- LittleLaw
- Posts
- 📈 Why UK firms keep merging with US firms
📈 Why UK firms keep merging with US firms

Table of Contents
If you take just one thing from this email...
UK law firms have been merging a lot this year. The latest is Hogan Lovells’ proposed merger with Cadwalader
These mergers aren’t just about growing in size — they’re a business move to win more profitable work in a market that is growing slowly.
By merging with a US firm strong in private capital, a firm like Hogan Lovells gets access to clients who generate steady, high-fee work. Also, the new, combined firm can offer more services to the same clients and take a bigger share of their legal spend.

EDITOR’S RAMBLE 🗣
I know a lot of you are doing law firm applications over the Christmas break.
(I really don’t understand why some deadlines are on 31 December 🤬)
Because of that, LittleLaw isn’t stopping. We’ll keep publishing as normal, every Wednesday, right through the holidays.
That said — nothing terrible will happen if you slow down for a couple of days.
So, I’m giving you permission to do that. You’ve worked hard this year, and taking a short break won’t set you back (it’ll probably help).
So yes, the newsletter will keep coming if you’re working. But if you need to step away, do it without guilt.
Enjoy your Christmas, properly. 🎅🏼
– Idin
P.S. I’m running a session with Linklaters in January. I’ll break down how a law firm actually works as a business. If you’re interested, sign up here.

FEATURED REPORT 📰
📈 Why UK firms keep merging with US firms

What’s going on here?
This week, Hogan Lovells said it plans to merge with Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft.
The deal is not final yet — partners at both firms still need to vote on it. That vote is expected in early 2026.
If approved, the new firm will be called Hogan Lovells Cadwalader.
It would become the world’s fifth-largest law firm by revenue and have more than 3,000 lawyers worldwide.
What’s the background of the two firms?
Hogan Lovells was created in 2010. It came from a merger between the American firm Hogan & Hartson and the UK firm Lovells.
That merger gave the firm two main headquarters — one in London and another in Washington DC.
Right now, Hogan Lovells has a wide US footprint. It runs 15 offices across major cities, including New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Boston, and Denver.
But there is a gap. The firm is weaker in some practice areas that matter most to big US private equity clients. These are the areas that drive large, high-fee deals.
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft brings different strengths. It was founded in 1792, making it Wall Street’s oldest law firm.
The firm is deeply rooted in New York and is known for specialist work in fund finance, securitisation, and derivatives. These are core areas for US private equity and financial institutions.
Why have Hogan Lovells and Cadwalader decided to merge?
Both firms are facing problems they don’t think they can fix alone.
What’s in it for Cadwalader?
Cadwalader has had a tough period. Since January, 33 partners have left the firm — with ten of them moving to rival US firm Orrick in October.
The firm has also faced public criticism over a deal it made linked to Donald Trump. To avoid harsh executive orders that could have limited its work with the US government, Cadwalader agreed to provide $100 million of pro bono legal services. These services must support causes approved by Trump.
All of this created a sense of instability inside the firm.
But Cadwalader is hoping that joining a larger, global firm will offer it a reset — calming internal tensions and stopping the partner exits.
What’s in it for Hogan Lovells?
Hogan Lovells has been selective with its merger partner.
In March 2023, it walked away from a possible merger with Shearman & Sterling. The reason was that Hogan Lovells was not comfortable with Shearman’s financial position. (In May 2023, Shearman & Sterling announced its proposed merger with Allen & Overy instead).
Despite the firm’s recent controversy, Cadwalader’s finances are strong. Also, Hogan Lovells wants deeper access to private equity work. These clients need a lot of legal support and pay premium fees.
Cadwalader brings exactly that.
It has long-standing relationships with banks, funds, and private capital providers. This gives Hogan Lovells access to clients it has struggled to reach on its own.
The fit goes further.
Hogan Lovells is strong in financial regulation, disputes, and investigations. These are the extra services private equity clients often need after a deal closes.
Put together, the merged firm can handle deals and everything that follows.
That makes Hogan Lovells Cadwalader a one-stop shop for large private capital clients.
How is this part of a wider trend?
This merger isn’t a one-off event.
Over the past year, several UK law firms have announced mergers with US firms:
Together, they point to a clear pattern.
UK–US mergers are becoming the default growth strategy for large law firms.
The trigger for this wave was the merger between Allen & Overy and Shearman & Sterling, which completed in 2024.
That deal changed expectations across the market.
What is driving the wave of law firm mergers?
There are a few reasons for the increase in UK–US mergers.
🔻 The market is no longer expanding
The core problem is that the legal market isn’t growing like it used to.
Demand for high-value legal work (big M&A transactions, financings, and major disputes) is flatter than it’s been in the past. When a market stops expanding, firms can’t grow by capturing new demand — that’s too slow. The only way to grow fast is to take work from competitors.
🤝 When two firms merge, a competitor disappears overnight
The combined firm can offer existing clients a wider range of services. It can say, “We already act for you on this work, and now we can handle that stuff too.” For clients, this is usually a welcome change — it means fewer firms to manage and a more joined-up service. Over time, that allows the merged firm to take a larger share of work that already exists.
💰 Scale brings financial power
Once both firms’ finances are combined, the merged firm has access to more capital than either firm did alone. That money can be deployed more aggressively. For example, it can allow a firm to invest in expensive technology (like new AI platforms), which smaller firms struggle to fund. It also lets them pay larger joining bonuses and profit guarantees to attract top talent (including partners who might bring their clients with them).
📉 Not merging can mean falling behind
In a legal market where lots of similar-sized firms are competing with each other, mergers make it so fewer, larger firms control more of the work. And if you don’t join that trend, you risk being left behind.
Why are UK firms merging specifically with US firms?
In short, because there’s more money to be made in the US.
🌍 The centre of gravity has shifted
In the 2000s, UK firms focused on expanding into Europe. After the 2008 financial crisis, Asia Pacific — particularly China — became the main growth target. Over the past decade, attention has moved decisively to the US.
That’s because the most profitable legal work is now concentrated there, especially in New York and, to a lesser extent, Washington DC. This work is driven by private equity, private credit, and hedge fund clients, who control a large share of global deal activity.
💼 Private capital dominates the most lucrative work
These clients generate more consistent work than traditional corporates. A company might run one IPO in a decade or one major M&A deal every few years. By contrast, private capital sponsors operate on repeat cycles — raising funds every three to five years, acquiring and selling portfolio companies, and regularly refinancing debt through private credit. That creates steady demand for legal advice and supports higher fees.
🇺🇸 US firms have the client relationships
US law firms have a natural advantage in this market. When private capital first developed, it did so in the US, using US advisers. As a result, US firms built long-standing relationships with these clients early on. Even today, global sponsors often prefer a US firm as lead counsel.
UK firms find it hard to access this work on their own. Merging with a US firm solves that problem. It gives them direct access to private capital clients and US-level profits, without forcing them to abandon their global platforms.
🧠 These mergers benefit US firms too
A lot of US firms are overexposed to private capital work. That’s profitable when markets are active, but risky if deal flow slows.
London still plays a critical role in global legal services. It’s a centre for global corporates and complex cross-border transactions, and its time zone connects Asia and the US within a single working day.
A UK merger helps US firms diversify their revenue and reduce concentration risk.
That’s why these mergers work well for both sides.
How can you use this in your applications?
If you understand why there’s a trend of law firms merging, you can show you understand how law firms operate as businesses — not just legal advisers.
Let’s go through some of the insights from this story, and how you can use it in your applications.
Insight | Why it matters | How to use it in your applications |
|---|---|---|
Law firms can’t rely on market growth anymore | Demand for high-value legal work isn’t what it used to be. So firms can’t increase revenue just by waiting for more work to appear. To grow, they have to win work away from other firms. | You can explain that mergers are a way for firms to grow in a slow-growth market. Instead of relying on new demand, firms merge to improve their position and compete more effectively for existing work. |
Mergers reduce competition | When two firms merge, there is one less competitor in the market. | Explain that fewer firms are chasing the same work. That can strengthen the merged firm’s position with clients. |
Cross-selling increases revenue from existing clients | A merged firm can offer more services to the same clients. This allows it to do more work for clients it already has, instead of constantly trying to win new ones. | When discussing a law firm merger, don’t just say it will have “a broader service offering”. Finding new clients is time-consuming and expensive. Explain how cross-selling helps the firm increase revenue from existing clients. |
Larger firms can invest and attract talent more easily | Larger firms typically have more money. That gives them more freedom to invest in expensive technology, and to offer high joining bonuses or profit guarantees to attract lateral hires. | You can explain that scale allows a firm to take a more ambitious long-term approach. For example, it can invest more heavily in AI technology to improve efficiency, or use financial incentives to recruit partners who bring clients with them, strengthening revenue over time. |
Not merging can be a risk | As firms around you get bigger, staying small can make it harder to compete. Clients may prefer firms with broader capabilities, and top lawyers may move to firms that can pay more. | This helps you show balanced judgement. You can explain that mergers are sometimes defensive — a way to avoid falling behind — not just a sign of ambition. |
If you mention these kinds of insights, it shows you understand how law firms actually operate as a business — and how a merger fits into a firm’s wider strategy.

IN OTHER NEWS 🗞
⚖️ The Mazur case is being appealed in The Court of Appeal. This appeal will take place in February 2026, much sooner than planned. The appeal follows a High Court ruling that said only authorised people can conduct litigation. That decision caused concern because many law firms rely on paralegals and legal executives to handle parts of litigation work. Some lawyers say the ruling is wrong and has created uncertainty, with possible effects on access to justice and diversity.
🏦 The Bank of England has cut interest rates to 3.75%, the lowest level in almost three years. The reasons for the cut are that the economy is slowing, unemployment is rising, and prices are not rising as fast as before. Put simply, higher interest rates slow spending and cool prices, while lower rates are meant to give the economy a lift. Some policymakers still worry inflation could stick around, but for now the Bank thinks rates should keep coming down, carefully and step by step.
⚖️ The government plans to reverse a Supreme Court ruling that made litigation funding much harder to use. The PACCAR decision in 2023 caused litigation funders to pull back, leaving many big claims stuck or dropped (here’s PACCAR explained). Put simply, litigation funding helps people pay for expensive court cases, and without it many claims never get off the ground. The government says changing the law will restore balance and keep the UK attractive for major legal disputes, though some businesses fear more claims and higher costs.

AROUND THE WEB 🌐
🧽 Handy: A stain guide that tells you how to clean anything off anything (based on the stain and fabric)
🎲 Decisions: Need to choose a film to watch? Instead of a coin toss, use this fun animation
🧩 Game: A crossword puzzle but one letter is missing

STUFF THAT MIGHT HELP YOU 👌
💻️ Free application advice: Check out my YouTube channel for actionable tips and an insight into the lifestyle of a commercial lawyer in London.
📁 Law firm application bank: A growing library of real, verified successful applications for training contracts and vacation schemes. Helpful if you want to learn from others who answered the same questions you’re stuck on.
📝 Write winning law firm applications: A practical course to help you write clearer applications, faster. Avoid common mistakes, learn how to structure answers properly, and get lifetime access to future updates. Try it for 14 days, risk free.
How did you find today's newsletter? |