Bonuses for top lawyers hit 9 months

More propaganda to stem the loss of talent. It does not say what proportion of lawyers get nine months. Usually 1 or 2.

Straits Times, 29 Dec
Bonuses for top lawyers hit 9 months

Business boom leads to larger payouts this year, with big firms paying 5-1/2 months and upwards
By K.C. Vijayan, Law Correspondent

BIG law firms, buoyed by the business boom, are handing out bigger year-end bonuses this year, with the best payouts breaching the nine-month mark.

The Straits Times understands that top performing lawyers in top-league firms like Drew & Napier and Rajah & Tann are getting high payouts across the board as rewards to recognise good work when the going is good.

Other firms like Harry Elias Partnership (HEP) and KhattarWong also awarded fatter bonuses of between 5-1/2 and eight months to its lawyers.

HEP’s managing partner Latiff Ibrahim said its top performers are in the ‘booming corporate, construction and litigation practices’.

KhattarWong’s Subhas Anandan said the bigger bonuses also spilled to the non-legal support staff, with the best receiving up to 5-1/2 months.

Lawyers generally attributed the fat bonus cheques to the strong economy, increased revenues and the need to pay high performers for ‘all the hard work and all the nights they have put in’.

WongPartnership, one of the biggest firms here, has had an ‘extremely good year’ in terms of the transactions and briefs received, said Mr Chou Sean You, a partner in the firm.

‘We expect to remunerate our lawyers well for all the hard work they have put in throughout the year,’ he said, adding that his firm traditionally declared its bonuses in January.

The upturn has benefited small and medium-size firms as well, especially in conveyancing work, said senior lawyer N. Sreenivasan.

‘Whether the property boom continues into the new year remains to be seen,’ he added.

He said that ‘with expected rental and salary increases next year, law firms will have to be more efficient, to reduce the impact of these increased overheads on the cost of legal services’.

Small firms which may not be able to match the fat bonuses of their bigger counterparts are unfazed, with some noting the hidden toll in work-life balance for those working in the top league.

Said Mr R. Kalamohan, who has run his own firm for more than 18 years: ‘I don’t know how many ‘handicaps’ I have compared to big firms, but when you look at the work-life balance, it is a different issue.

‘I am not constrained to burn the midnight oil every day unless there are exigencies. I do not think income is the main criterion for a good life.’

Give that man a Tiger.

Pay lawyers more to keep them: Chief Justice

By Pearl Forss, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 18 August 2007 2259 hrs

SINGAPORE: More young lawyers are switching careers, citing long hours, unrewarding pay and stress as reasons.

This causes a shortage of lawyers, and as the economy booms and the demand for law services goes up, the problem is becoming more acute.

How to address this problem?

“Pay them well,” said Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, in his address to law students at the inaugural Singapore Legal Forum on Saturday.

“Our young lawyers enjoy a degree of professional and social freedom and mobility which lawyers of my generation have never experienced. Perhaps the solution is in the old fashion but still fashionable way of using carrots without the stick since the latter doesn’t work. Pay them well. Greed works most of the time, even for the large majority of people in affluent societies,” he said.

In recent years, even the best-paying firms in Singapore are seeing their young lawyers jumping ship to Hong Kong, where salaries for junior lawyers start at about S$11,650 a month.

In contrast, the big firms in Singapore pay junior lawyers just over $4,000.

A second law school has been established at the Singapore Management University.

Also, the NUS Law Faculty has increased its intake and firms are now allowed to hire foreign lawyers.

But the shortage has not eased yet.

Another issue of concern addressed at the Legal Forum is how to make the law more accessible to the public.

Laws may be available online but the language in which it is written makes it difficult for the layman to understand it.

So the Chief Justice said that he would ask the Law Academy’s publishing committee to study the feasibility of publishing simplified law books.

While access to the law is important, access to justice is even more so.

This need will be provided by lawyers who do pro bono work, that is providing service free of charge.

But such services are currently confined to Community Court cases, and this year, more convicted offenders are appearing in High Court appeals without lawyers.

