Five senior City lawyers have launched an outsourcing and technology boutique today, which pledges to axe the billable hour.
Clerkenwell-based radiant.law has been formed by a team that includes Andrew Giverin, who last month became the latest in a string of partners to resign from BLG (1 December 2010).
Giverin, and the other shareholders in the business, argue that theirs is the first outfit to take legal commentator Richard Susskind’s views on the future of the legal profession seriously by combining process-driven work and use of new technologies with oversight from senior lawyers and getting rid of the billable hour in favour of fixed fees.
Radiant.law shareholder Alex Hamilton, who has joined from Giverin’s former firm Latham & Watkins, told The Lawyer: “Clients need good value and pricing certainty and fixed fees and variants of that offer better certainty than the billable hour.
“We’re trying to provide the expertise of senior lawyers who can cut to the chase with the more factory-like approach to doing the more mundane aspects,” he added.
The firm will send less complex work offshore to LPO provider Pangea3 and does not intend to hire any junior lawyers.
The other shareholders to join the business are Morrison & Foerster partner David Skinner, senior Deutsche Bank lawyer Mark Millward and BLG senior associate Jason McQuillen.
Readers' comments (10)
Anonymous | 4-Jan-2011 3:52 pm
Since when is fixed fee a new concept?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 4-Jan-2011 11:17 pm
Brave and well timed move, but will GC's support the move by going off panel for key transactions?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jan-2011 9:24 am
I don't think Morrison & Foerster have realised what MoFo really means. It's street slang, and it's not very complimentary!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jan-2011 1:23 pm
I foresee a future where wizened old men with wispy beards and glasses will monitor the progress of automated legal robot technicians, whilst cackling maniacally.
Of course when the old wizened men retire, there won't be anyone to replace them because they didn't see fit to recruit any junior lawyers.
Consequently, the robot underclass will rightly assume they are now in charge with dire consequences for the profession.
Possibly.
Anyway, all the best. This new fangled fixed fee arrangement will have the clients coming in droves.
Funny how the fixed fee generally matches somewhat closely the projected amount of time spent on a matter multiplied by charge out rate.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 5-Jan-2011 7:11 pm
there is nothing innovative about this firm. surprised you decided to cover the launch. there are plenty more firms that offer good legal services out there that you never seem to bother to write about because they don't have 'big' names or such like. do a bit of on the ground reporting to find out what's out there and don't just publish press releases. not to mention that this firm is just 5 guys getting together - no space for the women that always seem to drop out of the legal profession
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 9:08 am
@ Anonymous 9:24am. Are you serious? Your comment indicates you're a bit behind the times. MoFo have played on the slang as marketing ploy for years. Keep up!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 9:33 am
"Funny how the fixed fee generally matches somewhat closely the projected amount of time spent on a matter multiplied by charge out rate." + 10% for unforseeables, though if anything unforseeable actually happens, your fixed fee is out of the window. Decent scam
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2011 3:46 am
In every business, a fixed fee is in return for a fixed amount of work. In the legal profession, a fixed amount of work is rarely if ever defined, or indeed definable, unless you do standard conveyancing. Thus, sooner or later the "fixed fee" starts increasing due to unforeseen increased work.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2011 12:27 pm
I didn't know about the MoFo alternate meaning, but all recent e-mails form the lawyer have been blocked by my employer's e-mail filter because of this story!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andrew Giverin, radiant.law | 17-Jan-2011 2:48 pm
Those who query whether our pricing is really different from the traditional law firm model are invited to check out our latest blog on the subject, which can be found on our web site, entitled “pricing is about value not time”.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment