header-logo header-logo

08 September 2021
Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Are the Big Four reshaping the future of legal services?

The Big Four accountancy firms are cornering the legal market in a far more sophisticated way than simply poaching work from law firms, according to an investigative report by LexisNexis Legal & Professional

The report, ‘Are the Big Four reshaping the future of legal services?’, published this week, is based on in-depth interviews with lawyers from across the commercial sector.

It identifies how, while the Big Four originally set out to seize high-value legal work, they have since changed their strategy to one of offering integrated solutions. They are offering clients a higher integration of technology, project management and process management than can traditional firms.

Moreover, the Big Four now tends to choose its leadership from internal talent, often with non-legal backgrounds, rather than recruiting top talent from law firms.

‘The last time they tried to enter the legal profession in the 1990s, their strategy was we’re just like law firms only bigger,’ says David Wilkins, Lester Kissel Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, in the report.

‘But that’s not their strategy anymore. Their strategy is we provide a different kind of offering, moving from a fee-for-service model to an integrated solutions model.

‘The Big Four can offer a far higher integration of technology, project management and process management; they employ a huge number of people across a huge range of specialties and they are way more global than even the most global law firm. This is why, for many kinds of issues that companies face, it’s a very attractive offering.’

According to Wilkins, they are not interested in one-off matters but want the ‘run-the-company’ matters. He provides the example of Bayer’s $66 billion acquisition of Monsanto in 2016, where parties were advised by several top-tier law firms but the post-merger work―integration of contracts and the policies and procedures―was awarded to PwC.

 

Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll