Categories:Middle East

CC, DLA and Simmons lose out as Jumeirah revamps legal panel

  • Print
  • Comments (19)

Readers' comments (19)

  • Any more than four or five firms on a legal panel is pure over-kill and generally a sign of a general counsel trying to friends and ex-colleagues a favour, or worse.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ooops ... another piece of bad news for DLA in the sand.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A sign of the times that clients will continue with further rationalisation of global panels to reduce costs. Further, clients will dictate terms of billings and law firms will need to meet client demands given the fixed billing schedule on offer. There's no doubt, lawyers will need to become more commercially astute and think with an MBA hat on.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The firms also had to show that they could service the hotel chain in all the jurisdictions in which it operates.
    Mayer Brown do not have offices in the ME.
    Weil Gotshal has a token 2 lawyer office in Dubai.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • These firms will not receive much work. It's just another elaborate profile-raising exercise by an ambitious head of legal.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree with the previous comment. I bet these firms are secretly delighted - I worked in Dubai at the time of the original panel process and it was classic Middle East showboating - an elaborate process where something like 22 firms were whittled down to only (!) 12; even if the credit-crunch hadn't hit Dubai a few months later, Jumeirah doesn't outsource much work so a panel of that size was entirely unjustified and i heard that the panel firms had to provide training and jump through administrative hoops which were totally disproportionate to the fees they were getting. Oh, and the conference organised for "building close ties with panel firms"? never happened.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In a part of the world where in-house lawyers are still trying to gain the same recognition as their UK and US counterparts, well done Jumeirah for adopting such a progressive approach to the procurement of legal services. I have seen an increase in the number of my clients in the region who are asking for creative cost control initiatives and additional services, such as training and secondments - something which does not sit comfortably with many firms in the region.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anon 11.45 and 4.42 are clearly sour grapes lawyers from either cc, dla or s&s...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Or they could simply be people who've encountered the Jumeirah oddballs!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • ...or, they could just be right. Seems like an honest opinion has been given and that is that in-house HoLs are jumped up ego-craving cookie monsters.
    We did a pitch a short while ago for a VERY prestigious client, but lost out to a good regional firm. No sour grapes over losing out to the other firm, other than we were better...(!)
    Sour grapes due to the way in which the pitch target's director (who was also a surveyor by trade) handled the entire affair, had us march down to see them at their offices and basically bum steered us because of the fact that our firm was less well known (but equally capable by the pitch taget's director's own admission).
    Love Oscar the Grouch.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'll bet CC etc are sharing a big collective sigh of relief for escaping the nonsense of the Jumeirah panel.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Just an observation, but Jumeirah neither have the quality of work nor the budget to sustain or warrant a panel of international law firms.

    BTW - the conference that was organised for Jumeirah's original legal panel was cancelled (by Jumeirah). The Lawyer ought to check its facts! So much for them getting closer to their panel firms etc.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If a firm wants off a panel, there are two ways to go about it:

    1) Wait to get kicked off; or

    2) Take yourself off.

    Seems like option 2 is much easier. Why would these firms wait to get kicked off if they wanted off so badly? Did they have a gun to their heads?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Because the firms had to go through the motions and play the game for wider political and PR reasons.

    Jumeirah, though a commercial non-entity, is still a Dubai government company.

    Fairly obvious, Captain Obvious....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That's utter nonsense. There are plenty of graceful ways to remove oneself from a panel that you no longer find profitable or worthwhile. If you handle it correctly and professionally, nobody would blame you. Clifford Chance won't feel much pain being removed from this panel but you can't tell me DLA Piper sees it as a blessing in disguise.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Heh at Jumeirah for calling a CC partner some years ago to complain that their secondee wasn't wearing a tie. It's been a joke at CC ever since.

    Meanwhile, Jumeirah still struggles to open hotels...but that's apparently not a problem as long as its people are immaculately turned out!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The secondee in question has fared well since then, while the smartly dressed buffoons have not really moved their business forward.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Field Marshall Common Sense - are you a Jumeirah clown in disguise? DLA will miss having Jumeirah as a client about as much as they miss having Nakheel as a client... At least Nakheel was actually worth a few bob as a client, notwithstanding they went bankrupt and didn't pay their bills lol.
    Anonymous from Sep 16 @ 3.09pm is 100% on the money.
    BTW, Simmons and CC are still high fiving each other following the news.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The comments are rather revealing. I in fact worked as a 'member' of the Jumeriah legal team around this time and I have to say, it was an entirely regrettable experience. Regrettable because the 'team' (and I use that term loosely), driven by ineffectual 'leadership' (again, I also use that term loosely) was more about rhetoric than substance. The head of legal clearly didn't understand the market, or his team, and his side-kick (an on odious lickspittle of an individual) was embarrassingly and cringe-worthingly trite. They rarely outsourced work, so why on earth they had the number of firms on the panel that they did is anyones guess. Quite frankly - if you weren't selected, then you were the lucky ones - believe me!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (19)