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.
Helen Sage is right to draw attention to the lack of accreditation of experts, particularly in medicine (The Lawyer 12 March).
She quotes me in this regard, upon the Law Society Directory of Experts, recently published by FT Law & Tax. I am alleged to have said the directory is "not worth the paper it is written on".
I do not recall using that phrase and if I did, I was wrong. Since I was involved in the publication of the directory and wrote the introduction to the medical specialities, it must be clear that I support the publication. The point I was attempting to make was that the directory was not a form of accreditation although many subscribers suppose that it is.
The Law Society directory does not set out to be a form of accreditation, requiring only two referees for entry. The directory is useful but it does not fulfil the requirement of providing a source of accreditation for the high street solicitor.