Here are some of the key points we covered:

• Work highlights carry the most weight in Legal 500 submissions. While referee and market feedback can help justify a ranking, they hold less influence than the quality and substance of the matters you present.
• Researchers will assess your firm’s overall team strength and depth of capability, not just your star partners. Be sure to reflect this by highlighting a broad range of lawyers involved in matters, as well as any firms you’ve collaborated with.
• Present a strong and diverse client roster to showcase the breadth and quality of your practice.
• Be strategic and concise when describing matters. Clearly explain why each piece of work is complex, innovative, and impactful.
• Secure referee consent in advance and keep them informed when the research process begins. Ask them to whitelist Legal 500’s email addresses to ensure they receive the requests. Choose referees who are available and responsive, regardless of seniority.
• Watch out for updates in practice areas and terminology (https://www.legal500.com/the-legal-500-submission-information/europe-middle-east-africa-emea-submissions/). Legal 500 periodically introduces changes, so stay informed to ensure alignment

A question came up in the chat that we didn’t address at the time—regarding where Of Counsel can be ranked in Legal 500 submissions. Legal500 tries to align counsels with the experience levels typically reflected in the individual categories. For instance, an Of Counsel with 10–20 years’ experience would be considered for the Leading Individual or Next Generation Partner categories, rather than Leading Associate. Conversely, a more junior counsel may be considered for Leading Associate. 

We recommend that the firm nominate the individual for the category that best reflects their experience, and the editorial team will then assess the suitability accordingly.

Click here to watch the full recording of the webinar (Passcode: OEKy#3&*)

The post Legal 500 – Expert tips for the EMEA deadline – Follow Up appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

In light of the recent escalation in Israel, Tier One Rankings have reached out to Chambers and Partners to ask if they will be able to make any adjustments to its approach its currently ongoing research. As a result, Chambers have now made the following announcement about their research schedule, showing a flexible and empathetic approach toward the affected legal community.

Acknowledgement of the Current Situation

Chambers has expressed concern for those impacted and extended hopes for a swift resolution to the crisis. While it is committed to maintaining a full research agenda and will aim to complete its research cycle this year, it has recognised the unique challenges currently facing Israeli law firms and legal professionals.

Revised Research Timeline

To accommodate disruptions, Chambers will delay the start of research for key practice areas in Israel:

• Corporate/M&A, White-Collar Crime, and Dispute Resolution (including Class Actions): Research will now begin on July 7, 2025.
• Projects & Energy and Environment: Research is scheduled to commence on July 21, 2025.
• Other Israel Sections: These will begin in late July to early August, with no changes anticipated at this time.

Referee Outreach and Ranking Considerations

Understanding the potential for delays in referee feedback, Chambers is considering broader use of surveys and is prepared to accommodate lower-than-usual response rates. They have assured firms that these challenges will be taken into account when finalising rankings.

Commitment to Monitoring the Situation

Chambers reaffirmed its commitment to closely monitor developments and will adapt further if necessary. The team emphasised its readiness to maintain open communication with firms throughout the process.

This move reflects a sensitive and proactive stance during a difficult period, reinforcing Chambers and Partners’ commitment to fairness and collaboration.

The post Chambers and Partners Adjusts Israel Research Schedule Amid Ongoing Situation appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The post London Legal Marketing Happy Hour appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

This point cannot be overemphasised. For most directories, referees are a key part of their methodology. This is because, speaking to referees gives the directories the most possibility of receiving unbiased feedback about the firm, and its all-round service that goes beyond the substance of the work itself. For Chambers, referee response can contribute to roughly 55% of the research methodology. Therefore, to think that referees are not important or to not pay attention to them can be a costly mistake. 

Availability trumps popularity 

In choosing referees for a research cycle, it is important to consider who is available and will have the time to speak to the researchers or complete the survey forms. The referee does not have to be the CEO or COO of the client’s company. It is enough to have an integral member of the team, who may not be as popular or senior on the team but has the time and knowledge to provide the feedback and information needed for the research process. 

Familiarity over seniority 

This point flows from point 2 above. The chosen referee should be a person familiar with the team of lawyers and the advice provided to the client in the past year. Ideally, the referee should be the person that has liaised with the firm and lawyers on the matters, who is able to describe the work sufficiently, mention the names of the lawyers active on the matter and what the roles of each lawyer was on the matter. The closer you get to choosing a referee to meet all of these requirements, the better. Similarly, the referee should be the person that has worked with the team recently (preferably in the past year) to ensure that their feedback is relevant to the research, and they also have fresh remembrance of the team of lawyers and their roles on the matter. The referees should also be a good mix of existing and new clients. Existing clients already know how the team works, would most likely be more familiar with the team members and may be more comfortable speaking about the team. Including new clients helps to add some diversity to the referee list and to ensure that the same list of names are not recycled year after year. 

