Understanding IFLR1000

IFLR1000 specializes in covering various aspects of corporate financial and transactional work across multiple practice areas. These areas include:

• Banking & Finance
• Capital Markets
• Financial Services Regulatory (FSR)
• Investment Funds
• M&A/Transactional Private Equity
• Project Development/Projects
• Restructuring and Insolvency

The importance and relevance of these practice areas can vary significantly based on jurisdiction as well as the volume of work conducted by the firms in those regions. Firms need to be particularly attentive to how they align their practices with IFLR1000’s requirements.

Submission Guidelines: The Portal is Key

One of the major updates emphasized during the webinar is that all submissions and referee lists must be submitted exclusively through the designated portal. It’s crucial to remember that submissions sent via email will not be accepted.

The portal offers several benefits, including:

• The ability to preview past submissions, providing an excellent reference point for crafting current submissions.
• Ensuring that when creating an account, it is done using the law firm’s official email domain, maintaining professional integrity.

Eligibility Requirements: What You Need to

Participate

To participate effectively in the IFLR1000 research process, firms must meet several criteria:

• Physical Presence: A tangible office must exist in the jurisdiction where the submission is being made.
• Local Licensing: Both the firm and the lawyers involved must be licensed to practice locally.
• Core Practice Areas: The firm should practice in one or more of the core areas defined by IFLR1000, ensuring their expertise aligns with the submission requirements.

Detailed Breakdown of the Research Form

The research form itself is structured with clear sections that demand careful consideration.

Section 1: Lawyer Nominations

• A new change this year, the first section exclusively focuses on new lawyers, specifically those who are currently unrated by IFLR1000. This change signifies a shift towards recognizing emerging talent within the legal industry.
• When nominating, it’s essential that all nominated lawyers work within the specified jurisdiction for the submission.

For lawyers who are already rated, maintaining their ratings hinges on several factors:

• The submission of  deal evidence showcased in Section 3 of the form.
• Gathering and considering both client and peer feedback, which are integral components of the evaluation process.

Notably, the Lawyer Survey has returned this year, providing an opportunity for self-nomination and allowing lawyers to present additional deal evidence.

What if the lawyer is rated for one practice area but not another?

• In that case you can put down the lawyer’s name for the other practice area.

Section 2: Overview of Practice

In this section, firms must present a comprehensive overview of their practice. This entails selling their unique competitive advantage to the IFLR evaluators. Relevant data regarding market share should be included, and firms are encouraged to provide information on their impact in the ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) space, if applicable.

Section 3: Prioritize Complex Deals

When it comes to Section 3, firms are directed to prioritize their top 10 deals that are characterized by complexity, impact, and innovation. It is critical not to leave the innovation section blank, as this could raise questions regarding the firm’s capacity for creative and impactful work—something that is vital in the eyes of IFLR’s research methodology. It is important to prioritize this section as it is the most decisive factor in IFLR’s research methodology

Referee Form Details

This year, IFLR is requesting feedback from only 20 referees per practice area. It is important to confirm with referees prior to listing them to maximize the likelihood of positive engagement. Each referee can provide insights on multiple lawyers, and it is recommended that about half of the referees can be linked to deals in the submission.

Moreover, firms can proactively inquire about the percentage of client feedback received, which can serve as a useful metric for understanding the firm’s standing.

Important Timetable to Note

Firms should be particularly aware of the key deadlines associated with the IFLR research cycle:

– Submission Deadlines fall on either February 12 or June 30 depending on your jurisdiction.

– Research interviews will take place from February to August.

– The lawyer survey will be sent out in March/April.

– Research publication dates are to be announced in early Spring 2025, with all firm and lawyer rankings being released simultaneously.

Good luck to all of those submitting this year! If you would like any help or assistance with your upcoming submissions, please feel free to reach out to our Tier One team.

