LEGALAFFAIRSAVIATION INSIDE

FRIDAY, JANUARY 25, 2013 P25www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs

JACQUI SWINBURNE Housing a legal career P26

Globalalliancesthe way ofthe futureThe question of whichmodel to follow ishighly complex

SUSANNAH MORAN

THE globalisation of the Austra-lian legal market continues apace,with Middletons changing itsname to K&L Gates, following itsmerger taking effect this year, andNorton Rose set to merge withFulbright & Jaworski in June.

Further moves are expectedthis year, with King & WoodMallesons believed to be close to atie-up with a US firm.

But the issue of globalisation iscomplex: there is no singularmodel to follow, and while somehave their eyes on the US market,others are looking to Asia forgrowth. Some firms have fullymerged, others partially, whilesome prefer an alliance model.

For some firms, joining forceswith a global firm is the only wayforward. Others see no need, andare happy to remain independent.

Not surprisingly, K&L Gates’sAustralian managing partnerNick Nichola is firmly in the campof the former. ‘‘We came to a view,rightly or wrongly, that globalis-ation was here to stay and it hadfinally caught up with the legalprofession,’’ Mr Nichola said.

He said for many years Austra-lia had enjoyed boom times but‘‘that all irreversibly changed in2008’’.

‘‘We made a decision we want-ed to back the significant, truly in-tegrated global player (model),’’ hesaid. ‘‘That is a call we made thatwe think will be sustainable in 50years; this is long-term thinking.’’

Another factor was a concernthe firmwouldbepartofan ‘‘undif-ferentiated middle’’ that was

neither a large integrated firm nora niche specialist.

Norton Rose merged withDeacons in 2010 but NortonRose’s Australian managing part-ner, Wayne Spanner, saidthoughts of merging with an over-seas player had been taking shapeyears before. ‘‘Back in 2005, 2006,we took a strategic view on wherethe world was going and how weneeded to move and what weneeded to do,’’ he said.

‘‘We saw the political and econ-omic shift from West to East.’’

Some of the benefits of global-isation for staff include stints inoverseas offices — several gradu-ates head overseas for months tospend time working in Asia.

Tony O’Malley, King & WoodMallesons’ managing partner,Australia, believes there will be acontinuing trend of international-isation. His firm is rumoured to beclose to a second merger.

‘‘If you are not innovatingaround your service, you are kindof going backwards,’’ Mr O’Malleysaid. ‘‘In the next 12 months, wemight see the emergence of newbusiness models — the barriers toentry are quite low really inAustralia.’’

Michael Rose, Allens Link-laters, said they chose an alliancemodel, which was working ex-tremely well. ‘‘For us, we wanted toensure we had access to a goodinternational network while at thesame time preserving the thingsthat make us the firm that we are.’’

Dean Hely, incoming manag-ing director at Perth’s Lavan Legal,said the firm was surprised by howmany firms ‘‘rushed’’ into joiningoverseas firms. ‘‘We have hadorganisations approach us and wereally haven’t been interested, al-though you are flattered by peopleapproaching,’’ Mr Hely said.

Continued on Page 26

Quiet giant recruits strategically to expand

NIKKI SHORT

John Emmerig says he is very happy to be joining Jones Day because of its excellent staff and sophisticated expansion plans

SUSANNAH MORAN

YEARS before the overseas firmscame knocking on the shingles ofAustralia’s law firms in earnest,one of the world’s largest oper-ators, Jones Day, quietly wentabout its business in Australiawith a small Sydney office.

But in recent times the firm hasmade a strategic decision to sig-nificantly expand its Australianoffering and has been poachingsome of the nation’s best lawyers.It has also taken on an extra floorat Sydney’s Aurora Place.

John Emmerig, the formerhead of the class action practice atAshurst and its senior govern-ment litigation partner, is thelatest recruit to join Jones Day.Emmerig,whohasacted indozensof class actions for a range of cli-

ents including banks, govern-ments and liquidators, resigned inJune last year, but it is only now hecan speak out, after being held byAshurst to a six-month noticeperiod and sent on gardeningleave. He was gagged from talkingto clients, colleagues or the mediaduring that time, and started withJones Day last month.

‘‘At a personal level, I have toconfess that I really enjoyed thetime off,’’ says Emmerig, whospent the time completing a wine-making and viticulture course,making his first vintage of shirazcabernet, and indulging in his pas-sion for painting. ‘‘I feel rested, re-energised and fantastic for it.’’

At 8.30am on his first day atJones Day, Emmerig received acall from a client he had workedfor at Ashurst wanting to be‘‘Client 001’’. By lunchtime,

Emmerig also had his first set ofinstructions out of Singapore andother clients have since movedwith him.

Emmerig first came acrossJones Day in the late 1990s but itwas not until more recently thathe began to seriously think aboutmoving firms.

‘‘It became apparent some timeago that the make-up of the top-tier players in the Australian legalmarket was going to change. I feltthat, going forward, practisingfrom a leading global platformwas never going to be optional; itwas going to be a necessity.

‘‘So the key question became‘which global firm would providethe best platform’. For me, JonesDay and only Jones Day tickedevery box. It was a global legalpowerhouse with 800-plus part-ners, 2500-plus lawyers, operat-

ing across 37 offices, with anexceptional calibre of personnel.’’

Part of the attraction of joiningJones Day was that ‘‘there were nomerger issues to deal with and allthat entails’’, Emmerig says.

‘‘The firm wascommitted to theAustralian and regional marketand the global managing partner’splans for Jones Day’s growth inAustralia seemed to me to besophisticated, well-resourced andin every respect built around afocus on quality. It also providedsomething that many of the otherglobal or regional firms did not:that is, the chance to do the sort oflitigation I enjoyed doing in Aus-tralia — class actions and majordisputes — but with the addedbenefit of being able to take part inmore first-order regional and glo-bal litigation.’’

On the outlook for legal ser-

vices, Emmerig says he believes‘‘the major league’’ for legal prac-tice in Australia has been perma-nently redefined. ‘‘The dominantcomponent of the new majorleague comprises global brandsand I don’t see that changing.

‘‘I have no doubt there will alsobe major-league quality workavailable for an unaligned majorlocal firm or a limited number ofquality boutiques, but the keyhouses . . . in the high-end sectorwill be predominantly global innature — and the rise of the globalbrands in this market also redefin-es the professional opportunitiesto work oncross-border and inter-national transactions. I suspect wewill end up looking a lot like Paris.

‘‘That means a lot of globalfirms with offices of varying sizesand a number of established dom-estic boutiques.’’

Inquiryhead longa keenreformerMICHAEL PELLY

THE appointment of NSWSupreme Court judge PeterMcClellan as head of the royalcommission into institutionalchild sexual abuse has receivedwidespread acclaim. However,there is one group that will behappy to see him take a three-year break from the bench —lawyers who prefer to ply theirtrade in front of a jury.

McClellan does not bow tothe collective wisdom of a jury.In fact, he says there is anargument for them to beabolished from trials altogether.

He has long been an advocatefor reform, but since his firstspeech on juries in 2005McClellan’s thinking hasdefinitely hardened. It’s notpersonal; he just believes juriescontribute to the cost and delayin the legal system — and thatjudges sitting alone can do abetter job.

Since the departure of chiefjustice Jim Spigelman last year,it has been McClellan who hasbeen the court’s most visiblejudge. His speeches have beenthought-provoking and at timespopulist. He even won over talkshow host Ray Hadley when hesaid early last year that criticismfrom such quarters was valid.

It was a little cheeky given thenew Chief Justice, TomBathurst, had offered theopposite message in his speechmarking the opening of the legalyear.

Bathurst said talkback hostswere responsible for a distortedview of the justice system and ‘‘amisguided perception that thelegal community is soft oncrime’’.

There is little doubtMcClellan is comfortable in thepublic eye. In that sense, thefederal government has chosenwell. He is also, by all accounts, a

Continued on Page 26

Not-for-profits gain as pro bonowork rises to 30 hours a yearSUSANNAH MORAN

LAWYERS are providing close to30 hours a year in pro bono work,according to a survey by theNational Pro Bono ResourceCentre, a slight increase from twoyearsago.That figure isanaveragehowever, and some lawyers arespending six months to more thana year seconded to a not-for-profitorganisation.

Of the pro bono work provided,62.8 per cent is for organisations,with the number of individualsreceiving assistance falling overthe years.

The full survey, the NationalLaw Firm Pro Bono Survey 2012, isbeing released today by theNPBRC, with a rise in responsessince the centre’s 2010 report.Thirty-six firms responded, upfrom 29 in 2010. The figures referto the 2011-12 financial year.

Director John Corker said thefirms surveyed employed about19 per cent of the Australian legalprofession.

With more work than ever be-ing done for organisations, ratherthan individuals, Mr Corker said itwas crucial law firms did not losesight of the need to act for peoplein need, in cases of ‘‘acute injustice. . . There are certain cases that it’simportant that firms don’t just re-ject because they are too difficult.

‘‘Let’s not lose sight of those im-portant cases that can make a realdifference to upholding the tra-ditions of the law when it comes toinjustice,’’ Mr Corker said.

He said it may be ‘‘easier andmoreefficient’’ for firmstodoworkfor organisations, and in the caseof large firms, their skill sets mightbe a better match.

With more pro bono workbeing done for organisations, thesurvey supports other findingsthat greater funding is needed forLegal Aid. ‘‘Pro bono is not asubstitute for legal aid — for thosethat think that it is, here is clear

evidence that it is not,’’ Mr Corkersaid.

The most common areas of lawwhere expertise was providedwere governance, deductible giftrecipient applications, employ-ment law, commercial agreementsand incorporations.

Areas of work where firms mostcommonly rejected requests forhelp were in family law, wills/pro-bate/estate law and criminal law.

Law firms provided assistancein a number of ways, includingthrough secondments, althoughthis declined in large firms. Onefirm provided a lawyer to a not-for-profit organisation for 14months. It is usually young law-yers, graduates andassociates whogo on secondments, although onetop-tier firm said secondmentsnowinvolvedmoresenior lawyers,and there were ‘‘more interna-tional opportunities’’.

Mr Corker said, overall, the sur-vey results ‘‘paint a picture of quitea diverse pro bono sector — there

is a real variety of activities anddifferent approaches’’.

Another interesting findingwashowprobonoworkwasrecog-nised within a firm. While 23 firmstreated pro bono work as billablehours, those that didn’t took intoaccount the amount of pro bonowork a lawyer was doing whenreviewing salaries or consideringpromotions.

As for the reasons why lawfirms find it hard to respond torequests for help, the surveyrevealed similar reasons to thosein 2010, namely ‘‘capacity, insuf-ficient expertise in relevant areasof the law, concern about conflictof interest with fee-paying clients,and lack of management or part-ner support within the firm’’.

Key among these was the lackof partner support.

Firms were requested to dowork in a number of ways, includ-ing referrals, existing clients, andalso cold-calling direct fromorganisations that needed help.

‘Real work’ thatmeets benchmarks

DAVID HILLARD

LAW firms that provide legalservices to the commonwealthare required to report theirhours of pro bono work perlawyer in FY2012. The amount ofpro bono work performed byAustralia’s largest law firmsvaries significantly, in data justreleased in the commonwealth’sLegal Services Expenditure

Report 2011-2012. Now that probono performance is publiclyavailable through thecommonwealth’s Legal ServicesExpenditure Report, firms willinevitably be made accountablethrough questions fromprospective clients and recruitsabout how they measure upagainst their peers and the widerprofession’s expectations.

The 24 largest Australianfirms that reported to thecommonwealth fell into threedistinct bands of pro bonoperformance.