Prior notice is key 

No one enjoys being barged with multiple emails about some research that they know nothing about. It is important to inform referees in advance or at the start of research so that they can expect to receive the emails from researchers and attend to them. Even if the referee is familiar with the directory and has been part of the research in past years, there is no harm in informing them that they will be contacted again, this time for the research.  

Remember to follow up 

It is not enough to inform the referee that they will be contacted, it is helpful that firms follow up with their referees to find out if they got the researchers’ emails and if they have provided feedback. By now, spam filters, firewall blocks should sound familiar as they almost always happen with some referees when they are contacted. Following up helps to know if there are such issues and helps to ensure that they get sorted on time. If the firm has subscribed to tools like the Chambers Referee Management Tool, it will be helpful to maximise the use of these tools to track the status of the referee feedback rates. There are times when it may be helpful to also follow up with researchers about referees, as researchers are busy, it is important to not overdo the follow up process. For our thoughts on the best approach to following up with referees and researchers, see here.

Always remember, written feedback is possible

Rather than not providing any feedback at all, you can encourage your busy referees to provide written feedback to the directories. Most directories provide surveys to referees, even where they request calls, they will most likely accommodate written feedback via surveys, questionnaires and even emails. Encourage your clients to explore this option where their schedule does not permit getting on calls within the timeframe of the research. 

Guidelines matter 

It is typical of directories to state the maximum number of referees that they want each firm to put forward for each practice area. It is important to comply with this instruction by ensuring that enough referees are put forward and that extras are not too much. Also, where, as with Chambers and Partners, there are specific instructions as to the number of referees each referring partner can put forward, it is important to comply with such instructions. This is to ensure that all referees are contacted for the purpose of the research, and some are not left out simply because some partners put forward more names than they should. 

Non-client referees

It is worthy of note that referees can be other people apart from clients. They can include lawyers on the same side (not at your firm), or on the other side of deals, third parties such as professionals advising on the same deals like accountants, tax advisers, etc., arbitrators, barristers, and so on. In deciding to put forward any non-client referee, it is important to inform them in advance and pay attention to their availability, familiarity with the matter and the team at the firm and other necessary points mentioned above. 

Running out of time? Your referee list can help out 

If you are ever running out of time with the submissions and research is about to start, uploading the referee list in the meantime helps to save the day. While you ask for that extension or try to get the submission done as quickly as possible, the uploaded referee list gives the researchers something to work with and they can contact referees already while awaiting the submission. 

Next time you are preparing a referee list for the purpose of a directory research, consider all the points above and see how helpful those referee comments can be for achieving your ranking goals. 

The post Referee Management 101 – For Chambers and other Directories (Tips from an ex-senior researcher at Chambers) appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Ranking Statistics: Key Figures Across Jurisdictions

Spain demonstrated an 8% increase in ranked departments, bringing the total to 684. The rankings expanded to include 11 new firms, with 1,539 individual lawyer rankings, including 63 star associates. Additionally, there was a notable 9% rise in junior partners ranked, bringing the count of up-and-comers to 85.

Romania increased to 134 department rankings and 246 lawyer rankings. The country now leads Europe in female lawyer representation, with 53% of its ranked lawyers being women.

The Benelux region saw department rankings rise from 720 to 778, and the number of ranked firms grew from 188 to 200. Austria’s department rankings expanded from 228 to 253, while Switzerland’s rankings increased from 209 to 223.

Competition law rankings saw slight growth, with 649 submissions, 445 departments across 298 firms, and 877 ranked lawyers, including 83 new individuals entering the rankings.

Spain and Romania: Market Growth and Notable Developments

Key market trends in Spain include growing interest from Latin American investors, evolving regulatory developments, and Barcelona’s rise as a technology hub, although Madrid remains the country’s dominant legal market. Significant structural updates to the rankings were also introduced, including the separation of arbitration and litigation tables in dispute resolution, the launch of the first-ever ESG rankings table, and the opening of submissions for a new transportation table.

Romania’s legal market has seen notable expansion in corporate M&A, competition law, and dispute resolution, reinforcing its growing regional influence.