The post Key Insights from the IFLR1000 Webinar appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Perhaps the most common error a Chambers researcher will encounter when reading submissions is where a firm has provided excessive  reams of information. These issues can include too many work highlights, or individual highlights running for multiple pages. Often a lot of this information is impenetrable and goes far too close into the fine technical detail. When determining rankings, researchers typically take ten to fifteen minutes reading and analysing each submission. Therefore, anything that makes it difficult to quickly comprehend the information is often a pet peeve for researchers. The ideal length of a work highlight is one side of A4, which means that the matter description should be around two to three paragraphs. It’s very rare for a matter to genuinely require more space than this.

Providing too little information.

Ironically, this issue is typically the next most common problem with submissions! The submission document is ultimately a balancing act; the document is designed to be a specific length so that a researcher can make a reasoned decision on the quality of that firm in a reasonable amount of time. Whilst matter summaries should be succinct, providing just one or two sentences is likely not enough to fully understand what the matter is about. Furthermore, if a firm is unable to provide 20 work highlights, researchers will likely conclude that it is not acting on enough significant work to warrant a ranking.

Adding extra matters outside of work highlights.

A technique often used by firms to circumvent the limits of the submission document is to group together multiple matters into a single work highlight. For example, grouping any work done for the same client or the same type of work being collated together. Grouping a few related matters together like this is acceptable, but this technique should not be used to abuse the document and filling it up with an excessive number of additional matters. The work highlights should ideally remain just one page of A4. Furthermore, listing additional work in other areas such as lawyer bios or team summary should also be avoided beyond quick headlines.

Getting the wrong focus on certain lawyers.

One of the most challenging aspects of writing a strong submission that achieves a firm’s aims is in providing enough coverage around individual lawyers. As space is limited, it’s common for some lawyers to present more evidence to the disadvantage of others. One effective workaround is to list all lawyers who were involved in each work highlight to give them due credit for the same matter. Lawyers who are already ranked should continue to demonstrate a good stream of work (at least 2-3 work highlights), but when it comes to unranked lawyers, firms should consider who they want to focus on supporting and provide them with the most support both in terms of the submission and the number of referees.

Using hyperbolic language.

Sometimes firms are prone to using superlatives in order to promote some of the work they present (for example, describing a deal as ‘one of the best in the market’ without elaborating on why.) Researchers are trained to look beyond ‘marketing speak’ and just drill down into the facts of the evidence. The evidence that a firm presents should be allowed to speak for itself.

Ignoring or mishandling the feedback section.

Section C2 on the Chambers submission offers firms the opportunity to comment on the existing rankings and how accurate they believe current coverage is. Firms often instead use the space to express frustration about rankings without any constructive feedback. This can instead be used as a chance for a firm to describe why they are underranked and where they believe the current coverage is going wrong, or by drawing comparisons to firms in higher bands. These insights will both get the firm’s point across and provide insight that researchers will find helpful.

Misunderstanding the confidential/publishable format of the submission template.

The standard template on a Chambers submission contains space for both publishable and confidential information in order to allow firms to confidently share any sensitive data without any risk of publication. This template includes 10 publishable matters and 10 confidential, and firms often interpret this as needing to specifically include this number of each. In reality, as much or as little confidential information can be included, and the template can be adapted to include more or fewer sensitive matters.

Mislabelling confidential information.

It’s surprisingly common for the same information in a submission to be variously labelled as publishable or confidential in different parts of the submissions. Matter values, client names and other specific details are often affected by this. Whilst this doesn’t affect ranking decisions, it is significant in writing editorial, as researchers will not include information that is at any point labelled as confidential.

Bios.

It’s common for lawyers to cut and paste their bios directly into this space, when a link to their website will provide the same information. The bio space is best used to provide a very brief summary of what that lawyer’s particular strengths are and a few headline achievements.

Quoting rankings in other directories as evidence.

Chambers does acknowledge data from third parties such as press releases or data from Mergermarket. However, notes about rankings in other directories are usually disregarded by researchers. The methodology of directories varies slightly, so it should be anticipated that they produce slightly different results.

