Jones Day bolsters Paris finance team with Gide hires
Jones Day has recruited a structured products team from Gide Loyrette Nouel in Paris led by partner Alban Caillemer du Ferrage.
Caillemer du Ferrage joins Jones Day along with of counsel Quian Hu, counsel Karole-Anne Sauvet and associates Clément Saudo and Mathilde Nicand. The five lawyers start work at the US firm today (8 October).
The team focuses on structured and derivative products and market infrastructure. They will sit within Jones Day’s banking and finance group, which currently advises on financing, debt restructuring and financial litigation. Caillemer du Ferrage is also the International Swaps and Derivatives Association counsel for France.
Caillemer du Ferrage said in a statement: “The increasingly complex regulatory environment requires the ability to provide advice in a wide variety of jurisdictions. Joining Jones Day offers us the opportunity to practise in a truly global firm that offers a broad range of services at the highest level, in the world’s main financial and business centres, to an exceptional client base of financial institutions and corporates.”
Last year Jones Day brought on board Norton Rose’s French corporate finance head Hervé Castelnau and his team (12 September 2011). However, the firm lost employment partner Anne Boileau to Gide in February this year (2 February 2012).
The firm is bulking up in other parts of Europe too, having announced the launch of an Amsterdam office last week (1 October 2012).
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (16)
Anonymous | 10-Oct-2012 10:39 pm
@Anonymous 10:58 am
Fair points. But you're not addressing the key issues: As someone said, "Who would turn to Gide for a massive international arbitration dispute? A headline-grabbing joint venture? A multi-source cross-border financing? A glorified continental firm doesn't make a global firm." These are relevant queries. How can any firm -- doesn't matter whether it's Gide or any another continental firm -- succeed internationally without a substantial London or NY presence? Surely this question is relevant to many continental firms, without singling out Gide specifically.
At the end of the day, a firm can focus on a few core jurisdictions where it is profitable, or try to be 'global' and have profitable offices subsidise new markets. How does it work out if you want to become global without a very profitable home base and/or an established London or NY presence?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Oct-2012 4:20 pm
I think the thick end of a billion dollars is at least "chunky", if not "massive"... http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6ed60084-82bd-11e0-b97c-00144feabdc0.html
Arbitrations being quite hush-hush, I'm guessing that reported cases represent the minority of any firm's caseload.
I don't know anything about finance / M&A in any firm, let alone Gide, but I'm sure their PR guy will be along shortly to share...
And I agree that glorified continental is not global. Gide may not be particularly massive in London or the US, but it is big in most of Europe, and has a hefty Chinese presence. All of that taken together may well prove to be more than adequate to make money.
Not every firm can (or should) be a super-profitable global behemoth.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 15-Oct-2012 1:14 pm
There is plenty of room for everyone in the market. Gide is not a "global" firm but it is certainly an "international" one. How many other firms with their head office in continental Europe can actually say that they have the international coverage of Gide without having merged with (i.e., been swallowed up by) one of the American or English firms?
Vive la différence! And no, I am not at Gide.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Oct-2012 6:50 am
"There is plenty of room for everyone in the market."
haha.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Immoraliste | 17-Oct-2012 11:28 am
only after squeezing through La Porte Etroite ....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 17-Oct-2012 6:08 pm
Obviously Jones Day sees some value in hiring Gide lawyers, would they hire from a terrible firm? I understand that some here are commenting on business strategy etc. probably some valid points, but it seems to me that there are some with vested interests/scores to settle!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment