Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Goodwin Procter LLP suffered a data breach after a vendor that it uses for large file transfers was hacked, according to an internal memo obtained by news outlets.
The memo, circulated on Tuesday by managing partner Mark Battencourt, said Goodwin was notified of the security issue on 22 January and immediately stopped using the service. The firm also retained the services of a third-party forensic expert an launched an investigation into the breach.
“Our investigation revealed a small percentage of our clients may have experienced unauthorized access to or acquisition of confidential material” on 20 January, Battencourt said in the memo. "Clients whose data may have been directly impacted as a result of this matter have been notified, and we have also communicated the security incident to all firm clients."
The investigation also revealed that “only a few Goodwin employees were affected” by a breach, all of whom had also been notified. The memo added that none of the firm’s resources appeared to have been impacted other than the file transfer service.
"Please know that we were running the most current version of the service and following all directions to ensure the proper maintenance of the system," the memo said, noting that security patches were being deployed as soon as they were made available.
Goodwin confirmed the accuracy of the memo when approached by Bloomberg, but declined to comment further.
[ymal]
The Boston-based Global 50 firm is only the latest firm to have suffered a data breach. Seyfarth Shaw LLP confirmed in October that it had suffered a ransomware attack, forcing it to shut down several of its systems, and Grubman Shire Meiselas & Sacks confirmed in May that troves of data on their celebrity clients had been stolen by hackers.
Law firms make attractive targets for cyberattacks due to the volume of sensitive information their systems store. Hacking attempts on major firms are rapidly increasing in frequency, prompting many to invest in greater cybersecurity measures for 2021.
Our industry partner, Simply Law Jobs, has announced that the legal job site is undergoing the biggest transformation in its 18 year history.
Based on in-depth research into the industry, as well as extensive feedback and insights provided by Simply Law Jobs clients and jobseekers, the site will be relaunched with a brand new look, new and exciting features and old favourites which have been updated or revamped.
The job site has been optimised so jobseekers and recruiters can connect in the quickest and easiest way possible. This includes better search filters, enhanced candidate profiles, prompts to provide better job advert descriptions and an improved candidate management system to manage job applications more efficiently.
The relaunch also aims to eliminate common bugbears of jobseekers such as the time spent applying for vacancies and not hearing back from employers after applying for jobs.
In a recent survey, 32% of Simply Law Jobs users claimed that job adverts don’t provide the information which they are looking for. With the new prompts to provide better job advert descriptions, jobseekers can gain a better understanding of the job responsibilities, skill requirements, benefits and company culture.
This will help jobseekers better match themselves to relevant career opportunities before taking the time to apply for jobs. Recruiters will also benefit by receiving a better quality of application.
In the same survey, 42% of users claimed the most frustrating part about job hunting was not hearing back from a recruiter after applying. With an improved candidate management system, recruiters can update candidates on the status of their application at the click of a button.
In a recent survey, 32% of Simply Law Jobs users claimed that job adverts don’t provide the information which they are looking for.
Better communication will improve the candidate experience and allow jobseekers to concentrate on the next stage of the recruitment process, whether that be applying for other jobs or preparation for an interview.
For the first time ever, the revamped site will allow jobseekers to apply for jobs using their Simply Law Jobs profile instead of their CV. The candidate profiles allows jobseekers to showcase their talent, skills and experience which means a better chance of reaching the interview stage and landing their dream job.
The relaunch was triggered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. When the first national lockdown was announced in March 2020, recruitment activity was put on hold for many employers.
Dave Capper, Simply Law Jobs Director said, “As soon as the lockdown restrictions were imposed, activity on the site did slow down. While it wasn’t ideal, it did give us the opportunity to sit back and reflect on where we could make improvements.”
He continued, "We reached out to clients and jobseekers to ask them what they loved about Simply Law Jobs, what they didn’t and what could be implemented to improve their experience. We always knew that we wanted to provide a platform inspired by the needs of the people who use it most.”
The relaunch, going live mid March, is just phase one of the regeneration. Phase two will concentrate on career development and creating a community in which professionals can connect. This will include mentorship guidance, career case studies, upskilling opportunities, end to end career guidance and much more.
[ymal]
Capper said, “After reaching out to our jobseekers, we discovered that there was a need to expand our offerings. Our focus has always been on connecting jobseekers with jobs, but our future vision is to support professionals from the minute they consider joining the legal industry, through the process of gaining their qualifications and experience, during the job search and throughout the course of their career. We want to be there every step of the way!”