The post 10 Common Mistakes in Submissions appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Key Developments Across the Region

The 2025 Guide sheds light on emerging trends and critical updates shaping the South and Southeast Asian legal markets. Below is a summary of notable advancements in various jurisdictions:

India: Driving Innovation in Tech, Media, and Capital Markets

India’s legal market continues to reflect the country’s growing global stature. Significant trends include:

• Digital Transformation:

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) 2023 has introduced new compliance challenges for businesses, with law firms advising major tech companies like Amazon and Google. The Unified Payments Interface (UPI) has also driven legal work, particularly in fintech innovations such as speech-to-text AI and third-party payment systems.

• Media & Entertainment Sector Growth:

The increasing regulation of OTT platforms, high-profile defamation cases, and generative AI’s influence on media are fueling demand for legal expertise. Cases such as *The Kerala Story* and celebrity endorsement disputes have been pivotal. Chambers has responded by introducing a dedicated Media & Entertainment table.

• Capital Markets Rebound:

Despite global economic challenges, India’s IPO activity remains robust, exemplified by Ola Electric’s landmark listing. The Social Stock Exchange has also emerged as a groundbreaking platform, enabling non-profits to list and access capital markets.

• Indonesia: Emerging Fintech Hub

Indonesia’s fintech sector is experiencing rapid growth, driven by widespread digital payment adoption and evolving regulatory frameworks. Legal firms are increasingly focused on navigating cryptocurrency regulations, solidifying Indonesia’s position as a critical fintech market.

• Malaysia: Cybersecurity Takes Center Stage

Malaysia’s legislative advancements in technology law, highlighted by the Cybersecurity Bill 2024, signify a commitment to secure digital transformation. The establishment of the Cybersecurity Centre of Excellence in Kuala Lumpur further cements its role in fostering technological progress.

• Singapore: Leadership in AI Governance

Singapore is leading the way in AI governance, having unveiled a draft framework for generative AI. Legal practitioners are addressing challenges posed by AI disruption across industries and advising on significant investments in AI startups.

Capital Markets Across APAC: A Mixed Outlook

• Australia:

Capital markets have been subdued, influenced by inflation and geopolitical tensions. However, an optimistic forecast for 2024 suggests potential growth in equity markets.

• Hong Kong:

While the region continues to face a third consecutive year of decline, privatization deals are on the rise. New regulations targeting startups and tech companies hint at a potential recovery.

• Japan:

Low interest rates and active private equity markets have spurred significant M&A activity, including Toshiba’s $13.5 billion take-private deal.

Mergers and Acquisitions: Resilience Amid Challenges

Southeast Asia is witnessing a resurgence in M&A activity despite global economic headwinds. Singapore leads the region in deal volume, while Japan is experiencing an increase in unsolicited takeover bids, driven by recent regulatory changes. In India, domestic M&A remains strong, with Reliance’s $8.5 billion joint venture with Disney being a standout transaction.

Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Legal Market

Diversity remains a focal point, with women comprising 23.5% of ranked lawyers in the 2025 guide. While smaller markets like Laos and Sri Lanka lead in gender representation, larger jurisdictions such as Japan and South Korea still have room for progress.

The post Key Developments from the Chambers Asia-Pacific 2025 Guide Launch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Fintech Funding & M&A

The global FinTech funding landscape is facing challenges, as recent KPMG data highlights a decline in equity funding. Although interest rates have dipped slightly, the overall market remains subdued. Sectors like PropTech and consumer FinTech are experiencing slower growth, while transactional work, startups, and regulatory trends dominate industry conversations. In spite of this, $51.9 billion in funding was raised in the first half of 2024, emphasizing the sector’s continued investment potential.

Notably, many M&A deals have been delayed during the first half of 2024, as stakeholders await the outcome of the US election. This pause underscores the broader uncertainty in the market but also highlights opportunities for growth and innovation in areas that prioritize resilience and adaptability.

Crypto in the US and Around the World

Cryptocurrency continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the financial landscape, especially in the US. The industry has a history of engaging with the political sphere, exemplified by high-profile donations such as those from Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX. The 2024 election cycle has ushered in what is considered the most pro-crypto Congress in history, with promises to implement regulatory reforms.

