The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Disclosure exercises in litigation are no longer restricted to physical documents. E-disclosure is increasingly crucial, but dispensing with paper does not mean things are straightforward.
That has been thrown into sharp relief by the SFO’s disclosure exercise in its defence of damages claims brought by businessmen Vincent and Robert Tchenguiz. In pre-trial hearings before Mr Justice Eder, ahead of a full trial later this year, Slaughter and May partner Jonathan Cotton, acting for the SFO, revealed that the agency was running behind in disclosure and wanted to find more junior barristers to join the document review team busy dredging thousands of files.
The SFO has so far spent £118,000 on the disclosure exercise. It sounds a lot, but when you consider that the team has clocked up over 2,500 hours, it works out at less than £50 an hour – surely a bargain for the taxpayer.
However, the hearings also showed that finding those extra barristers needed for the SFO to meet its disclosure deadlines could be tricky. SFO counsel Dominic Dowley QC of Serle Court Chambers told Eder J last week there was “no realistic possibility” of increasing resources.
“There are no more junior barristers available – we’ve hired a lot and we can’t get any more,” said Dowley.
Losing the case will be costly for the SFO, with the brothers jointly claiming around £300m. Getting disclosure right is crucial, but despite the efforts of the SFO team it remains an uphill battle.