Nine firms exceeded theNational Pro Bono ResourceCentre’s Aspirational Pro BonoTarget figure of at least 35 hoursof pro bono work per lawyer ayear. A further eight firmsaveraged between 15 and 34 probono hours per lawyer. Finally,seven of the largest firms in the

Continued on Page 26

CASE AND DATA MANAGEMENT ADVISER

The governments of Vanuatu and Australia have established the Vanuatu

>ĂǁĂŶĚ:ƵƐƟĐĞWĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ^ƚƌĞƚĞŵZŽĚůŽŶŐ:ĂƐƟƐ;WĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ

ǁŚŝĐŚĐŽŵŵĞŶĐĞĚŝŶDĂƌĐŚϮϬϭϮdŚĞWĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉŵĂŶĂŐĞĚďLJ'ZD

/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůƐĞĞŬƐƚŽƐƚƌĞŶŐƚŚĞŶƚŚĞůĂǁĂŶĚũƵƐƟĐĞƐĞĐƚŽƌĂƐĂǁŚŽůĞĂŶĚ

ĂůƐŽƚŽďƵŝůĚƚŚĞĐĂƉĂĐŝƚLJŽĨĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐŝŶƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĂůũƵƐƟĐĞƐĞĐƚŽƌ

'ZD/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůĂƌĞƐĞĞŬŝŶŐĂCase and Data Management Adviser

;ĚǀŝƐĞƌƚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞDŝŶŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ:ƵƐƟĐĞĂŶĚŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐŝŶ

ĐŽůůĂďŽƌĂƟŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKĸĐĞŽĨƚŚĞ'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚŚŝĞĨ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶKĸĐĞƌ

ƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐƚŚĞƋƵĂůŝƚLJŽĨĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĐĂƐĞĂŶĚĚĂƚĂŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚĐĂƉĂĐŝƚLJĂĐƌŽƐƐ

ƚŚĞŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐŽĨƚŚĞƐĞĐƚŽƌĂŶĚƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐƉůĂŶĂŶĚ

ŚŝŐŚůĞǀĞůƐƚĂŐĞĚƐƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐ/dƉůĂŶĨŽƌƚŚĞŝŶĐƌĞŵĞŶƚĂůƉƌŽŐƌĞƐƐƚŽǁĂƌĚƐĂ

ĐŽŵƉƵƚĞƌŝƐĞĚĐƌŽƐƐĂŐĞŶĐLJƐƚƌĞĂŵůŝŶĞĚĂŶĚǁĞďĞŶĂďůĞĚůĂǁĂŶĚũƵƐƟĐĞ

ĐĂƐĞŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƉůĂƞŽƌŵ

<ĞLJĚĞůŝǀĞƌĂďůĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĚǀŝƐĞƌǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞ;ďƵƚĂƌĞŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞ

following:

)ǁƌŝƩĞŶĚŝĂŐŶŽƐƟĐĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĂĂŶĚĐĂƐĞŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ

ƐLJƐƚĞŵƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂǁĂŶĚũƵƐƟĐĞƐĞĐƚŽƌ

)ƌĞƉŽƌƚĂŶĚƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŽŶŝŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĂŶĚƚƌĞŶĚƐŽĨ

ĐĂƐĞŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚ/dƵƐĂŐĞǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞũƵƐƟĐĞƐĞĐƚŽƌŝŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŝŶŐ

ĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚĐŽƵŶƚƌŝĞƐ

)ŚŝŐŚůĞǀĞůƐƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐ/dƉůĂŶĨŽƌƚŚĞůĂǁĂŶĚũƵƐƟĐĞƐĞĐƚŽƌ

)dĞƌŵƐŽĨƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĨŽƌĂƐƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚ+ĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐ

ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ,ƚŽďĞƵŶĚĞƌƚĂŬĞŶďLJĂƐƉĞĐŝĂůŝƐĞĚĮƌŵ