President-elect Trump has vowed to replace SEC Chair Gary Gensler, a long-time critic of cryptocurrency, and introduce measures such as a crypto advisory council and a strategic bitcoin reserve. The crypto market is closely watching for clarity in areas like digital asset regulation, SEC and CFTC rulemaking, and the cessation of “regulation by enforcement.” Businesses are particularly eager for advancements in cryptocurrency bank accounts and broader regulatory approvals, which would provide a more stable foundation for growth.

Crypto Industry’s Increased Political Influence in US Elections

The cryptocurrency industry has significantly amplified its political influence in recent years, with the 2024 U.S. elections marking a watershed moment in its engagement with the political process. While crypto donations to political campaigns are not new—most famously exemplified by Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX’s contributions to both parties—the 2024 election cycle saw a more strategic and focused approach. Industry-aligned political action committees (PACs) like the Fair Shake PAC raised over $160 million, channeling funds to support pro-crypto legislators and target crypto skeptics. High-profile donors, including Coinbase, Ripple Labs, Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, and the Winklevoss twins, played a pivotal role in this effort.

In Ohio, crypto-backed groups invested $40 million to support blockchain entrepreneur Bernie Moreno, who successfully unseated Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown, a known critic of the industry. Similarly, in California, crypto PACs influenced primary races by spending $10 million to oppose Representative Katie Porter’s Senate bid, favoring the pro-crypto Adam Schiff instead. This aggressive, bipartisan approach to campaigning and lobbying has resulted in what commentators have dubbed “the most pro-crypto Congress ever.” The crypto industry’s concerted efforts to shape the political landscape underscore the growing significance of regulatory debates in digital assets and reflect a new era of political engagement for the sector.

AI in Financial Services

Artificial intelligence is transforming the FinTech sector, as companies increasingly integrate AI into their offerings to enhance efficiency and service delivery. Notably, OpenAI has raised $6.6 billion in funding, achieving a valuation of $157 billion, reflecting the growing importance of AI in financial services. Financial firms are also exploring ways to leverage AI for client research, but critical questions persist: What liabilities arise if AI produces errors? How can firms ensure the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated outputs before delivering them to clients?

The enthusiasm for automation is particularly strong in historically labour-intensive areas such as compliance, sanctions, anti-money laundering, and fraud detection. By embracing AI, companies aim to reduce costs and time inefficiencies while maintaining high standards of accuracy and compliance.

Tokenization of Real-World Assets

The tokenization of real-world assets is experiencing significant growth, driven by innovations in stablecoins like gold-backed cryptocurrencies. The ability to trade assets such as gold more efficiently and accessibly—enabled by fractional ownership—has spurred widespread interest in this space. Tokenization offers new avenues for investment and trading, breaking down barriers that have traditionally limited participation in high-value asset markets.

As the FinTech industry continues to evolve, tokenization is poised to play a central role in democratizing access to tangible assets, opening up exciting possibilities for investors and market participants alike.

The post Key Developments from the FinTech 2025 Guide Launch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

1. Client Feedback: The Cornerstone of Rankings

• Why It Matters: The webinar reiterated that client feedback is the most significant factor influencing rankings. The rankings aim to reflect market realities, and direct input from clients offers the clearest lens into a firm’s performance.
• Tips for Success: Firms are encouraged to ensure their clients are aware of feedback requests and prepared to provide detailed, experience-driven responses. Feedback should emphasize areas where the firm stands out, including exceptional service or unique expertise.

2. Peer Review: Nuanced but Impactful

• Peer feedback, while secondary to client input, can influence rankings, especially when it highlights critical issues such as significant partner departures or praises noteworthy expertise.
• The peer feedback is weighed cautiously unless it provides substantial, corroborated insights.

3. Practical Evidence in Submissions

• Quality Over Quantity: The ideal submission includes up to 15 significant matters that highlight the breadth and depth of a firm’s expertise. Cases should underscore complexity, innovation, or significant regulatory impact.
• Multiple Practice Areas: Firms with a wide scope of services can submit additional forms tailored to specific practice areas, ensuring all highlights are adequately covered.

4. Navigating the Awards Submission Process

• Separate Processes: Awards submissions are handled via the Nominations Gateway, distinct from the ranking submissions through the accreditation portal.
• Overlap Allowed: Significant cases can be submitted for both awards and rankings if they meet the criteria, simplifying efforts while maximizing impact.

