Comment

How Freshfields’ £100k NQ pay will change the profession

By on
132

Magic circle embrace of MoneyLaw set to have far-reaching effects

“This is a new salary war,” wrote the first commenter on Legal Cheek’s exclusive story last week revealing that Freshfields had increased its newly qualified solicitor (NQ) salary by a chunky 18% to £100,000.

They are dead right. Freshfields’ move heaps pressure on the other four magic circle firms (Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, Linklaters and Slaughter and May) to follow if they are to maintain their elite status among future lawyers. Expect movement and quickly.

Indeed, the quintet — whose collective nickname was coined by The Lawyer magazine in the 90s and has proved remarkably sticky — have done well to resist major NQ pay rises this long. Browse the NQ salary category of the Legal Cheek Firms Most List and there are 18 US firms’ London offices which pay in excess of the ‘MoneyLaw’ minimum of £100k. These include not only outfits offering just a handful of UK training contracts, but giants like White & Case that hire 50 trainees annually in London.

The magic circle has been valiantly attempting to avoid fighting such firms on pure cold cash by offering work/life balance perks. Their most profitable member, Slaughter and May (where NQ pay currently stands at £83,000), has been most vocal about this, firing off press releases about sabbaticals and extra holiday being offered to its rookies. In a highly competitive trainee recruitment market, where the best future lawyers typically hold offers from several firms, that strategy is unlikely to be enough now that Freshfields has thrown its lot in with the MoneyLaw movement.

Once the magic circle hit £100k, the corporate finance boutiques like Travers Smith and Macfarlanes, which typically offer the strongest competition for hotshot students, will be forced to raise their NQ rates sharply too. The global megafirms will quickly follow, and then the firms below them, and so on.

What does this all mean for UK corporate law?

Firstly, paying like American firms will mean working more like American firms. US outfits are known for their lower number of junior lawyers per partner and associated reduced overhead costs. This means longer hours. London headquartered firms will have little choice but to move closer to this model if they are to maintain profitability in a market that has been broadly flat since the 2008 financial crisis. While there may only be marginal change now, firms could use the next recession as an opportunity for restructuring.

Secondly, mindful that ultra-hardworking US business culture doesn’t fully translate culturally to the UK, British firms will be looking for ways to drive more efficiencies that temper the worst of the hours excesses. In practical terms that will mean MoneyLaw with added lawtech — an area this country is arguably ahead of the US on. Already we have been seeing the ground work, with all of the major law firms pouring investment into technology over recent years that is now starting to yield results.

The other limb of the efficiency drive will be more north-shoring. Soaring London house prices and commercial rents mean that it is much cheaper to employ people outside the capital. This leaves the money to pay more to those who remain. It’s probably no coincidence that the magic circle firm with one of the most well developed regional presences — despite a few hiccups insiders say that Freshfields’ Manchester office has been a big hit — has moved first to match the Americans on London NQ pay.

The final takeaway from the junior lawyer pay rises is that corporate law, like wider society, is seeing a growing gap financially between those at the top and everyone else. Associates in magic circle firms’ London offices will earn more but there may well be fewer of them in the future. Meanwhile, with firms pressing hard for savings in other areas, it’s hard to see pay for some of the new paralegal/legal technician roles enjoying the same levels of inflation. Unless some dramatic external event — such as a botched hard Brexit or the election of a Corbyn government — comes along to change this, the course seems fixed.

Students getting excited about MoneyLaw salaries should keep this in mind when making career decisions. Do they have the brains and the commitment to secure one of the ever more coveted trainee places in a top law firm? Do they bring something else desirable to the table, like a first degree in a STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) subject, or fluency in a useful language? Do they have the sort of passion for business and finance that corporate law firms increasingly demand?

Or are they, if they’re being really honest with themselves, just in it for the money and the status? Because if it’s the latter, there’s a growing risk that they end up with neither as a member of the expanding paralegal branch of the profession.

The 2019 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

132 Comments

Anonymous

I wouldn’t work 14 hours a day in a US/MC sweatshop for all the money in the world.

‘What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?’

Anonymous

Let’s not be catastrophic though. Several profession have very stressing hours (doctors, IB, PE), and lots of people still want to work there. Money is a factor, as a lot of people also plan to change career later on.

Anonymous

What are IB and PE?

Anon

Investment Banking and Private Equity, I’m guessing

Anonymous

Irritable Bowel, Pulmonary Embolism.

Anonymous

Brothers! Sisters!

The greed of the legal profession is unsurpassed!

No one needs £100,000 in their twenties! No children, no social obligations!

JEREMY CORBYN WILL TAX THIS GREED AT 75%

FOR THE MANY, NOT THE FEW!

Communist scum

Go smoke your pot

Anonymous

Funny

LondonTrainee

Re. Anon 15 May, 9.54am talking about other challenging careers, I agree with you.

I was a British Army officer in my first career, which often involved long hours in unpleasant conditions. Many (20+) of my friends are doctors: their careers are more brutal and unforgiving than lawyers’ – and probably even Army officers’, overall. Working 12-14 hour days as a lawyer for 4-5 years doesn’t put me off. No one will die, and as long as you manage exercise, sleep and diet, you can do it without sacrificing your health. Yes, choosing to invest your time into your career has opportunity costs (raising a family, for example), but that’s a personal choice. Clearly it’s not for everyone, but then, what life choices are universally applicable to anyone? I am as disinclined to sneer at those who choose to work long hours than I am at those who choose the ‘Mommy track’ of part-time work to primarily focus on childcare. Life’s rich tapestry – each to their own.

Kirkland NQ

Loser. Profit? I’ll send you a pic of my Lambo parked outside my townhouse in Chelsea if you like and then you can decide if it’s worth it.

IM Trainee

I saw this the other day while working part-time as a parking attendant – very nice indeed.

Anonymous

I’ve seen you post several times and it’s increasingly apparent you’re either unemployed and in a mental hospital or a student.

Quick facts for you: an NQ at Kirkland (assuming one trained there) would have earned a total of £70-75k after tax as a trainee and would earn &75k after tax by the end of the NQ year.

Now considering a low-end Ferrari costs around £150k. So you’d have had to spend absolutely nothing for the duration of your TC to have afforded it outright. Now if you financed it, you’d be paying your whole salary per month(after tax) to pay it back.

This is all without factoring in the cost of a £5m townhouse in Chelsea and the monthly repayments of circa £20k that you’d pay if you magically summoned a 500k deposit.

I advise you take your meds and head to the job centre

Kirkland NQ

Erm, it’s a Lambo, idiot, not a Ferrari. No way are you a lawyer with that poor attention to detail.

Also, you’re looking at the published salaries for normal drones, not megastars on the partnership fast track.

Anyway, off for a boozy lunch with the GC of a PE firm who’s going to send a few megafund work my way.

Anonymous

LLL

Anonymous

You may be on the partnership fast track, but what shade of white and what font do you have on your business card? I bet you can’t even get a reservation at Dorsia.

Anonymous

Hahahaha

Anonymous

You deranged little cretin, please keep going: it’s very entertaining.

lol

Even on 100k a year you would barely afford a Chelsea townhouse…

Kirkland NQ

Are you blind or retarded? I told you above, I’m on the rockstar bigballz partnership fast-track pay, with extra bonus after the Managing Partner got spooked I may get poached. Got it?

Anonymous

Barely? You’d be nowhere near it. I can barely afford a one bed flat in Deptford on more than that.

Anonymous

Not if you’re at S&M and have daddy’s money to play with…

Anonymous

…but for Wales?

Anonymous

Obviously Freshfields have succeeded at distracting prospective trainees from discussing Ryan Beckwith’s conduct with a junior female associate.

Cynic

Good point: this is very cleverly timed to bury that news, isn’t it. A prime example of the ‘dead cat’ strategy (google it).

Fortunately, as an active SRA prosecution, this will be published in full anyway. We can read it then; the only question is, will Alex allow us to comment on it at Legal Cheek? Much though I would like to have a conversation in due course once the facts are announced after the tribunal hearing, I suspect that an understandable aversion to being sued might mean that comments are locked on the story…

Anonymous

Freshfields is an immortal dinosaur that gains power with every hit to its reputation. It’s anti-fragile. One of its partners is finally held to account by a courageous junior associate for sexual harassment, it raises salaries for NQs and pays Alex Aldridge to write a puff piece like this. It has a rotten inner core of entitlement.

Anonymous

dats deep bruh. now pass me de blunt

Anonymous

Alternatively: law firms always announce salary reviews in May.