In his speech, the Chief Justice also addressed the issue of restoring confidence in the law profession, particularly after the high-profile case of lawyer David Rasif who fled with more than $12 million in clients’ monies.

“We must be more discerning about what we read in the media. The facts do not suggest any loss of confidence in the legal profession,” said the Chief Justice.

“On the contrary, our large and medium law firms are generally held in high regard in Singapore and in the region. All the ethical and professional lapses that I have come across in my 40 years in the law have emanated from small law firms. It’s very unfortunate,” he added.

Although only a small minority of lawyers in these firms have committed breach of trust, the Chief Justice stressed that all law students must be taught the importance of ethical values.

The forum was organised by the UK Singapore Law Students Society. – CNA/ir

Laws

Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics
First law: A robot may not, through its actions or inactions, allow a human to come to harm.
Second law: A robot must obey any order given to it, unless in contradiction of the First Law.
Third law: A robot must protect its own existence, unless in contradiction of the First or Second Law.

Barnum’s Law — You’ll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
Named for P. T. Barnum, close to H. L. Mencken quotation.

Benford’s Law of Controversy — Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available.

Bernard’s Law – When the people own the money, they control the government. When the government owns the money, it controls the people.
Coined by Bernard von NotHaus, monetary architect of the Liberty Dollar.

Brooks’s Law — Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later.
Named after Fred Brooks — author of the well known tome on project management, The Mythical Man-Month.

Callahan’s Law — Shared pain is lessened; shared joy, increased — thus do we refute entropy.
Coined by Mike Callahan in Spider Robinson’s Callahan’s Series.

Clarke’s Three Laws. Formulated by Arthur C. Clarke.
o First law: When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
o Second law: The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little ways past them into the impossible.
o Third law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Dilbert Principle — The most ineffective workers are systematically moved to the place where they can do the least damage: management.
Coined by Scott Adams, author of the comic strip Dilbert.

Duverger’s Law — Winner-take-all electoral systems tend to create a two party system, while proportional representation tends to create a multiple party system.
Named after Maurice Duverger.

Finagle’s Law — Anything that can go wrong, will — at the worst possible moment.

Fudd’s First Law of Opposition — If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.
Posited by the Firesign Theatre in “I Think We’re All Bozos on This Bus (1971)”.

Goodhart’s Law — Once an indicator or other surrogate measure is made a target for the purpose of policy, then it will lose the information content that would qualify it to play such a role.
Coined by economist Charles Goodhart.

Gresham’s Law — Bad money drives good money out of circulation.
Coined in 1858 by British economist Henry Dunning Macleod, and named for Sir Thomas Gresham (1519–1579). Earlier stated by others, including Nicolaus Copernicus.

Hanlon’s Razor — Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Named after Robert J. Hanlon, although there is some debate.

Harshaw’s Law — Daughters can use up ten percent more than a man can make in any normal occupation, regardless of the amount.
Coined by Jubal Harshaw in Robert A. Heinlein’s Stranger in a Strange Land.

Herblock’s Law – If you like it, they will stop making it.

Hotelling’s Law — Under some conditions, it is rational for competitors to make their products as nearly identical as possible. Named after Harold Hotelling.

Hutber’s Law — Improvement means deterioration.
Coined by financial journalist Patrick Hutber.

Kerckhoffs’ Principle — In cryptography, a system should be secure even if everything about the system, except for a small piece of information — the key — is public knowledge.
Stated by Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century.

Keynes’s Law — Demand creates its own supply.
Attributed to economist John Maynard Keynes, and contrasted to Say’s law.

Kuta’s Revelation — All forms of religion are based on faith in faith itself as a self-administered psychological placebo.
From the Selfbook (2007).

Ko?akowski’s Law — For any given doctrine that one wants to believe, there is never a shortage of arguments by which to support it.
Polish philosopher Leszek Ko?akowski

Linus’s Law — Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.
Named for Linus Torvalds, initiator of the kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system.

Littlewood’s Law — Individuals can expect miracles to happen to them at the rate of about one per month.
Coined by Professor John Edensor Littlewood.

