INTERVIEW
Fraser Whitehead
talks to Amanda Lathia of TWM Solicitors
A
fter a long association with this local law society Fraser Whitehead has moved on. His career began in 1973 in Chancery Lane as an articled clerk with a firm now part of DLA Piper. Forty-six years later, having worked for only one other firm and moving no further than Gray’s Inn Road, a full-time career came to end just doors from where it began. AL Has much changed in that time? FW Well yes and the pace of change is increasing. Let us start with training. In 1973 I would spend one day a week at Companies House doing searches and another doing the outdoor clerking at the courts and the rest sitting with my “Principal”. We were not employees but chartered “to be bound to and obey” and sometimes unpaid or even having to pay for the privilege. Most of the partners wore bowler hats. Mine lunched at Simpsons. As law graduates, we had passed the legal theory exams taken over five gruelling days, but it was learning by rote. “Pay cash is not a cheque,” lingers on, with many others. There was no practical training so there was a lot of trial and error and therefore little client contact. One of my first responsibilities was to draft a deed adding a new partner to a large accountancy client. I thought it would be an opportunity to also rearrange the partners names alphabetically. It was not, apparently, but I somehow survived. So, training is very much improved though it is easy to see why some view the new PQE regime as a step back. The legal support and technology changes have been substantial and perhaps more than you can imagine. In 1973 we had a machine room with a small photo copier and a very large metal box from which a specialist typist that could produce an original deed and a duplicate. When I joined Russell Jones & Walker in 1975 it was known as a relatively progressive London firm. As in other firms, many senior fee earners were legal executives, very able but often with no formal professional qualifications. I was one of about thirty lawyers, as we were all known to imply a less hierarchical structure. But all lawyers were male and all white. Women in the firm worked in secretarial and administrative support functions. On the first day, being a solicitor, I was given a largish office with a desk, a large chair, a pen and ink holder, a large blotting paper holder and a pile of files. There was a second smaller chair where my secretary would later sit to take shorthand and produce typed letters with carbon copies for the file. I read the files, read large books from the library shelves, dictated letters and drafted documents. I recall being impressed with the eloquence of my first outputs. Asking smugly if I had really said what I now read. “Not exactly” was the smiling reply. On become a partner in 1978 aged twenty-seven, I moved to an even bigger room. After forty-five years and now very senior, I was sharing a desk, in a large open space, where I read files and books on a screen and mostly typed slow and badly using auto correct and spell check. For most of the last few years I reported to a woman from the other side of the world. I learned a lot. So, the technology firm culture and structure had changed but the core job had not. Read, think, get it right, advise, do. 18 | CENTRAL LONDON LAWYER
When I stated in the law partnerships were limited to twenty and even the largest firms were small to medium by today’s standards, and the profession was just over 40,000. Both have increased enormously, and we are no longer just profession owned businesses. In the last five years it has been noticeable that the application of technology has leapt forward and now is not only assisting but reshaping the qualified lawyer function. I cannot see the profession continuing to increase in size and it will more likely shrink. Probably we will have to reclassify both what we mean by the word lawyer and, more importantly, what distinguishes the title solicitor, if we are to retain value in that brand. AL You worked for Slater & Gordon in specialised litigation. Could you tell me more about your time with that firm? FW We need to start with Russell Jones and Walker which was known as the blue-chip claimant dispute resolution firm, and where I enjoyed a long and successful career for nearly forty years. In 1975 we had just joined the EU and the Sex Discrimination Act had become law in November. In 1976 I brought a Tribunal case for a Ms Garland against her employer BREL. It was the first sex discrimination case to be referred by the House of Lords to the European Court of Justice and we won. The case also established principle of direct effect of EU law. So, a relatively glittering start. As a firm mostly representing workers and unions at time when labour relations were dominating the news we were working at the heart of the political and legal agenda. In 1980 I was back in the House of Lords in the leading case on secondary strike action and winning, having lost before Lord Denning in the Court of Appeal. We steadily grew the business from four partners in one office to a fifty-partner firm with ten offices thought the UK, with an excellent client base and a classified as a top fifty firm. I headed a number of departments over that time, and we had a well-run and cohesive partnership. There was a strong work ethic but also a lot of fun. We had the balance just right. You see much less of that in firms today. In 2012, then one of the largest firms in our fields, we were taken over by Slater & Gordon. In sense, and as it turned out, a victim of own success. S&G was an international and publicly listed law firm based in Australia with a similar client base and a particular strength in class actions. I switched from my then role of Head of Group litigation in RJW to a similar role in S&G and joined the UK Board. We remained part of the international listed law firm until 2017 when S&G internationally experienced serious debt problems and was taken over by an American Hedge Fund, who broke us off from the Australian PLC. I was the last member of the UK LLP other than the hedge fund, who now own both but as separate businesses. In my final year I was involved in cases in the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. I concluded my last case, a group action, at a late-night ADR on my 68th birthday. We finished just in time for a beer. There are now almost no RJW people left at S&G. The firm is much changed and today seems to be barely a law firm. It is sad to have no alma mater to be proud of. AL What attracted you to litigation? FW In training I had experienced, commercial, commercial property and commercial litigation work and my fourth and final was to
