Jonathan Keil

It might surprise some but there are a number of law firms now paying partners $20m or more. The highest comp band that I have come across for a partner is $25m, but there will be some that are higher. The number of partners at US firms earning $7-$12m has swelled over the last 5 years. The questions is are they worth it? Outside of Wachtell you have a number of elite firms who charge anything from $1600-$2800 often elite firms recover at 100% or close to that. So the contribution a single partner can make has a ceiling. What they leverage is a significant client or client base. Individuals are still pivotal in relationships, a single partner can make a significant difference, in fact their departure can be terminal. Paul Weiss Chair Brad Karp recently talked about retention and how they retain their best, they fight hard to hold their clients but all firm leaders know that there are partners who are a significant differential in a relationship. Now those partners can leverage that differential and if the output is consistent the earning potential is significant. Absent a structure that allows you to reward your key partners in line with their peers, they are far more susceptible to being picked off. #fidessearch #webringtherightpeopletogether #law #partnercompensation https://lnkd.in/eSzchp2j

12

4 Comments

This report from BNY Mellon provides interesting information on the investment strategies of some 189 family offices. Some family offices focus increasingly on direct investments, growth and AI. Is this a new trend for family offices? You can find the full report here: https://lnkd.in/eQiMgYpu #private_clients #familyoffice #westmoore

2

Leveraged Finance, hey?! Although I intended to do a couple of posts last week on the new NQ salaries and the rise of the $20million partner, those will have to wait for the moment. Within the London leveraged finance market, the shifting sands have rendered a dramatically different landscape to even two years ago. Colossal moves have become so commonplace that even the mindboggling hires by K&E of Ian Barrett and Sinead O'Shea didn't receive as much attention as they deserved... and here's another biggie. When Jonathan Brownsen moved over to Cahill, it was a big deal. He established almost overnight one of the stronger US lender-side lev fin practices, focusing on big-ticket syndicated work, and they were one of the highest paying teams in the city. At Latham they'll aim to plug the gap left by Mo et al after the team move to Paul Hastings, after many (including myself) had assumed that Latham would pivot to become more of a sponsor shop. Many other firms have been looking to bolster their leveraged finance offerings (Davis Polk, Cleary, Skadden, etc); some established teams have continued to go from strength to strength; some have exploded out of nowhere; and a few that were on promising trajectories have stalled a bit among tough market conditions. With an awful lot of hiring going on... at a variety of levels... in teams of all shapes and sizes, it might be worth a chat with an ex-leveraged finance lawyer who is relatively plugged in to what the various players in the market are up to and what they're all actually like. So far this year I have moved finance lawyers of every level, from NQ through mid-levels through senior/counsel all the way to partner, and I have more active roles that ever before. If you have post-qualification experience in a highly ranked leveraged finance team, even if you aren't necessarily thinking of an imminent move, we really should talk.

13

The #SFC said today it suspended a former licensed representative for seven months on the back of fund management failures. He was the portfolio manager for a Cayman-incorporated fund (Fund) between May 2018 and April 2020.  According to the SFC, he - - failed to properly manage the Fund to ensure that its investments were in line with its stated investment strategy, objectives and investment restrictions. The Fund’s investment objective was "to achieve capital preservation combined with steady capital appreciation over a long term through primarily investing in a diversified portfolio of equity securities." Instead, there were only one to three stocks at any given point in time in the Fund’s portfolio during the 21-month period from its inception in May 2018 to January 2020. In addition, the Fund held highly concentrated positions in two Hong Kong-listed stocks, one of which was not on the permitted securities list approved by senior management. Further, it was found that the person failed to properly manage and take proactive steps to mitigate Fund risks in accordance with internal policies where the holding of an unsuitable stock was concerned. - further failed to properly manage Fund risks in accordance with internal policies in terms of the Fund's liquidity and concentration risks, while also breaching stop-loss procedures. The case serves to remind all fund managers to adhere to investment mandates and properly manage fund risks. If, as a result of market conditions, new investment opportunities or other reasons arise that appear to justify a change in a fund's underlying investment objective and strategy, the fund should obtain consent from all existing investors unless the terms of subscription say otherwise, generally speaking. It is also a reminder that fund manager should adhere to internal policies, such as restrictive securities lists, or stop-loss or soft winding-up procedures. This is in addition to complying with relevant laws and regulations, including the Fund Manager Code of Conduct.  Should any fund manager require legal advice, please feel free to reach out.    #investmentfunds #compliance #regulation Katherine Liu Alan Wong James Wong Monica JIA Brian Ho