Locard’s Exchange Principle — With contact between two items, there will be an exchange
Premise of forensics named after Edmond Locard

Metcalfe’s Law — In network theory, the value of a system grows as approximately the square of the number of users of the system.
Framed by Robert Metcalfe.

Moore’s Law — The complexity of an integrated circuit will double in about 24 months.
Stated in 1965, though not as a law, by Gordon E. Moore, later a co-founder of Intel.

Morton’s Fork — A person who lives in luxury and has clearly spent a lot of money must obviously have sufficient income to pay as tax. Alternatively, a person who lives frugally and shows no sign of being wealthy must have substantial savings and can therefore afford to pay it as tax.
Named after John Morton, tax collector for King Henry VII of England.

Murphy’s Law — If anything can go wrong, it will. Alternately, If it can happen, it will happen.
Ascribed to Major Edward A. Murphy, Jr.

Murphy’s Law (alternate) — If there are two ways to do something, and one of them will result in a disaster, an untrained individual will invariably choose the wrong way.
Also ascribed to Major Edward A. Murphy, Jr.

Ockham’s Razor — Explanations should never multiply assumptions without necessity. When two explanations are offered for a phenomenon, the simplest full explanation is preferable.
Named after William of Ockham. Also known as Occam’s Razor: Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.

Orgel’s Rules. Formulated by evolutionary biologist Leslie Orgel.
o First rule: Whenever a spontaneous process is too slow or too inefficient a protein will evolve to speed it up or make it more efficient.
o Second rule: Evolution is cleverer than you are.

Pareto Principle — For many phenomena, 80% of consequences stem from 20% of the causes.
Named after Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, but framed by management thinker Joseph M. Juran.

Parkinson’s Law — Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.
Coined by C. Northcote Parkinson.

Technician’s Corollary — No matter how big the data storage medium, it will soon be filled.

Peter Principle — In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.
Coined by Laurence J. Peter.

Pittendreigh’s Law of Planetary Motion — The perception of time passing more quickly has nothing to do with the fact of my own aging process. It’s the fault of the Solar System! The Earth is simply moving around the sun faster every year.

Putt’s Law — Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand.
Coined by Archibald Putt.

Reed’s Law — The utility of large networks, particularly social networks, scales exponentially with the size of the network. Named after David P. Reed.

Reilly’s Law — People generally patronize the largest mall in the area.

Rock’s Law — The cost of a semiconductor chip fabrication plant doubles every four years.
Named after Arthur Rock.

Say’s Law — Demand cannot exist without supply.
Often stated as Supply creates its own demand. Attributed to economist Jean-Baptiste Say and contrasted to Keynes’s Law.

Stigler’s Law of Eponymy — No scientific discovery, not even Stigler’s law, is named after its original discoverer.

Strathmann’s Law of Program Management – Nothing is so easy as the job you imagine someone else doing.

Sturgeon’s Law — Nothing is always absolutely so.
Derived from a quote by science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon.

Wirth’s law — Software gets slower faster than hardware gets faster.

Zipf’s Law — For many different kinds of things, their frequency is observed to be approximately inversely proportional to their rank order.
Named after George Kingsley Zipf.

Top Tips for dealing with In-house Lawyers

Australia – If you work with Australians, don’t worry; you don’t need to know anything about the law – but you must know about the sports results.

US – You have to be ready every hour of the day. They don’t know about time difference – they’ll call you at 3 or 4 am in the morning – they just don’t care about time.

Hong Kong – They have no time. No time for breakfast, no time for lunch, no time for sex. No time.

Singapore – You need to know the best chicken rice restaurant in the area – if you know the best restaurant, then they love you.

China – You have to drink. You have to drink more than them and more than you clients in order to get your job – its very hard I can tell you.

Paul Starr, Mallesons Stephen Jacques
Asian Legal Business, Issue 7.6

Rajah & Tann adds four new lawyers to its stable

This follows on the heels of many high-level moves in the legal industry
By WEE LI-EN
Business Times

FOLLOWING a series of recent high-level movements among law firms, Rajah & Tann (R&T) has strengthened its practice with four new senior additions to its team from a rival firm.

