Most popular
- BLP to cut 58 legal staff in massive salary reduction drive
- Tribunal rules against Travers in pregnancy discrimination case
- SJ Berwin name poised to vanish as King & Wood merger vote looms
- Top private school summoned by BSB over pupillage auction
- Osborne Clarke puts 13 senior fee earners on redundancy consultation
Most commented
- Tribunal rules against Travers in pregnancy discrimination case
- Top private school summoned by BSB over pupillage auction
- Texas firm Andrews Kurth makes Ashurst hire for City launch
- BLP to cut 58 legal staff in massive salary reduction drive
- Bond Dickinson cleans up with Colgate Palmolive panel place
Like what you’re reading?
Subscribe to The Lawyer today and get all the latest news stories, both domestic and global, and analysis of the legal sector.
A subscription includes:
- 50 weekly issues delivered direct to your door
- Exclusive annual supplements such as The Lawyer UK200 and The Lawyer Hot 100
- VIP invitations to The Lawyer events
- All this for less than £2 per week.
- Subscribe now
Your Account
Contact Us
Centaur Communications Ltd(a member of the Centaur Media plc group)
Wells Point, 79 Wells Street, London, W1T 3QN
Registered in England, no. 1595235 Contact The Lawyer team
- © Copyright - Centaur Communications Ltd - All rights reserved
Site powered by Webvision
Readers' comments (4)
Anonymous | 18-Jan-2010 10:44 pm
For one firm it is clear that putting barely concealed threats in the local newspaper has paid dividends...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12-Apr-2010 8:28 am
This exercise should have ensured best value legal services for Newcastle's taxpayers. Unfortunately the same Geordie's gentleman's club mentality kicked in and the same firms as usual won the work. In my view, if your brother is a partner in one of the firms or your married to one of the tendering organisations you are under a duty to step out of proceedings.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-May-2010 1:11 pm
I work in one of the councils and we are very uneasy about what has happened.
"Keeping it in the family" does not sit well with value for money .
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23-May-2010 4:26 pm
The new Government would do well to look into what happened to select at least one firm listed above.
This wasn't value for money.
It's not fair when one firm is pre-selected.
I'm waiting for an MP to ask a very difficult question. Heads will roll and it'll be seen that this process was like something from Get Carter.
Or maybe one of the firms who missed out? Or maybe a disgruntled employee? Or maybe a journalist will scratch beneath the surface. The first comment is just the first layer in a process that means the Council Tax payers are forking out more for legal services than they should...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment