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.
I am writing in response to the recent comment made by one lawyer in 'Axa and Norwich Union hatch plan to axe firms from panel' (The Lawyer, 20 March), that "the problem with going in-house is that you can't get quality lawyers".
I totally disagree with this comment. I am an in-house litigation lawyer for a multinational company, specialising in the litigation of asset finance and I have come across many good quality in-house litigation lawyers who have moved in-house for numerous reasons.
What a lot of lawyers fail to realise is that there are many advantages of becoming an in-house lawyer, one of which is that you get your life back by working sociable hours.
You also gain hands-on experience of the way a business is run, with the opportunity to develop into other areas.
Personally, I cannot see myself going back into private practice, and I would say to any lawyer that is considering an in-house litigation role that they should seriously weigh up the benefits of doing so.