Canadian Lawyer InHouse

25 CANADIANLAWYERMAG.COM/INHOUSE MAY/JUNE 2018 ark Harrington is seeing more in-house law- yers showing up on files where they didn't before, even on more complicated cases. An insurance defence lawyer for Torkin Manes LLP, Harrington is a 30-year private prac- tice lawyer who does work for companies that don't necessarily have in-house depart- ments. He's seen a range of litigation trends over the years and watched in-house depart- ments at insurance companies rise and fall. "I have also noticed my clients are still sending me the cases against the best plain- tiff lawyers even though they have in-house departments. I see cases from Thomson Rogers, Oatley Vigmond, Mcleish Orlando — they send me those files, they don't keep them in-house," says Harrington. The big complex files are still coming his way — it's the threshold cases/commod- ity work "slip and falls" that law firms are losing on the personal injury side because it's cheaper for the insurance companies to handle them in-house. "But are they getting the same quality they would from lawyers outside? I'm not so clear on that," says a skeptical Harrington. "It's certainly true they are taking a hardball approach." Harrington says it's the way the sector is headed to keep costs down. The trend is also impacting the lower eche- lon of lawyers in law firms like Torkin Manes. "I have an entire insurance department full of young lawyers who need trial experi- ence and taking those [smaller] files away is going to cause a further loss of my juniors' ability to get the trial experience they so des- perately need," he says. "So I think it's going to have a significant impact on the training of our younger professionals because they won't get the opportunities they had before." In fact, litigators who were once in pri- vate practice are taking their expertise and going in-house where they can do trials on a much different platform — one that al- lows them time to do it without the pres- sure of docketing (see cover story page 20). External firms are becoming all too aware that some of their larger clients of all kinds — not just the insurance companies — are placing more focus on addressing litigation matters and costs in-house. In resposne, many firms are deciding to embrace the op- portunity to work differently with clients who are going down this path, cognizant of the fact they must also evolve and adapt. "Most in-house departments are run by pretty savvy people who know what's within their capacity and what should be sent out. We don't really see them as com- petitors but as collaborators," says Carolena Gordon, litigation partner at Clyde & Co in Montreal. "They want to deal with some of the business litigation themselves and use us for other things. We see it as an op- portunity to get to know their business and meet in the middle and see what they need at a price that suits them and deliver ser- vices in a way that works for them." Because some in-house clients now have more expertise in litigation themselves, they want to be involved in talking through the pros and cons of the various strategic decisions in litigation instead of just being told what their external litigation partners think they should do. "We're certainly seeing the legal depart- ments of large clients like the banks, for ex- ample, doing smaller litigation in-house," says Catherine Beagan Flood, commercial litiga- Where larger matters still go external that's where lawyers need to get more creative in responding to those needs. There needs to be a better understanding of what client needs are. CAROLENA CORDON, Clyde & Co. RESPONDING TO CHANGING LITIGATION DEMANDS M Private practice litigators are seeing increasing involvement of in-house lawyers on files they once had domain over. Many see it as an opportunity to support clients and in the meantime retain the larger matters over time. BY JENNIFER BROWN

• Cover