Phase two of the relaunch is expected to go live in May 2021.
Elizabeth Hughes, specialist in family law at Parker Bullen, outlines the issues facing COVID-hit couples desiring a divorce and the possible avenues for funding available to them.
The current pandemic has put huge pressures on couples and families, putting even the strongest relationships under strain with reports from across the globe of a rise in marital break-ups and applications for divorce. Some even refer to a COVID ‘break-up boom’.
With job losses on the rise and the prospects of more looming, many people are struggling financially and therefore wondering how to pay for a divorce. With the average cost of divorce hovering around £15,000 this is no small concern. This problem is compounded by the fact that, since 2013, there has been a dramatic reduction in legal aid. Divorce numbers may be on the rise, but how many more divorces are being put off due to financial concerns?
We’re used to the media hype around ‘divorce day’, due to the big rush to divorce following the Christmas break. In reality, there are peaks and troughs during the year. However, the post-Christmas divorce peak is widely explained by the stress Christmas can cause some families – enforced family time plus the added pressures of preparation and celebration. The Christmas period is also commonly a time when people reflect on where their life is and where they’d like it to be, which in itself can be a catalyst for relationship breakdown. It’s not just Christmas that can lead to marital break-up; applications for divorce tend to rise after families spend a long time together, peaking after school holidays, for example.
COVID-19 magnifies all these issues and more. Spouses are being locked down together for weeks, maybe months. Young marriages are coming unstuck as couples face immense pressures early in their relationship. For those with children, there’s the added pressure of 24/7 parenting plus the challenges of home schooling. Moreover, financial worries - a common factor in divorce – are all too common. Some people are coming to terms with redundancy, others lower pay due to being furloughed and many more are worried about their jobs. In terms of the pandemic, vaccines undoubtedly provide light at the end of the tunnel. However, the economic fallout and therefore the financial impact on families could last for years.
[ymal]
COVID-19's financial impact on marriage could well be two-fold – contributing to a rise in relationship break-ups now, as well as a rise in people putting off initiating divorce proceedings due to financial concerns. One of the many reasons I hear for clients’ putting off seeing a family solicitor is their “need to get finances sorted first”.
Where a couple can’t fund a divorce through private funds, what options are available? Currently, eligibility for Legal Aid is very limited, with it largely being preserved for victims of domestic abuse and Public Law child care cases. One option is a commercial loan or re-mortgaging, both of which can be advised by an IFA, an IFA can also advise whether a spouse is eligible for a litigation loan. As many lawyers know, legal expenses insurance is a common bolt-on to car or home insurance policies so costs could be covered there. Additionally, a spouse could apply to the court for a Legal Services Order or Maintenance Pending Suit for non-legal fees.
Surely we need to make couples who may be struggling more aware of the funding options that are available to them. Otherwise, as we begin to emerge from this pandemic and the economy starts to recover it may not be a marriage boom we see, but a spike in divorce.
Kirkland & Ellis LLP is on track to achieve annual revenue of around $5 billion following an upsurge of demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Financial Times first reported.
Insiders at the Chicago-based firm said that its turnover was approaching $5 billion for the twelve months to the end of January, up from $4.45 billion in the previous year. One partner described the firm’s performance as “eye-watering”.
Kirkland & Ellis is the largest law firm in the world by revenue and the seventh-largest by number of attorneys. It is also the first law firm to have made $4 billion in annual revenue, a record it is now poised to beat.
However, the firm will not publicly disclose its financial results. Partners reported that its leadership is concerned by how reports of its exceptionally strong performance will be received during a global health crisis.
“This crisis is a humanitarian issue so it doesn’t feel right to be talking about how well you’ve done,” one said.
The firm’s success was attributed to growth in its three main areas of focus: private equity, restructuring and litigation. Costs were also cut drastically by the elimination of legal conferences and the need to travel overseas, as well as expensive catering for clients.
Kirkland & Ellis also advised on nine high-profile M&A deals in the automotive sector during 2020, worth a total of %3.7 billion.
[ymal]
In a Wells Fargo survey of 125 big law firms, overall net income grew 25.6% annually in the first half of 2020, greatly surpassing analysts’ expectations of a profit downturn sparked by the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi is suing the US government over its inclusion on an official list of companies with ties to the Chinese military.
In January, under the Trump administration, the Defense Department added Xiaomi and a further eight companies to a list of companies purported to have ties with the Chinese military. When a company is placed on the list, US investors are required to divest their holdings in the firm by a set deadline.
Xiaomi Corp filed its complaint against the US Defence and Treasury Departments in a Washington district court on Friday. The complaint was addressed to Biden appointees Lloyd Austin and Janet Yellen.
The company is seeking to be removed from the list, to which it characterises its inclusion as “unlawful and unconstitutional” and claims it is not controlled by the People’s Liberation Army. It states in its complaint that 75% of the company’s voting rights are held by co-founders Lin Bin and Lei Jun under a weighted structure.
Should the investment restrictions come into effect on 15 March as designated, they would cause “immediate and irreparable harm to Xiaomi”, the lawsuit adds, as a “substantial number” of its shareholders are US residents.
The firm also claims that its designation on the list “deprives Xiaomi of its liberty and property rights without due process of law.”
[ymal]
Xiaomi is the world’s third-largest smartphone manufacturer, having benefited greatly from sanctions placed on rival Huawei by the US and other western nations. It shipped 43.3 million units in Q4 2020, up more than a third, and controls 11.2% of the global smartphone market.
A barrister who was widely condemned for tweeting about a “stroppy teenager of colour” has been expelled from his chambers, though he claims to have resigned four days earlier.
John Holbrook was expelled from Cornerstone Barristers, where he had been a member for fifteen years, according to a statement released by the chambers over the weekend.
Holbrook received widespread criticism after posting a tweet on 17 January in response to a video from the Equality and Human Rights Commission telling the story of a black girl who was sent home from school because her hairstyle contravened its dress code.
“The Equality Act undermines school discipline by empowering the stroppy teenager of colour,” Holbrook tweeted.
The tweet gained wide media attention, with shadow justice secretary David Lammy also speaking out against Holbrook’s remarks. An investigation was subsequently launched by Cornerstone Barristers, who asked Holbrook twice to take the tweet down, though he refused.
“Members were clear that statements made on social media by Mr Holbrook were irreconcilable with membership of Cornerstone Barristers,” a spokesperson for Cornerstone wrote.
“Cornerstone Barristers reiterates its repudiation of the contents of Mr Holbrook’s particularly offensive tweet on 17 January at 09:34hrs and all that it insinuated. Mr Holbrook’s views never reflected the views of these chambers. We unequivocally condemn discrimination in all its forms.”
[ymal]
Commenters have noted that the 17 January tweet was not the first example of Holbrook posting inflammatory comments on social media. A tweet posted in October 2014 read: “Identity politics have tarnished the Nobel Peace Prize as 1000s point out that 5 of the last 12 winners were Muslim”.
Holbrook, who characterised his critics as a “woke mob”, claimed that he had resigned four days prior to his expulsion, “having concluded that I no longer wanted to practise as a full-time barrister.”
Stock trading platform Robinhood has been hit with a class action lawsuit after restricting purchases of focal stocks in an ongoing battle between retail investors and Wall Street hedge funds.
The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, alleges that Robinhood purposefully “deprived their customers of the ability to use their service” in an attempt to “manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial institutions.”
Before markets opened on Thursday, Robinhood announced in a press release that it would restrict certain stocks that have experienced “recent volatility”, while also raising margin requirements for some securities. Equities affected had been boosted by the interest of online investment subreddit r/wallstreetbets, drawing an unprecedented wave of new investments to struggling retail stocks in an attempt to damage the hedge funds that were shorting them.
GameStop, AMC, American Airlines, Bed Bath & Beyond, BlackBerry and Nokia were among the stocks affected, subsequently experiencing precipitous drops in value. GameStop fell 44% following the imposition of restrictions, while AMC plunged 57%.
Several other trading platforms, including Charels Schwab, TD Ameritrade and Webull also moved to restrict the volatile shares, though Robinhood’s popularity among online investors has drawn the greatest attention.
Robinhood’s move has already drawn attention from lawmakers, who condemned what they saw as preferential treatment of established Wall Street firms over smaller investors.
[ymal]
Robinhood has yet to comment on the lawsuit.