Benelux, Austria, and Switzerland: Regional Market Shifts

In the Netherlands, standalone tables for arbitration and litigation were introduced, while mass torts emerged as a significant trend, highlighting the increasing prominence of collective actions. ESG litigation, particularly greenwashing claims, is gaining traction in the Dutch market.

Belgium, despite some uncertainty linked to political changes, remains relatively stable. In Austria, the introduction of a new TMT Data Protection section reflects a growing area of legal focus. However, Austria’s market has been affected by the insolvency of Signa, signaling deeper economic concerns. Luxembourg’s real estate sector faced challenges, although fund financing and fund litigation experienced growth.

Switzerland reflects cautious optimism in its transactional market despite underlying concerns. The country also saw the introduction of a dedicated Sports table.

Competition Law Trends: Evolving Legal Challenges

Competition law remains a dynamic area, with significant growth in contentious competition-related work, particularly follow-on damages claims. The enforcement of the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) regime and foreign subsidies regulation is gaining prominence, with potential shifts expected depending on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.

The EU’s Digital Markets Act enforcement is a key area to monitor, while ESG-related competition work remains limited, except for cases linked to greenwashing. The food and retail sectors are seeing an increase in competition investigations due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis. Additionally, ‘no-poach’ agreements are becoming an increasingly relevant topic for competition law specialists.

Upcoming Webinars and Further Engagement

To assist firms in navigating the evolving research landscape, Chambers will host the following upcoming webinars:

• Europe Research Webinar – Hosted by Thomas Morton Green on April 8, 2025.
• Spain Research Webinar – Hosted by Camilla Russo on April 10, 2025.

The post Chambers Europe Guide 2025: Key Insights from the Launch Webinar appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The post Webinar Invitation: Chambers RMT – Everything You Need to Know appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

1. Core Elements of a Strong Submission

• Work Highlights: Submissions should include detailed and significant matters from the past 12 months. Focus on innovation, complexity, and relevance to the market.
• Referee Feedback: Chambers places significant weight on feedback from clients and peers. Ensure referees can speak to your technical expertise, client service, and cross-border capabilities where applicable.

2. Submission Strategy: Tailor for Impact

• Prioritize Quality Over Quantity: For jurisdictions or heavily subscribed categories, focus on your firm’s most impressive highlights. However, aim to include the maximum number of matters (20) to demonstrate the depth of your practice.
• Referee Management: Submit all referees at the earliest deadline to streamline contact and avoid the “three-month rule,” which may limit repeated outreach.
• Adapt for Practice Areas: While the core submission principles are consistent across Chambers guides, adjust for jurisdictional nuances, such as the UK’s granular practice area categories versus broader global listings.

3. Optimizing Lawyer and Firm Presentation

• Bios: Highlight key achievements and a snapshot of recent, impactful work. Use concise, specific examples and avoid overly generic descriptions.
• About Us Section: Focus on what makes your team unique—industry expertise, generational depth, or specific standout capabilities. Avoid generic claims and ensure clarity.
• Feedback Section: Provide objective insights into market dynamics, competitor comparisons, and your firm’s positioning to strengthen your case.

4. Refining Matters for Submissions

• Grouping Matters: Combine related cases (e.g., similar transactions for the same client) but avoid overloading a single highlight with disparate elements.
• Cross-Practice Submissions: It’s acceptable to use the same highlight across different practice areas, but tailor the narrative to emphasize the relevant aspects for each area.

5. Interactions with Chambers Researchers

• Interviews: Partner interviews are an opportunity to provide clarity on niche practice areas or unique strengths but will not directly influence rankings. Prepare to use this time effectively.
• Market Feedback: Researchers also gather insights from peers in the market, which may influence their understanding of your firm’s standing.

6. Practical Tips for Success

• Stay On Time: While missing deadlines won’t automatically penalize you, late submissions may result in less thorough review.
• Include All Relevant Team Members: Acknowledge all contributors to a matter, even from other practice areas, but clarify their roles to avoid confusion.
• Use Data Effectively: Highlight deal values in transactional practices, but emphasize innovation and complexity in non-transactional areas.

Conclusion

Chambers submissions are both an art and a science, requiring a blend of strategy, precision, and storytelling. By focusing on your firm’s unique strengths, carefully managing referees, and adhering to submission best practices, you can enhance your rankings and visibility in this competitive landscape.

For additional support or tailored advice, feel free to reach out to Tier One Rankings for expert guidance. Stay tuned for more webinars and resources to help your firm excel!