5. Regional and Sector-Specific Dynamics

• Tailored Strategies: The importance of market dynamics varies by jurisdiction, with factors like firm size, client base, and practice focus playing significant roles. For example:
  • In markets dominated by larger firms, showcasing specialization or innovation can help smaller firms stand out.
  • In jurisdictions with limited players, demonstrating broad capability across sectors may be advantageous.

6. Deadlines and Timing

• The submission deadline for the ITR Tax Awards 2025 is March 13, 2025, as announced during the webinar.
• The submission deadline for the World Tax 2025 rankings is March 14, 2025. This includes all practice area submissions and client feedback forms.
• Client and practitioner survey feedback closes on May 30, 2025.

7. Client Feedback Accessibility

• The webinar addressed challenges in gathering feedback, especially when emails are blocked by corporate filters. Firms are encouraged to communicate proactively with clients, ensuring they anticipate and respond to feedback requests.

8. Market-Specific Challenges

• The webinar also delved into unique market challenges, such as assessing firms in jurisdictions with ongoing crises (e.g., Ukraine). In such cases, direct interviews with firms help researchers capture an accurate market picture.

9. Practical Tips for Advancing to Tier 1

• Establish a clear narrative in submissions, emphasizing market leadership and client satisfaction.
• Encourage clients to provide comparative feedback, specifically highlighting why they chose your firm over competitors.
• Demonstrate a consistent track record of high-impact, innovative matters.

10. Digital Presence and Marketing

• While a firm’s digital and marketing efforts are not directly factored into rankings, maintaining an updated profile can aid visibility and reinforce credibility.

Conclusion

This webinar offered a comprehensive guide for firms striving to improve their rankings and secure awards recognition. By prioritizing client feedback, strategic submissions, and clear communication, firms can effectively showcase their expertise and stand out in a competitive landscape. With the upcoming deadlines, now is the time for firms to act decisively and position themselves for success in 2025.

For more information, please check out the ITR World Tax Methodology page: https://www.itrworldtax.com/Stub/Methodology

The post Key Highlights from the World Tax Webinar: Insights and Strategies for Rankings Success appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

• Key insights into the legal directories scoring system.
• Strategies to secure individual rankings and maximize referee responses.
• Tips for crafting standout work highlights.

Date: November 12th
Time: 1 PM (UK time)
Audience: Legal professionals, marketing teams, and lawyers involved in legal directory submissions and award applications.

Don’t miss out!

Click here to register and to receive a link for the webinar.

The post Submissions 360 – Webinar appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

– Cross-border elements: Transactions involving companies from different countries introduce complexities such as navigating multiple regulatory environments, varying legal systems, tax regimes, and cultural considerations.

– Industry-specific regulations: Highly regulated industries (e.g., healthcare, biotech, financial services) often require compliance with stringent, specialized regulations that may add layers of complexity.

– Public company acquisitions: Acquiring a publicly listed company involves securities laws, disclosure requirements, tender offers, and regulatory scrutiny (e.g., antitrust or competition authority approvals), making it more complex than private deals.

– Value: Although one component of the assessment process, there is no doubt that the value of a transaction in a given industry does play a key role. Without a high value, the matter needs to incorporate many of the points below. 

– Hostile takeovers: In a hostile takeover, the acquirer seeks to purchase a company without the consent of its board, which can lead to defensive strategies by the target company (e.g., poison pills) and intricate legal maneuvers.

– Multiple stakeholders: Transactions involving multiple stakeholders (e.g., government, minority shareholders, private equity) create complex negotiations, competing interests, and varied legal and financial obligations.

– Use of innovative deal structures: Transactions that involve innovative financing methods, earnouts, stock swaps, or the use of complex instruments like contingent value rights (CVRs) or equity clawbacks can introduce financial and legal challenges.

– Post-transaction integration: Deals requiring complex integration, especially when combining differing corporate cultures, operating systems, or geographies, can increase difficulty.