The R&T recruits are leading telecommunications and information technology lawyer Andrew Ong, mergers and acquisitions lawyer Christina Ng, finance and securities lawyer Evelyn Wee and medical science lawyer Lim Wee Han.

R&T has recently been beefing up its practice with high-level additions to its firm. Former High Court judge Sundaresh Menon re-joined the firm last month, along with 12 other lawyers from international law firm Jones Day.

The firm’s four new lawyers are expected to join in the third quarter of the year.

The four are directors of a 32-member board at Drew & Napier (D&N), each with a long career at the firm.

According to D&N’s website, Ms Ng joined D&N in 1990 and heads its Indonesian and Thai desks, and Ms Wee joined D&N in 1989. Mr Lim joined D&N in 1992 and co-heads its medical science practice group.

Mr Ong, who heads the info-communications and technology business group at D&N, said yesterday in a statement: ‘I am extremely privileged to have been a part of Drew & Napier’s renown. After so many delightful years at Drew, I leave behind many good friends and colleagues as well as the fondest memories one could hope for.’

Yesterday, managing director of corporate and conveyancing David Ang said that despite the departures, Drew ‘will grow from strength to strength’.

He said of his departing colleagues: ‘We fully understand their plans to pursue their careers elsewhere. We will remain friends.’

D&N has itself just admitted four lawyers to its board from within the firm and is poised for further growth.

The new lawyers are Cheryl Tan, Adrian Tan, Kelvin Tan and Valerie Kwok.

There have been many high-level movements in the legal industry recently. It was reported last month that top criminal lawyer Subhas Anandan is leaving Harry Elias Partnership (HEP) for KhattarWong while Singapore’s first specialist judge Tan Chee Meng and co-managing partner of HEP is also leaving the firm for personal reasons.

The Customer

Fotogrefer
Photo: fotogrefer

A customer is the most important visitor on our premises. He is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him.

He is not an interruption of our work. He is the purpose of it.

He is not an outsider to our business. He is part of it.

We are not doing him a favour by serving him. He is doing us a favour by giving us the opportunity to do so.

Mahatma Gandhi

Reflections of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew

Everyone knows about Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew or MM as Singaporeans fondly call him. An icon of Singapore, there is a lot of literature about MM’s life, ?his magnificent achievements and his views. Frankly, there is little about MM that we do not know or which can still be written about. This interview focuses on MM – the lawyer, his values and principles, his frank views about the legal profession, leadership, and communication. Of course, no story about MM is complete without mention of his two favourite topics – Singapore and China.

‘I do what is right and I do it to the best of my capability. If that is inadequate, that’s all I can do,’ says MM of his guiding principle. What is right, to him, is based on integrity and realism.

In the 1950s, MM had been unsure of Singapore’s future. ‘I did not know how the world economy will perform or the dominance of technology then. My colleagues and I did the best we could under the circumstances then.’

When asked whether he liked the state of Singapore today, he replied that ‘like’ was a difficult and inadequate word to describe modern Singapore. ‘We have become a valuable red dot. We are highly organised, at our optimum and well connected. Our forte came from adopting the English language.’

A keen spectator of international developments, MM gave insights on the new super power in Asia – China. When he visited Shanghai in 1976, it was dark, overcrowded and full of pre-world and dilapidated buildings. MM predicts that Shanghai, with a growing population of about 1,300 million, will take over Hong Kong and become ‘the major centre of the Far East’ in the future. Before that, they need to go through the transition of mastering the English language and developing the rule of law, he says.

MM has always been very interested in the growth and workings of China. A friend of China, it is not surprising that the world leader who has left the greatest impact on him is the late Chinese communist party chairman, Deng Xiaopeng. ‘He is an outstanding leader. He has a decisive quality and a sense of realism. He goes to the heart of the matter. When we meet, he would speak in Szechuan Mandarin and I would communicate in English. He is the man who saved China. His visit to third world countries Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore must have made him realise that China was on the wrong track. In December 1978, he opened up China.’

