The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. 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.
The 25 June edition of The Lawyer ran a story about my appearance before the Competition Appeal Tribunal. The headline said "CAT raps Sullivan over non-qualified lawyer role". The article then asserted that the firm had received a "slap on the wrist over a fundamental procedure rule".
Nothing could be further from the truth. The facts are as follows: I applied on 2 March 2007 under Rule 7(b) of the Tribunal Rules to appear on behalf of Morgan Crucible, as the rules contemplate. The tribunal granted my application immediately for purposes of the first case management conference.
At the first case management conference on 13 March 2007, the tribunal made the helpful suggestion that we consider instructing a young barrister to be my junior. We adopted that suggestion and so informed the tribunal on 26 March 2007. On 30 March 2007 the tribunal wrote that it was "content with the arrangements that have been put in place". At the proceedings before the CAT on 26 June 2007, the chairman of the tribunal stated, unprompted, at the outset: "I am also very pleased that we have managed to sort out the representation that Mr Osgood can appear and I note that the mention in the press about the rap was not actually correct."