– Distressed assets or insolvency: Buying distressed companies or assets often requires navigating bankruptcy laws, debt restructuring, and creditor negotiations, which adds complexity to the deal structure.

– Intellectual property (IP) issues: Acquisitions that heavily rely on IP (e.g., technology or biotechnology companies) often require thorough IP due diligence and may involve complicated licensing or patent litigation concerns.

– Antitrust and competition law concerns: Mergers or acquisitions that significantly alter the competitive landscape of an industry may require antitrust reviews or concessions to avoid regulatory challenges.

These factors can make an M&A transaction more challenging than typical deals, requiring creative legal, financial, and strategic solutions, and should be made clear to the researcher.

The post Key Factors in Elevating M&A Transactions appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Prepare in advance

Don’t wait until the last minute. The awards are now open so make a start before Christmas approaches. Gather your final directory submissions, recent matters in any billing or transaction database, and identify potential matters that may impress a judging panel –collecting any missing details from the lawyers on the matter.

Focus on Deals of the Year and the Criteria

No more than three deals per category, all deals must be cross-border in nature.  Though domestic transactions can be referenced briefly in Firm of the Year submissions, the focus must remain on CROSS-BORDER deals and INNOVATION. Without completing the “why is this matter innovative” part, the deal cannot be shortlisted. 

Categories
While you can find more about the categories here, they are as follows:

• Debt and equity-linked

• Equity

• High yield

• M&A

• Loan

• Private equity

 • Project finance

• Restructuring

• Structured finance and securitization

• Financial services regulatory

• Digital finance, among others.  

Financial Services Regulatory recognizes non-contentious financial services regulatory and compliance advice, while Digital Finance focuses on crypto and blockchain work. There are also individual awards, including IFLR Women Dealmakers Hall of Fame (for senior female partners who have had an impact shaping the legal landscape and not won the award before). There is also the Rising Star category, aimed at senior associate-level lawyers with less than 15 years’ post-qualification experience.

How to highlight innovation

The IFLR judges will be looking for submissions that highlight legal innovation and creativity. While directory rankings can depend on the depth of work across a field, sector or team, awards can be awarded on ONE piece of outstanding or innovative work or one terrific lawyer who has had a tremendous year. For example, innovation might take into consideration the following points.

a) Legal and regulatory requirements, such as antitrust laws and foreign investment restrictions, vary dramatically and may need more tailored and innovative clauses to comply or get through any objections.

b) Different tax laws can lead to double taxation and increased liabilities.

c) Vital protection of patents and trademarks may form part of the transaction.

d) Varying data protection laws can complicate the transaction.

Talk to the nominee

Talk to the nominees to obtain these insights and ensure that the wider impact or unusual nature of the matter does not get missed.

Furthermore, ask the lead partner for a deal in which the firm was NOT involved but was significant. IFLR also requires nominations of other deals from participants.

Also ask the lawyer if they would recommend the in-house legal team at any of their banking clients, for which there are also awards.

This helps IFLR expand their pool of nominations and work. Find out more details about the awards from IFLR here.

The post Raise the Bar with IFLR   appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Chambers UK has just launched its 2025 guide, the most comprehensive yet, offering invaluable insights into the UK legal market. This year’s guide introduces over 200 new department recognitions and a 6.5% increase in lawyer rankings, with more than 600 new entries, 370 of which are women. With 57,000 responses and seven months of research, Chambers continues to set the gold standard for legal rankings.

New Initiatives and Market Trends

One of the standout updates in this release is Chambers’ growing focus on gender diversity. Over the past three years, they’ve added over 1,000 women to their rankings and have nearly closed the gap to a 60/40 ratio of ranked men to women. In addition, Chambers has enhanced its ability to highlight niche firms through the introduction of new tables, such as SME-focused firms and dispute resolution specialists.

The SME-focused category is a significant addition. It’s aimed at recognizing firms that excel in serving small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), a client base that’s seen a 24% rise since 2010. These firms often cater to very different needs compared to larger corporations, and Chambers is now offering more targeted rankings to reflect this. More about the SME-focused table in our previous blog post https://tieronerankings.com/introducing-chambers-uks-new-opportunity-for-sme-focused-law-firms/.