52

1 Comment

ESMA has just published an interesting statement on the use of AI in the provision of retail investment services. That said, most/all of the points are equally relevant in the wholesale financial sector. ESMA reminds firms that MiFID applies in firms' use of AI, and that, although AI technologies offer potential benefits to firms and clients, they also pose inherent risks, such as: ✔ Algorithmic biases and data quality issues; ✔ Opaque decision-making by a firm’s staff members; ✔ Overreliance on AI by both firms and clients for decision-making; and  ✔ Privacy and security concerns linked to the collection, storage, and processing of the large amount of data needed by AI systems. Link: https://lnkd.in/gwnkv8-n

54

3 Comments

There is still strong appetite among distressed investors to transact, provided that the price is right. What is being acquired though is often highly selective and not necessarily the business as a whole. Read what Finella Fogarty at RPC- law firm has to say about recent developments in our “INDEPTH FEATURE: Bankruptcy & Restructuring 2024” report: https://lnkd.in/egUpN-Nj #BANKRUPTCY #RESTRUCTURING

17

Hecht Partners LLP clients, survivors of the 21st Century's first genocide in Sudan, have just won in the Southern District of New York, defeating defendant BNP Paribas' motion for summary judgment to dismiss the victims case which was filed on the heels of the French bank's criminal conviction for violating U.S. sanctions against Sudan, Iran, and Cuba in a conspiracy that lasted a decade during Sudan's commission of mass atrocities against its Black African indigenous population. HIGHLIGHTS OF DECISION: Defendants argue that plaintiffs cannot prove that the Government of Sudan committed unlawful acts because Swiss law would consider acts of a government as immune from suit under the doctrine of jure impeii, and that BNPP cannot be culpable as an accomplice if the primary actor cannot be held as a tortfeasor. The argument is without merit. The Second Circuit ruled in this case that Sudan violated jus cogens by its genocidal acts, and that BNPP can be sued for aiding and abetting Sudan. As the Second Circuit held, the illicit acts in question – “genocide, mass rape, and ethnic cleansing” – violated jus cogens norms, which are “peremptory norm[s] of international law . . . accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole . . . from which no derogation is permitted.” Kashef II, 925 F.3d at 60. The holding of the Court of Appeals is the law of the case. Indeed, BNPP cannot now argue the issue that it already has admitted, that it knowingly and consciously assisted the Government of Sudan in its commission of unlawful acts and knew or should have known that it was enabling these illicit acts. Whether the abuses by the GOS would have occurred in the same way and magnitude without BNPP’s financing and access to western market presents material issues of fact. BNPP argues that discovery showed that most Plaintiffs did not live on oil-rich lands, that some Plaintiffs were harmed by simple and not sophisticated weaponry, and that the GOS had non-oil forms of revenue on which to draw, but such facts, even if proved, are not determinative on summary judgment. There are too many facts showing a relationship between the dollar financing provided by BNPP, and the atrocities perpetrated by the GOS. Causation cannot be decided in defendants’ favor by summary judgment. (emphasis added) [I]n terms of public policy, it would be arbitrary to apply Sudanese law when the courts of Sudan were not open to the Plaintiffs and lacked the capacity to control a genocidal government. (edited)

20

3 Comments

Here's the second in the new deep dives series that we have put together on current hot topics in the private credit space.

16

1 Comment

Can you imagine the gods you'd get working for you from China, India or Bethnal Green at a fraction of this price? An organisation can only feel this makes sense if it adopts a blinkered, parochial view of its potential talent pool. Clients with a view to accessing the best talent might observe that the world is not populated by Herodotus' Blemmyes. The providers of knowledge work either look at all available talent or they provide a poor product at a high price. https://on.ft.com/4diGqZT via @FT

4

In an enforcement action focused mainly on market manipulation, the CFTC announced its first charge under Regulation 165.19(b), the CFTC's anti-impedance rule. This enforcement action is a critical step in encouraging prospective whistleblowers to report market manipulation, fraud, and other violations to the CFTC when they have entered into an NDA or other agreement barring them from disclosing confidential information. "[T]he order finds that between July 31, 2017 and 2020, Trafigura required its employees to sign employment agreements, and its former employees to sign separation agreements, with broad non-disclosure provisions that prohibited the sharing of Trafigura’s confidential information with third parties. These non-disclosure provisions did not contain carve-out language expressly permitting communications with law enforcement or regulators such as the CFTC. The provisions caused confusion that resulted in an impediment to voluntary and direct communications with the CFTC about possible violations of the CEA and CFTC regulations in violation of the CEA’s prohibitions against impeding direct communications with the CFTC." #cftc#whistleblowing#stopfraud#compliance https://lnkd.in/eW8xFe3G

14

In an article for the FT Alphaville, White & Case lawyers reimagine how Zambia’s Eurobond restructuring could have fared under the proposed New York legislation to restructure sovereign debt. A fictional outcome based on real events. Read the full article here: https://ow.ly/NyM650RIQSa #Zambia #restructuring

4

Following HMRC's recent change in guidance to the anti-avoidance rules applying to LLPs, there is plenty to think about for businesses that use the LLP model. My colleauge Angus Wilson and I have written this short article to understand what the changes mean in practice, and what LLP businesses need to do now - especially for PE. #Tax #PrivateEquity #LLP

14

Another eye wateringly impressive headline from Law.com as Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP's top earning partner breaks the $20m mark, apparently beating the previous record high of $18m. The firm has now stretched its equity ladder from 9:1 to accommodate this new top echelon. This is a strategy we are seeing from a number of our top tier firm clients around the world as both a defensive tactic to retain their top rainmaking partners, and also as a recruiting tool; to be able to attract other top flight partners as laterals. We can't promise we can get you an offer of $20m, but we are very well placed to help you with your next lateral move as a BigLaw partner, or, for hiring partners and managing partners, retain us and we can work with you to find your next big rainmaker. Here are the people in our specialist lateral partner team to reach out to. Australasia: Jonathan Walmsley , Daniel Hogan   US: Nick Welsh, Bridget McCarthy, David Nicol, Anita Taylor London: Anita Taylor, Jonathan Marsden , Tim Andrews , Michelle Mills Europe: Nick Paleocrassas, Steve Salem, Máiréad Cremins Middle East: Sonia Patel, Aaron Faith Global : Jonathan Marsden New Clients: Ann-Marie Goodbody

4

My latest article can be found here: https://lnkd.in/eNjDkRxF which considers the use and benefits of Private FDRs - especially when acting for parties with complex matrimonial pots Stowe Family Law LLP #familylaw #wecare #bristol #divorce #finances

29

1 Comment

An opinion piece in the FT today titled "How to resolve the debanking debate" ends with a tentative proposal that the UK should move towards a "utility provision" model as in France, where a citizen who is unable to open a bank account can ask the central bank to nominate a commercial bank to take the account. The present reforms to address the debanking issue amount to slightly lengthening the notice period for account closure and adding an obligation to give reasons. I doubt this will do much to satisfy the grievances of affected customers. My own view is that neither the "longer notice" nor the "French model" solutions quite get to the root of the problem. The root cause is the shape of the AML regime itself. This essentially requires financial services firms to capture KYC material and then report suspicious account activity, all under continual threat of criminal penalties if they get anything wrong. The incentives are all towards compliance and risk-minimization, without an effective check on how this impacts customers. Applying another rule on top to require firms to pay more attention to the needs of customers is not a good solution, because the competing requirements are often in conflict. An alternative would be to allow financial services firms a safe-harbor to retain customers after a suspicion arises, coupled with enhanced data sharing with the authorities. That would at least remove the risk aversion driver for account closure.

36

2 Comments

Privilege for in-house counsel? When is your advice privileged? How do you maintain privilege when sharing legal advice with the business or with third parties such as litigation funders? Thanks Jonathan Barbee for an excellent discussion as to how to maintain privilege under US law. #inhouse #privilege #disputeresolution #litigationfunding

22

1 Comment