According to MM, Singapore will serve as the platform for Shanghainese businesses to operate and go regional. He acknowledges that the Singaporean Chinese are very different from the mainland Chinese. ‘Although we may speak the same language, we are very different from the mainland Chinese. Our beliefs and value systems are different. Our culture is different and will continue to be. Nothing is static.’

Singaporeans have to brace themselves for change, he cautioned. ‘We must never forget that we are living in a fast changing world. We have to continuously keep changing. That’s the only way to remain relevant. The strategy for Singapore’s continuous successful future is to move ahead and pre-position ourselves. Think beyond tomorrow,’ he reiterated.

Emphasising the importance of intellectual quotient (‘IQ’), MM acknowledges that the current method of selecting Singaporeans, be it into the Public Service Commission or into the NUS law faculty, is not perfect. ‘Certificates, character references, psychometric tests and National Service records are useful aids but insufficient to pick the best man or woman.’

Do leaders need emotional intelligence? ‘A person with high IQ but no EQ is at a great disadvantage. EQ is essential.’ He illustrates this by referring to the Japanese. ‘Their body language and physical movements help them to communicate beyond words with the other person. Our judges in the courts, for example, may not be able to make good judgments if they do not feel for the people who appear before them.’

Good communication and connecting with people are qualities important to MM. To him, a good leader is a person who is able to connect with others. ‘When this happens, the people believe, have confidence in him and follow. He must lead by example and not by force.’

With many lawyers who are Members of Parliament (‘MP’s), can one naturally conclude that they make better politicians? MM disagrees. ‘It is true that lawyers, the litigation ones, communicate effectively in English. However, this does not make them better politicians.’ He explains that after the General Elections held in 2001, five new MPs, of which three were doctors, became Ministers. It was the doctor who was the better communicator, pointed out MM. A good politician has to speak the people’s language, connect with them and then communicate it in Parliament.

He traces the beginnings of politicians being lawyers to the old English political system. British MPs were poorly paid and needed a profession to supplement their incomes. They turned to law.

About 47 years have passed since MM practised law. His mother told him that he must have a profession, unlike his father who was a rich man’s son and a storekeeper. MM had three choices then – law, medicine or dentistry. All three would have helped him to be self-employed and not work for the British. He ?chose law.

In 1946, he boarded the Britannic for England. He spent the first year of his legal education in the London School of Economics. Not liking the life in hectic London, he moved to the Cambridge town and finished his legal education in its renowned university. In law school, he preferred the practical subjects of contract and property to Roman law or English legal system. His Cambridge education was not just about learning the law. It shaped his life as a future politician.

Back in Singapore, he practised litigation in the areas of contract, criminal and arbitration in Laycock & Ong. He was called to the Malayan bar and practised law in the then Malayan states as well. He did not enjoy his nine years of law practice. ‘I was selling my skills for a living. Whether my client was in the right or wrong did not matter. I did not think highly of the adversarial system.’

‘If I had remained a lawyer, it would have been a meaningless existence. I have been a participant and as Prime Minister, ?I studied the system. I found it an unfulfilling profession,’ he stated vehemently.

One of the stakeholders of the early legal system was the jury. During the Select Committee hearing for the abolition of the jury, MM questioned famous criminal lawyer David Marshall on how many of his clients in more than 100 of his murder cases were convicted. ‘He said only one. I then asked him whether any of his clients were guilty. He said that this had never occurred to him and that it was not for him to decide.’

MM, who was then Singapore’s Prime Minister, felt that his role was to ensure that the legal system brought justice, which should not be circumvented by skilful advocacy. Jury trial was abolished in Singapore in 1970.

When asked about his views on the legal profession as it stands today, he replied that the legal profession has come a long way since the 1960s. The NUS law faculty has developed to the extent that the top three to five per cent of its graduates are equal to their international counterparts.

MM appreciates the reasons why it is difficult for the Singapore legal profession to retain its lawyers. ‘Young lawyers often do not realise the competitive nature of the profession they are entering. This is not a problem peculiar to Singapore.’ On litigation lawyers, he commented that ‘litigation lawyers are a special group of lawyers. They are prepared to work very hard, do the getting up and articulate their points well in court. If you do not enjoy this, find it tiresome, then don’t do litigation. Be a solicitor or a company secretary,’ he advised.

‘Small law firms will always be there.’ Why? ‘There will always be those who do not prefer to work in larger firms.’ He felt that clients’ monies must always be safeguarded. ‘The Law Society has to implement the safeguards such as having two signatories, another person or the client.’

In his political career, MM acknowledges that his legal education helped him to understand the constitutional process and the legislative system. MM, his wife, and Eddie Barker were responsible for drafting the Singapore Constitution.

MM Lee’s foray into politics and his highly impressive political career are evidenced by the status enjoyed by Singapore in its short history of 41 years. The son that the legal profession lost was the gain for Singapore politics. His secondary school teacher’s prediction – ‘He is likely to attain a high position in life’ – has come true indeed.

Rajan Chettiar
Rajan Chettiar & Co

MM Lee on lawyers, politicians and S'pore's future

9 August 2006
Straits Times
(c) 2006 Singapore Press Holdings Limited

THE idea of selling his skills, and doing a job where it did not matter if a client was in the right or wrong, did not appeal to Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a young lawyer here. Recalling those times in the 1950s in an interview with the Singapore Law Gazette, Minister Mentor Lee also said he did not think highly of the adversarial system. But as the Law Society’s monthly publication noted in its latest edition: ‘The son that the legal profession lost was the gain for Singapore politics.’ Mr Lee said if he had remained a lawyer, ‘it would have been a meaningless existence. I have been a participant and as prime minister, I studied the system. I found it an unfulfilling profession’. He felt that his role when he was prime minister, was to ensure the legal system brought justice and that it should not be circumvented by skilful advocacy. One aspect of Singapore’s early legal system, trial by jury, was abolished in 1970 after Parliamentary Select Committee hearings. Mr Lee went into practice after returning from London and became, among other things, a legal adviser to several trade unions. He helped found the People’s Action Party in 1954, becoming its secretary-general and Singapore’s first prime minister in May 1959. In the interview at the Istana recently, Mr Lee was asked about the legal profession today. He said it has come a long way since the 1960s. The National University of Singapore’s law faculty has developed to an extent where its top 3 to 5 per cent of graduates are equal to their international counterparts. Mr Lee could also understand why it is difficult for the profession to retain lawyers, saying young lawyers do not realise its competitive nature. Without reference to any case, he also said clients’ monies must always be safeguarded. The Law Society has to implement safeguards ‘such as having two signatories, another person or the client’. But Mr Lee disagreed when asked if lawyers made better politicians. Although ‘it is true that lawyers, the litigation ones, communicate effectively in English’, this does not make them better politicians. He noted that after the 2001 General Election, five new MPs, of whom three were doctors, became ministers. Mr Lee did not name them, but the three doctors were Dr Ng Eng Hen, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan and Dr Balaji Sadasivan. It was the doctor who was the better communicator, he said, again without citing anyone in particular. Good communication and connecting with people are important qualities, and for him, a good leader is someone able to connect with others: ‘When this happens, the people believe, have confidence in him and follow. He must lead by example and not by force.’ Emotional intelligence is also as essential as intellectual quotient. ‘A person with a high IQ but no EQ is at a disadvantage,’ he said, citing the example of the Japanese. ‘Their body language and physical movements help them to communicate beyond words with the other person. ‘Our judges in the courts, for example, may not be able to make good judgments if they do not feel for the people who appear before them.’ As for whether he likes the state that Singapore is in today, he said modern Singapore had become a ‘valuable red dot’. ‘The strategy for Singapore’s continuous successful future is to move ahead and pre-position ourselves,’ he said. ‘Think beyond tomorrow.’

© 2006 Dow Jones Reuters Business Interactive LLC (trading as Factiva). All rights reserved.