Refined Categories and Sector Focus

Chambers is also introducing more refined categories to better address changes in the legal market. For instance, the decline of PFI and PPP projects has led to a shift towards two key categories: “Projects Domestic” and “Projects International,” which streamline Chambers’ recognition of project-related work.

At the same time, the guide has discontinued less active categories such as Retail: Corporate & Competition and Aviation: Commercial, reflecting evolving market priorities.

AI-related legal work has also become a central theme in this year’s submissions. More firms are now engaged in AI governance, data protection, and intellectual property issues. Chambers’ analysts noted a surge in AI-related cases across multiple sectors, reflecting the technology’s growing influence on business strategy and legal frameworks.

Litigation Market and Future Rankings

Chambers has also highlighted shifts in the litigation market, with a new table for dispute resolution specialist firms. Litigation boutiques have been on the rise, offering personalized service at competitive rates. This year’s guide shines a light on 15 firms in this growing space.

Additionally, for the UK 2026 guide, Chambers will be expanding its ranking criteria by asking firms to provide 20 referees, particularly in the SME-focused category. This will offer deeper insight into what makes a firm an ideal fit for SME clients and help expand the rankings in this area.

Upcoming Awards and Looking Ahead

Chambers also announced its inaugural UK Solicitors Awards, set for February 13, 2025. These awards will recognize the top-performing legal teams in over 20 categories, ranging from finance to pro bono work, and will be a major event to watch for industry leaders.

Chambers continues to evolve alongside the UK legal market. By expanding its categories and adapting its research methods, the guide ensures that it remains a vital resource for firms and clients alike. With the legal landscape shifting rapidly—thanks to factors like AI, gender diversity, and SME growth—Chambers UK’s rankings reflect not only the best firms today but also those leading tomorrow’s trends.

The post Chambers UK Guide Launch 2025 – Webinar Watch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Standout Case Studies and Achievements of 2024

One of the key focal points of the submission process is the importance of highlighting a firm’s achievements in 2024. It’s crucial to clearly indicate the timing of a matter, as the assessment process gives significant weight to the date of the work. This is especially important as the submission form remains the primary tool for both the rankings and awards process. This dual function means that attention to detail in completing the form is critical to ensure your firm’s best work is recognized in both contexts.

Partner Interviews

The Legal Benchmarking Group continues to value interviews with partners to supplement the written submissions. Their preference is to interview at least two partners per firm, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of a firm’s achievements. If a firm is approached by an IP Stars researcher for an interview, it is crucial to arrange for multiple lawyers to participate in the discussion to provide a well-rounded perspective.

What’s New this Year?

A few new elements have been introduced for the 2025 submission process:

– Addition of the Firm’s URL: On the first page of the submission, there is now a section to add the firm’s URL for their website.

– Your New IP Stars Section: This is where firms can recommend senior IP practitioners who are not already ranked. This is a chance to elevate deserving professionals for consideration in the next edition.

– Diversity and Inclusion Reporting: There has been a change in how the Legal Benchmarking Group collects diversity data. A new Social Impact Awards category is being introduced, giving firms recognition for their contributions to diversity, inclusion, and broader societal impacts.

– Referee Spreadsheets: While last year they introduced two separate spreadsheets for referees, one for companies and one for firms, there is now just one. However, firms must still clearly identify the type of referee (in-house practitioner/ direct client or another law firm) to guide the research team’s questions effectively.

Best Practices for Submitting Matters

A final key piece of advice focused on the submission of matters: it’s recommended to submit at least 10 to 15 cases. Submitting fewer than 10 may not provide a comprehensive overview of your firm’s work, making it harder for the researchers to accurately evaluate your firm’s standing.

As highlighted in the webinar, most of the information from last year’s session remains highly relevant and can serve as a helpful reference for addressing further questions. For a detailed review of last year’s insights, please refer to the following link: https://tieronerankings.com/key-updates-for-you-from-the-recent-ip-stars-webinar/

The post Webinar Watch: IP Stars Rankings and Managing IP Awards 2025 appeared first on Tier One Rankings.