header-logo header-logo

04 May 2016
Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail

Ron Whitlam—hlw Keeble Hawson

Senior partner & co-founder retires after 24 years

hlw Keeble Hawson senior partner, Ron Whitlam, is stepping down after almost a quarter of a century at the firm.

Ron became the third partner of hlw, then called Hartley Linfoot and Whitlam—heading it alongside Andrew Hartley and John Linfoot—when he joined in 1992.

A licensed insolvency practitioner whose cases include the administration of a number of Football League clubs, Ron was managing partner of hlw from 1995. When the practice merged with Keeble Hawson in 2011, he played an instrumental role in the milestone which brought together two of Yorkshire’s best-respected legal names.

The senior partner has headed the litigation anddispute resolution department of hlw Keeble Hawson for 5 years.

Graduating with a First in Law from Cambridge University and joining what is now DLA Piper, where he qualified in 1979, Ron has witnessed the legal sector undergo a series of seismic changes over the past 37 years

He says: “The shifts in the legal landscape have been phenomenal in almost four decades. For the first eight years of my career, solicitors were banned from advertising their services until the law changed in 1987. Unprecedented technological developments have also dramatically changed the pace and delivery of legal services with more recent milestones including the introduction of alternative business structures, which opened our profession to non-lawyers.”

hlw Keeble Hawson’s managing partner, Paul Trudgill, says: “Ron’s retirement marks the end of an era for the firm. Over the last 24 years he has made a major contribution to its growth and establishment as one of the leading law practices in the area.

“Ron is hugely respected—not only by his professional colleagues within hlw Keeble Hawson—but also by his clients for his practical and commercial approach to finding workable solutions to problems. One of his principal legacies is the way in which he has helped others in his team to develop their experience and expertise to ensure that the firm can continue to provide a similar level of service to its clients after his retirement, as they have previously enjoyed from Ron. We wish him a long and relaxing retirement after all his hard work for the firm.”

Nominations for the Halsbury Legal Awards 2016, in association with NLJ, are now open. Visit the site to view all the categories and enter online. #Halsbury2016

Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll