Inhouse legal team of the year: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{a|people|}}To bring some rigour to the annual Awards season, the JC is pleased to announce the judging criteria for inhouse legal team of the year award. *'''ti..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|people|}}To bring some rigour to the annual [[Awards]] season, the [[JC]] is pleased to announce the judging criteria for [[inhouse legal team of the year]] award. | {{a|people|}}To bring some rigour to the annual [[Awards]] season, the [[JC]] is pleased to announce the judging criteria for [[inhouse legal team of the year]] award. | ||
*''' | *'''Timeliness of instructions''': How reliably close you can get to the magical Friday, 6pm deadline before dropping a “first rrequired by open of buisness tomorrow” instruction on your external advisors; | ||
*'''Can I speak to a partner please''': | *'''Inexplicable delay''': For how many days you can leave draft whose immediate turnaround you signalled was as a matter of life and death, and which necessitated your legal team rearranging plans for the theatre, wedding anniversaries and so on, before deigning to look at the email. | ||
*'''Can I speak to a partner please''': the degree of disdain you show should junior members of the external team endeavour to answer your elementary questions about the draft they spent sixteen hours preparing; | |||
*'''Red-herring ninjadom''': How comprehensive and particular is your knowledge of the punctuation, typography, weight and leading of your employer’s legal name wherever it should appear in a prospectus; | |||
*'''Most pedantic mark-up''': outside the inherent pedantry of the [[red herring]], how prepared are you to make superficial amendments to perfectly sound legal drafting; | |||
*'''Throw the associate under the bus''': How shamelessly will you blame the most junior member of outside counsel team — the same one whose name you keep forgetting and whose legal assurances count for nothing in the “can I speak to a partner please” category — for neglecting to prepare and circulate “critical legal documentation” that has, in fact, been in your inbox since 4.30 am on the Saturday morning immediately following your request for it. | |||
Revision as of 14:09, 2 December 2019
|
People Anatomy™
A spotter’s guide to the men and women of finance.
|
To bring some rigour to the annual Awards season, the JC is pleased to announce the judging criteria for inhouse legal team of the year award.
- Timeliness of instructions: How reliably close you can get to the magical Friday, 6pm deadline before dropping a “first rrequired by open of buisness tomorrow” instruction on your external advisors;
- Inexplicable delay: For how many days you can leave draft whose immediate turnaround you signalled was as a matter of life and death, and which necessitated your legal team rearranging plans for the theatre, wedding anniversaries and so on, before deigning to look at the email.
- Can I speak to a partner please: the degree of disdain you show should junior members of the external team endeavour to answer your elementary questions about the draft they spent sixteen hours preparing;
- Red-herring ninjadom: How comprehensive and particular is your knowledge of the punctuation, typography, weight and leading of your employer’s legal name wherever it should appear in a prospectus;
- Most pedantic mark-up: outside the inherent pedantry of the red herring, how prepared are you to make superficial amendments to perfectly sound legal drafting;
- Throw the associate under the bus: How shamelessly will you blame the most junior member of outside counsel team — the same one whose name you keep forgetting and whose legal assurances count for nothing in the “can I speak to a partner please” category — for neglecting to prepare and circulate “critical legal documentation” that has, in fact, been in your inbox since 4.30 am on the Saturday morning immediately following your request for it.