA confirmed it would miss its self-imposed deadline for publishing SQE pass rates among providers, blaming a lack of “sufficient data”.