The Adviser will be engaged on a short term basis for a total of 90 days and

ǁŝůůďĞƌĞŶƵŵĞƌĂƚĞĚŝŶůŝŶĞǁŝƚŚƵƐ/0ƐĚǀŝƐĞƌZĞŵƵŶĞƌĂƟŽŶ&ƌĂŵĞǁŽƌŬ

;'ƌŽƵƉ>ĞǀĞůϰdŚĞĚǀŝƐĞƌǁŝůůďĞďĂƐĞĚŝŶWŽƌƚsŝůĂsĂŶƵĂƚƵĨŽƌƚŚĞ

ŵĂũŽƌŝƚLJŽĨƚŚĞဓϬĚĂLJĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶĐLJ

dŽǀŝĞǁĂĨƵůůĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞdĞƌŵƐŽĨZĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƌŽůĞŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƐĞůĞĐƟŽŶ

ĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂĂŶĚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶĚĞƚĂŝůƐƉůĞĂƐĞǀŝƐŝƚƚŚĞ'ZD/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚ4

ǁǁǁŐƌŵŝŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůĐŽŵ

&ŽƌĂŶLJƋƵĞƌŝĞƐƉůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶƚĂĐƚ

<ƌŝƐƟŶĞůĞŽŶΛŐƌŵŝŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůĐŽŵ

ƉƉůŝĐĂƟŽŶƐĂƌĞĚƵĞďLJϱƉŵ;^dϮϬ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϮϬϭϯ

^ƚƌĞƚĞŵZŽĚůŽŶŐ:ĂƐƟƐŝƐŵĂŶĂŐĞĚďLJ'ZD/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůŽŶďĞŚĂůĨ

ŽĨƚŚĞƵƐƚƌĂůŝĂŶŐĞŶĐLJĨŽƌ/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ;ƵƐ/

STRETEM ROD BLONG JASTISVANUATU LAW AND JUSTICE PARTNERSHIP

Expressions of interest for appointment as

Chief Justice

or

Master

of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory

The Attorney-General, Mr Simon Corbell MLA, is seeking expressions of interest from

qualifi ed people for appointment to the offi ces of Chief Justice and Master of the

Supreme Court of the ACT under the Supreme Court Act 1933.

Expressions of interest are sought from all areas of the legal community, including

the private, government and community sectors. Women, people with disabilities,

Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people and people of culturally diverse

backgrounds are encouraged to apply.

The Supreme Court of the ACT has all original and appellate jurisdiction that is

necessary to administer justice in the Territory; and jurisdiction conferred by a

Commonwealth Act or a law of the Territory.

The Chief Justice is responsible for ensuring the orderly and expeditious discharge

of the business of the Supreme Court.

The Master exercises the civil jurisdiction of the Supreme Court which is

exercisable by a single judge.

Remuneration

A resident judge of the Supreme Court is entitled to the same remuneration,

allowances and entitlements as a judge of the Federal Court is entitled from time

to time – refer to the Supreme Court Act 1933, section 37U for further information.

In addition, the Chief Justice receives an additional daily amount set by the ACT

Remuneration Tribunal.

The remuneration and travel allowances of the Master are set by the ACT

Remuneration Tribunal. Other terms and conditions are determined by the Executive.

Inquiries and Selection Criteria

For a copy of the selection criteria please ring Lil Hays on (02) 6207 0552. For all

other inquiries please contact the Director-General, Justice and Community Safety

Directorate, Kathy Leigh, on (02) 6207 0500.

Expressions of Interest

Expressions of interest must be in writing and accompanied by a

detailed curriculum vitae. Expressions of interest can be emailed to

judicialappointment@act.gov.au or posted to Judicial Recruitment, Justice and

Community Safety Directorate, GPO Box 158, CANBERRA ACT 2601.

Please note that consideration may be given to progressing applications

without interview.

Expressions of interest for Master close Friday 15 February 2013.

Expressions of interest for Chief Justice close Friday 29 March 2013.

AG71832