Anonymous

You don’t think it’s a coincidence that they raised the salary so much?

MC Trainee

It’s common knowledge that female trainees sleep with partners in return for less hours/stress.

That’s one way of getting an easier ‘ride’.

Anonymous

MC hours and US hours are broadly similar so this aspect is unlikely to change. I also find it difficult to see how MC firms will move to a ‘leaner’ US model – they are already incentivised to do this (to cut costs and increase profitability) and have not done this because they are culturally different, sell themselves differently to clients, and this is not an easy change to make.

What we will probably see is more differentiation of pay within MC and other UK firms (both within London, especially above NQ level where salary scales can be more fluid, and through ‘northshoring’ of less profitable practice areas).

Ultimately, however, chargeable rates and profitability of MC firms have been increasing and part of this this is being passed down.

Anonymous

They just aren’t though – top bonus targets in the upper tier of US firms sit around 2.5-2.7k hours. This is significantly higher than the requirements for the highest bonuses (admittedly much lower in cash terms) paid by the MC.

Anonymous

2700 chargeable hours? With that kind of ass reaming, what would you even do with that top bonus? Buy a nice coffin maybe…

Anonymous

That is just rubbish. Most US firms don’t have billable targets and most associates will get the full bonus. Those that do have targets tend to hover around the 1800-2000 mark. For example, Latham is 1900, and there is no incentive for associates to bill more than that so often they don’t.

Kirkland pay a ‘top’ up so that associates billing around 2200 to 2400 hours might get around 1.2-1.3x the Cravath scale bonus but this is an unusual approach.

Everyone I have ever spoken to who has moved from a MC or top-performing group in a SC firm has said the hours are similar to US (and many have said they work fewer hours). There are a few US firms with notorious sweatshop cultures but that isn’t representative of the US market in London generally.

Anonymous

“There are a few US firms with notorious sweatshop cultures but that isn’t representative of the US market in London generally.”

Would you mind saying which ones? Asking for a friend.

Anonymous

Skadden, Cleary and Kirkland spring to mind, although I think it varies between practice groups as much as it does between firms (e.g. hours in finance teams always seem to be terrible across firms). From what I’ve seen/heard, hours at firms like Willkie, Covington, Ropes and Goodwin seem relatively sane and on par / below MC hours.

Would be interesting to see what other (non trolls) think.

Non-troll

Agreed, Cleary is a notorious sweatshop. They never seem to keep people for too long either. A friend who used to train there said departures were a daily occurrence. Skadden and Kirkland are a given, just by weight of reputation alone. I’ve heard pretty bad things about Milbank as well.

👀

Wait. Is this Legal Cheek?

Anonymous

northshoring – to shore something up north.

CMS 3PQE

Reckon I am due a raise?

CMS Partner

Back to work, cuck.

Anonymous

Jabba Warne says no raises planned this year.

No Idea

^^^^ this nearly killed me. hahaha

LL Associate

“Do they have the brains and the commitment to secure one of the ever more coveted trainee places in a top law firm? Do they bring something else desirable to the table, like a first degree in a STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) subject, or fluency in a useful language? Do they have the sort of passion for business and finance that corporate law firms increasingly demand?”

What a load of rubbish.

CC Associate

Yeah being a drone at a Magic Circle firm doesn’t require all that much in the way of brains.

Anonymous

All they checked for me was a pulse

Kirkland NQ

Aw, bless.

The New Porker

I’d have taken out the last 2 paras. But other than that, this is a good article.

Anonymous

Quick question for all the MC people: I am bound to go to a MC office in Luxembourg soon, any chance all these pay raises will benefit international offices as well? I doubt it but I thought I’d ask.

Thanks.

Anonymous

Lol, no.

Anonymous

No

Anonymous

Enjoy all that fascinating financial reg and tax work.

Anonymous

Obvs not.

Anonymous

Not exactly but it does spread through the firm to an extent. In most continental European jurisdictions salaries at MC offices are dramatically more than local firms, much like US firms in London. Salaries are a bit less than London but do tend to rise proportionally with the London rates.

Anonymous

Thanks, I thought it might be that. Still pretty happy, hopefully everything is going just as well on your end.

Have a good day!

How many times

There are 18 US firms’ London offices which pay in excess of the ‘MoneyLaw’ minimum of £100k.

No, there are more than that. The list doesn’t include Fried Frank, Pillsbury, Proskauer, Baker Botts, Bracewell, Willkie, McDermott, Vedder Price, Quinn Emmanuel, BSF, Richards Kibbe, Wilmer Hale – among others. These all take NQs.

Anonymous

Who would want to work for these nobodies though (Quinn excepted).

Anonymous

BSF a nobody? Good one. Sure, these firms aren’t full-service but none of them are nobodies.

Anonymous

The British Softball Federation? Bible Study Fellowship? British Skin Foundation? Ballerup-Skovlunde Fodbold? All of which appear above Bois Schiller Flexner (who?) in a Google search for BSF …

(Genuinely though, I had never heard of BSF before.)

Anonymous

Boies Schiller Flexner u uncultured swine

They take TOP tier instructions like acting as theranos’ and weinstein’s hachet man

SPB Slave

Rather work for them than some two-bid mid-market English firm.

Inglish

What’s a two-bid?

Anonymous

What’s a Proskauer or a Willkie? totally obscure

Anonymous

Not as obscure as a Goodwin.

Anonymous

None of these firms are obscure. People calling them obscure most likely work at English firms which invariably do not complete the relevant areas of law to the necessary standard to have heard of, encountered or be able to move to the others.

Anonymous

Yeah ok fresher, thanks for the info.

Anonymous

Work at a MC firm, never heard of half of them

Anonymagic

While lawyers at said firms all probably make more than you do, and given that you work for an MC firm, also work less hours. LMAO the irony

Anonymous

Yeah but have to have the igmony of putting boys shill flexer on their cv

Anonymous

Goodwin’s revenue just under $1.2 billion in 2018.

Anonymous

What about McKenzie Brackman?

Strong on matrimonial work as well as the usual corporate money well.

Douglas Brackman is a legend.

Anonymous

Family law is so easy it’s difficult not to be good at matrimonial work.

Anonymous

BB don’t pay £100k

Anonymous

Baker Botts don’t pay £100k

Anonymous

Funded in part by “north shoring”. Does this mean that Freshfields does not pay its Manchester associates £100k? Am interested, has Legal Cheek checked what it does pay them?

Anonymous

Probably 50-60% of London rates

Anonymous

As if – £45k at NQ base pay. No bonuses whatsoever.

Anonymous

Salford. According to Freshfields, and geography, their office is in Salford rather than Manchester.

MoneyLaw Balla

Why is “MoneyLaw” all one word? Is there a reason or is LC’s space bar broken?

Anonymous

Judging by your name, so is yours.

Anonymous

Can we please not indulge Legal Cheek’s transparent attempt to contrive a new word.

Anonymous

Meanwhile the London lawyers jusyify their high salary by winning all their cases against their northern opponents who know “that Car-bollocks case about a snail in a bottle”.

Anonymous

or just because it costs more to live in London?

Paralegal not in it for the money

“Because if it’s the latter, there’s a growing risk that they end up with neither as a member of the expanding paralegal branch of the profession.”

Rip my heart out if you must!!

Anonymous

Go FILEX route while applying for TC’s mate. Not enough people do this to spread the risk.

DWF HR

Despite DWF and Freshfields having different growth plans – which hindered our intended merger – we are still eager to retain the best talent.

As such, if anyone (anyone at all, even ex cons) want a job at DWF, you can start on Monday.

Just bring your proof of ID and CV with you on the day.

Anonymous

Remember to allege fraud and fundamental dishonesty in every defence.

Anonymous

I don’t know why people maintain the myth that the Magic Circle somehow works less hours than US firms, which is why they’re less competitive. It’s such a reductive stereotype and also completely untrue. MC hours are just as bad as average US hours – at the top end (K&E, LW) it’s probably a bit worse than the MC, but not hugely. The reason that they’re a fading brand is because their partnership is still mostly lockstep and therefore the senior rainmakers keep leaving.

Anonymous

I think it’s a bit premature to call the MC a fading brand. That said, it’s great to see the likes of Kirkland and Latham compete in what was otherwise an oligopoly in London. In the end, they’ll all end up being pretty similar to each other while PWC comes along to eat all their lunches. The competitive threat is not from other high end private practices, but the changing practices of clients, who have increasingly sophisticated in house legal teams, and other professional services firms such as PWC extending into legal services and providing a global ‘one stop shop’ for transactions.

Does not know Katie King

Conflicts at the Big Four are too rough for them to pick up any seriously good work.

Besides, no matter what they say, their legal arms are third-tier service departments and do not properly compete with traditional law firms for the kind of work the MC/white shoes do. You would be insane to pick Deloitte to handle a billion-dollar merger over Skadden, or EY over HSF for heavyweight Commercial Court litigation. And rightly, no one does.

The low/mid-market lot doing commoditised work are worried about the Big Four. The ones that pick up the hard stuff ignore them.

Anonymous

That’s what Blockbuster said about Netflix.

Does not know Katie King

They had totally different business models and sold themselves in completely different ways. One had a cheap way of distributing content and could charge accordingly low rates, the other had massive overheads delivering the same content in a manner inefficient for both the customer and the supplier. Customers shifted for perfectly rational reasons: convenience and cost.

That is not comparable to top-market firm v Big Four. Consumers of one of those services (expensive bet-the-company matters v cheap routine compliance/low-level transactions) will not be easily persuaded to switch between the two.

Anonymous

One saw themselves as being in the video tape leasing business, the other a content distribution business.

Freshfields see themselves as being in the legal industry, PWC see themselves as service providers for transactions.

Complex litigation is likely to remain with elite law firms, but transactions are likely to be serviced out of a global transactions service provider. Corporate lawyers really aren’t that special – you get AI to do the due diligence and a senior associate to mark up the SPA. The partner just signs the engagement letter. Can’t see how PWC can’t merge with Jones Day to produce a transactions Goliath. PWCJD for ever!!!

Anonymous

Mate you clearly don’t have a clue what you’re talking about

Litigation background only

Anon 5.01pm: could you (or others) explain further the flaws in the logic of Anon 1:40pm’s post, please.

My only experience is of litigation. I’m unable to assess whether, and if so how, Anon 1:40pm’s contention is valid, i.e. that transaction work could be poached by accountancy firms.

There is a perception, no doubt both over simplified and unfair, that transactional lawyers ‘merely’ draft largely routine paperwork to enable bankers to implement their deals. I for one would be grateful for my ignorance to be corrected.

Does not know Katie King

“The other limb of the efficiency drive will be more north-shoring. Soaring London house prices and commercial rents mean that it is much cheaper to employ people outside the capital. This leaves the money to pay more to those who remain.”

I would be astonished if people outside the equity were paid more. Northshoring etc are fundamentally measures to keep up profitability, not to give associates payrises.

Anonymous

Outwardly at least, Freshfields have always appeared to have been more concerned by the threat of US firms in London – changes to their equity structure, super points, etc. Losing the big PE/M&A hitters to Kirkland hurts them. They don’t have tons of work from UK clearing banks, like A&O and CC do, to fall back on. They’re more M&A driven than Finance (if we’re talking transactional work).

Slaughters are more profitable and do more public M&A work, they need to worry less about losing partners to PE driven US firms than FF. Linklaters are possibly most comparable to Freshfields but even they do far more finance work for banks than Freshfields.

They’ll invariably all move salaries up to catch Freshfields, whether it’s now or later in the year. Expecting more fudging ‘total compensation’ figures from some. Respect to Freshfields for appearing to make £100k the base salary before bonus.

Anon

Not to be controversial, because clearly an 18% raise in any salary is enormous, but after tax, when all is said and done – doesn’t it make that much of a difference?

The old salary after tax was around 57k. The new one is about 66k. Once you account for student loans, rent (which I’d wager at least 90% of NQs will be burdened with), is this really life changing?

Symbolically of course it’s huge, no doubt. Maybe there is a ‘new salary war’. But I’m not sure all the hype is justified. When push comes to shove, as an MC NQ you’re a cog in a wheel in a firm you likely won’t be at in 3 years time. What difference does it really make whether you have an extra £7000 a year in the context of your whole life?

Anonymous

There’s more to it than post-tax income. Pension contributions for one, enhanced maternity pay and bragging to your uni/school mates that you’re on £100,000 as a 25 year old.

Anonymous

Obviously you’ll never see your mates so the only people who are going to be impressed are Legal Cheek comments contributors.

Anonymous

Or Kirkland NQ, when he’s released out of his padded cell for his occasional 1 hour access-to-PC allowance.

Kirkland NQ

If by “mates” you mean the group of model girlfriends I spend my free time with, I see my mates frequently.

Anonymous

Kirkland NQ aren’t you the illegitimate father of a half-Russian bastard?

Kirkland NQ

Not that I know of. Well there was that time on that private jet to my beach villa in Bora Bora…

Freshfields NQ

Do you mean the Four Seasons? I preferred the over water bungalows.

Kirkland NQ

I guess you saw photos in a magazine you were lining your were repairing your windows with then?

Anonymous

?

Phucko

Bruh u don’t even kno wat Bora Bora is

Anonymous

!

Anonymous

Yawn.

Easily entertained

I quite like ‘Kirkland NQ’. While I’m sure that he’s no more a Kirkland NQ than ‘Jones Day Partner’ was an actual Jones Day Partner, I commend the effort put in to entertain us. He reminds of the ‘Overheard at Goldman Sachs’ parody account*.

* See https://www.valuespreadsheet.com/value-investing-blog/goldman-sachs-gs-elevator-gossip-funniest

True ting

Five years in a US firm as a mid level associate and you could save close to 450k. Having 450k in cold hard cash by the time you are 35 is life changing for the average person. Well worth the stint.

Utter bollox

In five years? Net of tax? After all living costs and other bits added in? Are you high?

True facts

Yes.
200k gross annually is 9k net per month
Living costs etc @ 4k/save 5k per month
+ bonus each year of circa 30k.

400k saved over five years is easy as and yes, associates at top US firms are getting around 200k a year if not more.

Anonymous

Try 250k pal.

Bludd

Nope

Anonymous

If you are an NQ trying to buy a first property (assume you have a deposit) and can borrow 5.5x salary with Barclays Premier (which £100k income entitles you to), that is rather than 550k rather than 467.5k if borrowing, which makes quite a difference.

Anonymous

Brothers! Sisters!

This is pure greed!!

JEREMY CORBYN WILL TAX IT AT 75%

FOR THE MANY, NOT THE FEW!!!

VOTE LABOUR

True ting

Billion dollar deals across multiple jurisdictions, the type that hit the headlines and involve multiple stakeholders with competing interests are usually highly complex, need to be done in super pressured timeframes and involve hundreds of documents and hugely orchestrated signing process. This together with conflicting time zones inevitably means the lawyers will need to be working round the clock. It begs the question why would anyone agree to work around the clock for anything less than the maximum salary they could achieve in the market?

I work at a US firm and if we are responding through the night there is no way the magic circle law firm on the other side can clock off at 9pm and come back in to start work again at 9:30am > this means they have to work just as many hours but for less money.

Anonymous

Yeah

Selling point for MC is better training + marginally better partnership prospects + better prestige if you want to go in house/somewhere else

Beyond that, they’re banking that 6 figures is enough to keep an associate there because all their mates are there and better the devil you know

Anonymous

Also better support networks like secretaries, document production, trainees etc so youre not doing absolute grunt work at 4 pqe

US Firm Associate

Yeah, none of that is true – except for perhaps Slaughters associates trying to go inhouse with a PLC client. Training is actually better at the bigger US firms in London (those with PSLs and proper precedents) because they are doing most of the good deals so have experienced partners and up to date examples to train you on. And partnership prospects in the MC are vanishingly remote. There’s a limit to how many shares you can offer in a static/shrinking business and those older lockstep partners aren’t retiring one moment before they have to….

Anonymous

Partnership prospects at MC firms are close to zero. They take in 80-100 trainees a year, and make up at most ten London partners a year, of which perhaps half will have trained elsewhere. That translates to about 5% of trainees making it through the pipeline.

True ting

I’m not sure doing a five year stint at Freshfields or Clifford Chance is going to get you any further than doing a five year stint at K&E or Skadden. In fact in the latter firms you are more likely to actually stand on your own feet (you have to) and develop into a capable and commercial lawyer.

Anonymous

I don’t think five years at FBD and CC will necessarily get you further than K&E and Skadden, but this idea that associates at US firms are great commercial lawyers is nonsense – at least the ones I have dealt with are mindless drones just like at any other corporate firm.

Anonymous

You are mistaken beta cuck

Anonymous

Oh dear. The roll has become so common and vulgar.

William May must be spinning in his grave.

Anonymous

Hear hear. Far too many Eastern European peasants prancing around… Brexit’ll sort them though.

Join the conversation

Related Stories