CMS Cameron McKenna has appointed 16 new partners, with 14 of the promotions coming in the UK offices.
The figure is up from last year’s total of nine promotions across Camerons’ offices and is part of a 32-strong promotion round in the CMS network as a whole in 2011.
London accounts for a dozen of the new partners, with one each being based in Aberdeen, Bristol, Budapest and Prague.
The commercial, regulatory and dispute practice is the best represented in the promotion round with five new partners, while energy has four new recruits to the partnership and banking and finance has three. Two new partners join the human capital team, while corporate has just one new partner.
The promotions, effective from 1 May, are all to the level of office partner, with none joining the equity at the firm.
The full list of new partners is as follows:
Banking and Finance
Patrick Donegan (London)
Mark Moseling (London)
Ivan Sefer (Budapest)
Commercial, Regulatory and Dispute
Monica Lesny (London)
Simon Garrett (London)
Will Sefton (Bristol)
Tom Scourfield (London)
Tomas Matejovsky (Prague)
Corporate/M&A
Steve Mack (London)
Energy
Matthew Culver (London)
Jeremy Wilson (London)
Ian Herbert (London)
Alison Woods (Scotland)
Human Capital
Pete Coyne (London)
Emma Frost (London)
Management
Craig Perry – General Counsel (London)
Readers' comments (5)
Anonymous | 3-May-2011 4:58 pm
Who cares? This firm has become a laughing stock over the last 2 or 3 years.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 4-May-2011 11:23 am
Indeed - the firm is particularly marketing driven, but with no real substance to back up what it is selling.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 4-May-2011 12:36 pm
Human Capital? LOL!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 4-May-2011 8:30 pm
Congratulations to new partners!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6-May-2011 5:54 pm
I am not too sure I agree either with the tone or the content of the post about Camerons being "particularly marketing driven but without any real substance". Firstly if the poster believes that it is a weakness to be "marketing driven" then I suspect they won't be employed in the legal market for much longer. Secondly - it is a fine firm with many extremely good people with much of value "to market".
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment