Britain’s biggest law firms contracted financially over the past year, with revenue and profit at the top-100 down, figures published today reveal.

While three quarters of the top firms reported revenue growth, that figure was 7 per cent down on the previous year. Likewise, the figures show profit margins falling across the top tier “as pricing remains under pressure, productivity decreases and salaries increase”.

The figures – from the 25th annual law firms survey from PwC, the “big four” accountancy practice – showed that profit per equity partner at the top firms remained at flat and did not dip because practices retained a “tight control of partner headcount”.

Still at the highest end of the profession, the top 50 firms increased fee earner headcount by 7.6 per cent on average. But the researchers found that return on that investment had so far failed to produce significant revenue growth.

The survey highlighted a significant disparity between the performance of the top-tier UK firms relative to their competition in the US. Leading international American firms showed nearly 3 per cent growth in fee income over the past year and 3.2 per cent growth in profit.

David Snell, of PwC’s law firms advisory group, warned that even though the top UK partnerships were keeping a tight rein on equity, “spare capacity has increased and is a cause for concern, particularly with the increased uncertainty around Brexit”.

Snell maintained that “workforce management and deployment has remained unchanged for many years and we expect the better performing firms in the future will be those who can improve the agility of their workforce both between practice areas and globally”.

Members of the public wildly overestimate the cost of legal services and are failing to get appropriate advice regarding fundamental consumer issues, it was alleged on Friday.

Fewer than 10 per cent of respondents to a recent survey said that they were confident that they understood the cost of common legal services such as residential conveyancing, divorce and wills and probate.

Only about 22 per cent of individuals said that they always instructed lawyers or used other formal legal services when they had a legal problem. While about a quarter reported that they had at least once actively decided not to seek formal advice for a legal problem.

The survey questioned more than 2,000 consumers, and analysts pointed to strong evidence that a lack of clear information regarding legal fees was “hindering consumers from looking for the best lawyer”.

The report produced by the Law Superstore – a UK-based legal services comparison website – will provide further ammunition to the solicitors’ watchdog, which is lobbying for greater fee transparency in the profession.

“Consumers are saying they are confused about how much [lawyers’] services cost and aren’t always seeking advice when they need it,” Matthew Briggs, chief executive at the Law Superstore, said.

“This has to change. The regulator is already investigating how we create more transparent industry and this research shows just how critical it is – people want to understand what they are getting from their lawyer and value for money, not rock bottom prices.”

Women lawyers are more likely to be ethical than their male counterparts, researchers have claimed amid suggestions that females are far less motivated by financial reward.

A transatlantic group of academics claim that women studying law had “a greater propensity to be more ethical”.

The boffins also said that prospective women lawyers “valued self-enhancement less and self-transcendence more highly than the male respondents”. Richard Moorhead, professor of law and professional ethics at University College London, who led the research team, cut through the jargon to explain to The Brief that women studying law are “more interested in justice and the interests of people around them” than are men.

The research – published in the International Journal of the Legal Profession – also found that women law students “had a stronger sense of ethical identity [they were more likely to think in ethical terms, said Moorhead] and lower levels of moral disengagement [they are less likely to see unethical conduct as acceptable] and entitlement [they are less likely to think they simply deserve success]”.

In addition to Moorhead, the research team included academics from Cardiff University law school, Northwestern University in Chicago and the University of Tulsa in Oklahoma.

A company breached the contracts it had with up to 500 British timeshare holders, the High Court ruled last week, but the claimants were unable to prove sufficient financial loss to be awarded damages.

Lawyers for four claimants bringing test cases at the Royal Courts of Justice in London said that they were considering an appeal of Mrs Justice Proudman’s ruling.
The judge found that while the timeshare exchange company, RCI Europe, had breached its contract and misled members, the four test claimants had not proved individual loss.

RCI’s bosses had been accused of skimming off the best properties in the exchange scheme and acting in complete conflict with their customers. Mrs Justice Proudman found that “there is little doubt that RCI was in breach of the terms of its contract”.

David Greene, the senior partner of Edwin Coe, a London law firm, who acted for the claimants, said RCI’s “arrogance towards its members is staggering and the judge rightly found against them on these issues”.

The lawyer continued: “Whilst we are now considering an appeal on certain elements of the judgment, the court’s findings open up the possibility of the hundreds of thousands of RCI members seeking compensation on proving loss.”

Greene instructed Robert Deacon and Clive Wolman of Thomas More Chambers in Lincoln’s Inn; while Herbert Smith Freehills, the City of London law firm, acted for RCI, instructing Charles Graham, QC, and Nicholas Sloboda of One Essex Court in the Temple.

Scotland Yard detectives have appealed for information in their hunt for a solicitor who fled the UK on the eve of being sentenced for fraud.

Maria Antonia Cameira, 58, is a Portuguese national and the director of two law firms based in London, Cameira Law and CL@Cameira Legal. She is listed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority as a “registered European lawyer”.

Last week Cameria was sentenced in her absence to six years in prison after being found guilty of abuse of position under provisions of the Fraud Act 2006. The offence, involving fraud of more than £90,000, related to the misuse of client funds deposited as part of residential conveyancing instructions.

The trial began on October 10 at Snaresbrook crown court. Cameira failed to appear on the third day and police said that she had fled to Lisbon. A UK warrant has been issued for her arrest. The trial continued in the absence of Cameira and her defence team. After an eight-day trial, the jury unanimously found the lawyer guilty.

Detectives appealed for anyone with information about her whereabouts to contact the Metropolitan police on 101 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Hundreds of police sex pests uncovered – The Times

Gropers in police ranks going unpunished – The Times

Female Labour MPs call for legal change following Ched Evans retrial – The Guardian

Scotland’s £10 million court ‘charade’ – Sunday Post

Children ‘at risk of internet grooming’ as Government breaks promise on new law – The Independent

Parents fight social workers over girl’s wish to be a boy – The Sunday Times