The previous decade saw unprecedented change in the practice of law -- with the prospect of law firms floating on the stock exchange and the onward march of law as a commodity purchase.
So far the debate has been all about law firms, but there is an equally good argument for corporate legal departments to enter the fray. Imagine an ambitious and entrepreneurial general counsel who is tempted to seek the liberation of the legal team from that lawyer’s employer. Add to this a strong management team and some private equity backing, it could make for an interesting business proposition.
Outsourcing the legal department is a logical next step and would have numerous advantages. Client companies would retain the benefits of having a legal team on the inside while converting the burden of a non-core function to a revenue cost to be negotiated and fixed at an arm’s length basis.

Liberation

The liberated legal department would be free to disaggregate ‘services’ in whatever way seemed to be most conducive to business efficiency. Any considerations within the business that had questionable applicability to the legal function would be up for discussion and could be ditched.
The really interesting element of this hypothesis is that the model is highly scalable with the potential to create a sizeable business in its own right. Focus and purchasing power will help to drive cost down while continually improving client satisfaction. Part of this process will involve acknowledging that offshore legal process and services outsourcers have, to date, got it badly wrong. We are already learning that often the more sustainable answer will lie in intelligent outsourcing onshore.
I can already hear the law firms saying ‘we can do all that’. However, a key difference is that in-house legal teams are specifically not and should not seek to emulate the practices of law firms within commerce and industry. The in-house department, as part of a business, needs to look at the law as a means to an end and not -- as is usually the case with a law firm -- as an end in itself.

There will be sceptics

The advantage of this idea is that the in-house team would still have the same in-depth knowledge and feel for the business and would still be able to ‘take a view’ –key qualities prized by in-house lawyers and their employers alike.
Naturally, it will not all be plain sailing. There will be many sceptics -- not all in-house lawyers will immediately warm to the idea. But have they considered the possibility of gaining experience and career progression across many different companies and sectors while with the same employer? Could this be one way of addressing the frustrations felt by some in-house lawyers who find themselves locked into flat structures and waiting for dead men’s shoes?
There will be a raft of issues to be addressed, but I believe it will happen and there will be benefits to be gained for all involved.

Between 2002-11 Andrew Vellani was chief legal officer of international retailer COFRA Holding; prior to that, he was group legal director at UK drinks company Scottish & Newcastle