The post Chambers Success Strategies: Key Insights from the Webinar Q&A appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Recognizing these hurdles, Chambers has introduced a new opportunity tailored specifically for SME-focused firms – the SME-focused Firms section. 

This innovative section offers a streamlined submission process that focuses more on a firm’s client base rather than individual work highlights. Notably, Chambers is not requiring client referees for this category this year.

This category is designed to provide a platform for firms that may not have the same resources as larger competitors but have a roster of satisfied clients whom they support on a variety of issues, including corporate matters, disputes, financing, restructuring, and tax.

Unlike traditional submissions, which typically require 20 unique work highlights, the SME-focused Firms section requests firms to describe their relationships with ten key clients they regularly work with. This approach aims to provide a comprehensive picture of the firm’s practice while reducing the burden of compiling extensive documentation.

Open to firms across the UK, including Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, it is nonetheless important to note that firms with three or more department rankings in Chambers UK are not eligible for this category.

If your firm fits the criteria and would like to apply, submissions are open until April 17th. 

For more information and access to the submission template, please visit: https://chambers.com/topics/showcasing-smaller-law-firms-across-the-uk

The post Introducing Chambers UK’s New Opportunity for SME-focused Law Firms appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

From the Lawyers’ Perspective: Lawyers approach directory submissions with a desire to showcase their prowess comprehensively. This often involves delving into complex case specifics and legal nuances, utilizing elaborate legal terminology to underscore their accomplishments. The aim is to present a detailed and comprehensive picture of their expertise.

The Researchers’ Viewpoint: On the other side of the spectrum, researchers tasked with evaluating these submissions seek clarity, impact, and contextual narratives. They prioritize concise, results-oriented descriptions that effectively communicate key achievements, highlight the significance of cases, and emphasize the value delivered to clients. Researchers look for information that is not only informative but also digestible and to the point.

Bridging the Gap: The challenge lies in finding a middle ground that satisfies both parties. To create impactful submissions, lawyers should focus on emphasizing outcomes, client impact, and succinct case studies. This involves striking a delicate balance between providing essential details and presenting content in a reader-friendly manner that resonates with researchers.

Know Your Audience: It’s crucial for lawyers to keep in mind that researchers handle a substantial volume of submissions during each cycle. Therefore, clarity and brevity significantly aid their review process. Crafting submissions that are clear, concise, and directly relevant to the criteria set by the directories not only expedites the review process but also bolsters the chances of being recognized.

In conclusion, aligning lawyers’ aspirations with researchers’ needs in legal directory submissions involves understanding the importance of clear communication and the significance of presenting information in a format that is both informative and easily digestible. By recognizing and addressing these needs, legal professionals can enhance the effectiveness of their submissions and maximize their visibility within the legal community.

The post Legal Directory Submissions: What Lawyers Want vs. What Researchers Need appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

• Written submissions are vital. It is the main source of information about the team and its work, providing context by telling the researcher exactly what the firm is doing. This can help to make client and peer feedback much more meaningful.
  
• In the “About Us” section (often at the beginning of the document), you must introduce the researcher to the firm and its strengths with the use of hard facts and statistics. Do not use this box to express views on the previous rankings – that will come later on!
  
• The matters you put forward make up the bulk of the submission. What is complex will depend mostly on context and the broader market will have an opinion on this too. My advice here is to think about cross-border elements, innovative structures, new legislation, impressive deal values, etc.
  
• Mastering the matter descriptions is crucial. Aim to break them up into two main sections: the first should explain who the client is and what you are doing for them, while the second dives into the uniqueness and complexity of the case (i.e. what sets it apart from routine work).
  
• Do not, however, get too carried away with the descriptions. Make sure the matters are not too long – aim to strike the perfect balance between detail and compactness. And avoid using marketing speech!
  
• There is no need for more than 20 matters – too much can serve to create a less focused submission. You should be including up-to-date matters that encompass a wide range of sectors, where possible.
  
• Aim to provide matters led by various individuals – but be selective here: those you wish to have added/promoted in the rankings should be leading a good chunk of the matters put forward. I’d also recommended mentioning desired promotees/additions in the shop window – it’s the first section researchers will read and thus will be sowed into their minds as they read on.
   
• The size of the team is important, of course, but do not be tempted to drive up the numbers for the sake of filling in boxes – the numbers put forward should be reflected in the matters.

The post Unlocking Success: Tips from a Former Legal 500 Researcher appeared first on Tier One Rankings.