This is not the first of the trading platform’s recent legal worries, having agreed to a $65 million fine in December for misleading customers about the price of trading stocks using its service. It has also been challenged on whether it does enough to educate beginner investors about the inherent risks of day trading.
The legal and financial expertise of these professionals can help businesses to grow and succeed. At times, they can even help business owners like you avoid hefty fines or severe legal consequences.
Accounting professionals ensure that your business finances and transactions are well-documented. They also perform financial analysis; tracking your earnings and expenses to develop a financial statement that shows profit or losses. Accounting services also ensure tax returns are promptly filed and paid. In addition, accountants can give suggestions on the best possible accounting tools to help your business grow.
Once you’ve arranged accounting, legal professionals should be your next priority. Businesses can benefit from the expertise of a lawyer in so many ways. A lawyer can:
Businesses should partner with a legal expert long before government regulations, employment issues, or contract disputes arise. A corporate lawyer or legal team that works with your company knows your business from day one, and they can give competent advice for all your legal concerns and issues.
[ymal]
Both legal and financial professionals and their services guarantee the health and well-being of your company. There are even instances when they intersect, such as:
Professional advice is necessary for a business to keep up with growing demands. You can count on lawyers for legal advice and representation while you seek accountants' assistance to manage business finances. There are several instances when their functions overlap, as in the case of business ownerships and software. Their technical advice may differ in approach, but in essence, they are one and the same – to safeguard the business' best interests. Their professional services ensure the legal and financial well-being of your company. Indeed, law and finance go hand-in-hand in running a profitable business venture.
US chipmaker Qualcomm has lost its data dispute with EU antitrust regulators following a ruling from Europe’s top court on Thursday.
The Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) reaffirmed regulators’ right to see data held by Qualcomm, a move that is likely to strengthen the European Commission’s position in other antitrust investigations.
The case in point has already seen the chipmaker struck with a €242 million fine.
Qualcomm’s legal fight with the EU antitrust watchdog began in 2017 when it was instructed to provide more information relating to a case in which it was accused of predatory pricing in 2009 and 2011 in an attempt to crush UK-based phone software developer Icera.
Qualcomm declined to provide further information, arguing that the regulator’s request exceeded the scope of the investigation. It brought its case to the General Court – the second-highest court in Europe – and lost its challenge in 2019, subsequently appealing to the CJEU.
On Thursday, the CJEU backed the Commission.
“Having regard to the broad powers of investigation conferred on the Commission by Regulation No 1/2003, it is for the Commission to decide whether a particular item of information is necessary to enable it to bring to light an infringement of the competition rules,” court judges said.
[ymal]
The European Commission has already levelled fines of €1.2 billion against Qualcomm relating to this case and another in the past three years, both related to the company’s alleged use of its market power to thwart rival firms.
Qualcomm Is also the subject of a third case from the Commissions, which is investigating whether the chipmaker engaged in anti-competitive behaviour by leveraging its market position in 5G modem chips in the radio frequency chip market.
Stellantis, formerly Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA), said on Wednesday that it will plead guilty to charges of conspiring with company executives to make illegal gifts to leaders of United Auto Workers (UAW), the union that represents its factory workers.
The automaker will pay a fine of $30 million for one count of conspiring to violate the National Labour Relations act and accept three years of probation and oversight by an independent compliance monitor that will ensure it follows federal labour laws.
Timothy Waters, head of the FBI’s Michigan office, said FCA had conspired to make more than $3.5 million worth of lavish, illegal payments to then-UAW senior officials between 2009 and 2016. Bribes were given in the form of “money and other items of value” and were intended to “create an atmosphere more favourable for negotiating with the UAW.”
Federal prosecutors in Detroit described how Al Iacobelli, former head of labour relations at FCA and co-chairman of the UAW-Chrysler National Training Centre, signed off on a $262,000 payment to close a mortgage held by General Holiefield, fellow co-chairman of the centre and UAW vice president.
Iacobelli and others set up a liberal policy for credit card usage to placate union officials, the charges state. Training centre credit cards paid for more than $30,000 in meals for UAW officials at restaurants throughout Southern California, the government alleged.
[ymal]
Iacobelli was sentenced to 5 1/2 years in prison in 2018, and 12 UAW officials have also been convicted as part of the years-long investigation, including its two previous presidents, Gary Jones and Dennis Williams.
UAW also recently agreed to cooperate with a monitor appointed by the Justice Department to oversee union finances and operations.
