header-logo header-logo

12 November 2018
Issue: 7817 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Employment
printer mail-detail

Lawyers in the gig economy

Platform law firms on the rise as lawyers embrace flexibility

The gig economy is taking hold in the legal sector, with more than 1,000 lawyers now working remotely at ‘platform’ law firms.

Platform firms—such as Keystone Law, which recently listed on the London Stock Exchange, Excello Law and gunnercooke—allow lawyers to step outside of the traditional firm structure and have more choice in how they work. Lawyers at these firms are usually self-employed and work remotely using shared services such as accounting, IT, marketing and compliance provided by a central hub.

According to research by accountants Hazlewoods, the number of UK lawyers working for platform firms has risen 29% to 1,035 in 2018, up from 803 in 2017.

The advantage for lawyers is they can work flexibly, avoid the legal profession’s long hours culture, choose how much attention they pay to marketing versus fee-earning, and keep a higher percentage of the fees they charge. It’s a model well-suited to parents or those who don’t want to commute.

Platform firms usually have fewer overhead costs on rent and on-site IT staff, which they argue means they can offer high-quality services at lower rates. They can also expand into niche markets or into geographical regions without a large presence of traditional law firms.

Jon Cartwright, partner at Hazlewoods, said: ‘The continued growth of platform law firms reflects the enthusiasm in the legal sector to adapt to new ways of working.

‘It is also part of broader trend amongst lawyers to be more entrepreneurial, to strike out on their own. Some because they want to do things their way, some because they feel big law firms involve too much politics and others because they feel they are getting enough out of the fees they earn.

‘Platform law firms are also tapping into the trend of placing greater importance on the work/life balance across many sectors, not just in law firms.’

Issue: 7817 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll