Riverview expands overseas with New York launch
Riverview Law, the start-up venture backed by ABS-in-waiting LawVest, is to open an office in New York.
Richard Lissack
The business has appointed former AdviserPlus Business Solutions client director Andy Daws to lead the New York base.
Riverview Law launched in February as the umbrella company of Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors (20 February 2012).
Riverview Chambers is home to 43 barristers, including 12 QCs and provides direct access to the bar on a fixed-fee basis.
The aim is to open a direct access pathway to the UK bar for US lawyers, while removing the added cost of instructing a barrister via an SRA-qualified solicitor.
Chief operating officer Adam Shutkever said: “The volume of cross-border activity, along with the impact of extraterritorial legislation such as the Bribery Act and Enterprise Act, means that many international corporations and professionals have a regular need for advice and representation in the English system, yet are often frustrated by the inefficiency of having to appoint, separately, both solicitors and barristers.”
Daws added: “There’s a real appetite to eliminate the duplication of effort and open-ended nature of costs often associated with the English legal system, which is something we’re able to do without compromising on quality.”
Riverview head of international Richard Lissack QC is also a member of Outer Temple Chambers. The set opened a base in New York at the end of 2009, a move Lissack was instrumental in (9 November 2009).
Lissack is admitted to the New York bar and is currently instructed as the first-ever US/UK jointly appointed monitor in respect of the Innospec bribery litigation.
Andrew Spink QC, who is also a member of Outer Temple and Riverview Chambers, chairs the North American Committee of the Commercial Bar Association.
Readers' comments (2)
Wiggy | 30-May-2012 11:08 pm
NY base = NY postbox. What a coincidence that RLQC is also Head of International at Outer Temple and features in the photo to boot. I wonder whether Andy Daws looks after Outer Temple's "NY" base as well (by which I mean I genuinely wonder whether that is the case).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jason | 1-Jun-2012 8:29 am
I always find it odd with barristers chambers offering this kind of thing. On the face of it just using a barrister for certain particular advice might seem quite attractive to some (especially foreign clients) who are unclear what a barrister can, and is actually able to practically do with their 'advice' in our system.
For example, questions which arise when the advice is provided to a client usually revolve around what shall we do now, do we send a letter of claim or some other correspondence, which witnesses are you going to proof etc etc. Its my experience that a barrister will usually have to say at that point that a solicitor should be instructed as he has neither the resources nor the insurance cover to carry out their instructions. Its also been my personal experience that unfortunately at that point things have either moved on to make Counsel's advice mostly redundant, or alternatively, the client then provides updated and more detailed instructions (which can cast doubt on the content of the earlier limited instructions provided to counsel and upon which their advice is based).
Of course if the barrister doesn't let on that the position has changed then that presents quite separate professional issues.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment