Norton Rose posts £833m turnover at end of acquisitive year
Norton Rose has announced its unaudited financial results for the 2011-12 financial year, with the turnover figure of $1.32bn (£833m) representing a 9 per cent like-for-like increase on last year.
Peter Martyr
The latest figure, which includes the firm’s Canadian and South African practices, is £345m up on the 2010-11 revenue. The latest results follow the firm’s merger with Calgary-based Macleod Dixon, which went live on 1 January this year (4 October 2011).
The amount also includes fees brought in since the firm merged with Canadian firm Ogilvy Renault and South African firm Deneys Reitz, both of which came into effect on 1 June last year (15 November 2010).
The firm - which posts its global turnover in US dollars - said its revenue was up 9 per cent on 2010-11 on a like-for-like basis taking into account currency differences. Last year it turned over £484m (14 June 2011), with the figure adjusted to £488m for The Lawyer UK 200. That figure excluded Canada and South Africa.
Norton Rose CEO Peter Martyr said in a statement: “The benefits of the group are obvious. We’re seeing strong growth across the business internationally.”
The firm has not yet announced its profitability figures, with average profit per equity partner (PEP) last year estimated at £445,000.
Readers' comments (2)
Anonymous | 17-May-2012 5:54 pm
So 4 seperately run firms who do not share profits or resources have, in total (between the four of them) run up a large number in revenue. Between the four of them. Oh, and they share a name. Even though they're different firms that don't share profits or resources.
Not really much of a story when you look at it this way, is it?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anon | 18-May-2012 1:47 pm
@ Anonymous | 17-May-2012 5:54 pm - You can look it that way, but you would be wrong.
The firms are operationally integrated and have, or are rapidly in the process of creating, a single management, brand, IT system, billing system, know how system, office network and employee roll.
Full financial integration will inevitably happen in time but this is already one firm.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment