Damage Limitation: How the Virus Outbreak is Shaping Deal Work
Partners are having to adapt to a growing caution among clients, which is taking its toll on transactional work.
March 13, 2020 at 09:16 AM
4 minute read
As fears over the spread of COVID-19 mount across the globe, law firms are under pressure to reassess how they approach deal work, with coronavirus concerns now topping the list of priorities in a range of transactions.
For the past month, law firms have been introducing measures in a bid to stem the outbreak and protect staff. But as the virus continues to take hold, partners at major law firms have told Law.com International that growing caution among clients is changing how they deliver advice. The potential impact of the virus is now eclipsing routine commercial advice, delaying deals and bill payments, and leading law firms to channel resources towards damage limitation.
Changing client attitudes
As of March 12, there have been over 126,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus across 125 countries, more than 4,500 of whom have died, according to the latest data published by the World Health Organization.
With the numbers climbing each day, one partner observes how client attitudes to transactions have changed starkly since the outbreak started in January.
Whereas two months ago clients "were conscious but not too worried", the partner says that they are now "taking it seriously" and have been "asking for much more contingency planning and guidance" from their legal advisers.
Client calls previously scheduled for advice about the intricacies of deals have "now turned into contingency planning calls" as transactions are either put on hold, or falling through entirely due to market volatility.
The partner added that, once the situation stabilises, clients will "expect lawyers to do damage control" for them, such as preparing to raise capital in a bid to repair their balance sheets, or preparing for potential insolvencies.
A private equity partner at another firm suggested that, while most of his China-based clients have postponed deals due to the outbreak, there was a "genuine belief that they can control the virus" and therefore are regaining confidence and will continue pursuing investment opportunities.
However, in contrast, the partner said American clients' attitudes have heightened. He added that one of his clients, an American private equity house, asked his team to "certify in writing" that none of the lawyers on his team had travelled to country at risk in the past couple of weeks.
Though the virus has forced a physical distance between lawyers and their clients, some partners are sympathetic to client worries, with one calling them "common sense".
One partner however lacked sympathy for the worsening pandemic, claiming: "It's just a cold, people should just get over it."
Stunted earnings
Partners also warned of the long term impact the virus could have on law firms' financials and lawyers' earnings in view of a curbed deal flow.
As the virus causes significant volatility in the market, one partner says some clients are "thinking harder" and "more cautiously" about their business decisions, which is in turn causing transactions to "take longer" to go through and, consequently, longer for lawyers to get paid.
A partner and head of energy at a U.K. law firm added: "The virus will render the most financially vulnerable law firms even more vulnerable because clients will take longer to pay the bills."
He added that the most vulnerable might have to "rely on their cash balances" to get through the economic difficulty brought about by the outbreak.
But not everyone expects to lose out. The restructuring and litigation markets expect to see an up-tick in work, with lawyers in those areas likely to bill more as a result.
The recent anxieties come as law firms impose preemptive measures to halt the risk of exposing their lawyers, staff and clients to the virus. Some firms, including Baker McKenzie in London, closed their offices temporarily, while others cancelled events - including annual partners' conferences – and restricted travel.
Read More
Taylor Wessing Confirms Positive Virus Case In London, Closes Office
King & Wood Mallesons, Norton Rose Fulbright, Jones Day Send Sydney Staff Home on Coronavirus Fears
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAre More Canadian Lawyers Bailing on Big Law to Found Their Own Firms?
4 minute readIs Saudi Arabia's Khoshaim & Associates' Abu Dhabi Debut a Harbinger of Change?
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Mass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
- 4It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
- 5Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250