Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
With a limited pool of experts to choose from, law firms face a number of challenges in choosing the right expert witness when it comes to banking, investment and insurance disputes. There may also be occasions where more than one expert is required to cover different areas of specialisation. Below Lawyer Monthly hears from Paul Rex at GBRW Expert Witness Limited, on the issues involved in filling the expert witness role in banking cases.
What are common cases you are instructed on as an expert witness?
Our company’s focus is on our core areas of banking, investment and insurance. These cover a wide range of activities, which I can illustrate by listing specific areas where we have provided expert reports:
Banking
Derivatives; Commercial property lending; Syndicated lending; Residential property lending; Trade finance; Structured finance; Banking operations; Borrowing frauds; Contributory negligence.
Investments
Investment managers’ responsibilities; Complex investments; Quantum calculations for alternative portfolios or investment scenarios; Fraud; Investment performance: analysis of a wide range of UK and non-UK investment portfolios; Market practice; Trading practices; Settlement procedures.
Insurance
Insurance Broking, including brokers’ duties to clients on preparation of proposals, notification of insured events and other communications with underwriters; Underwriting decisions; Reports for insured parties and underwriters in cases where underwriters are seeking to avoid a policy; Disputes between insurers and reinsurers; and Personal insurance cover, including life and health insurance, residential property, PPI and motor claims.
Related areas
Intellectual Property; Commodity Trading; Derivatives Trading; Consulting fees for financial sector assignment; and Employment issues, including loss of earnings (often following accidents), performance bonus disputes, severance claims and employee benefit packages.
What process do you undergo when first instructed on a case? Can you share with Lawyer Monthly your step by step process?
The starting point for most engagements is a phone call or email from a law firm setting out a brief outline of the expertise required, the background to the case and the timescale for expert evidence. Deadlines for preparation and submission of reports are one of the most important aspects of this first discussion.
At this stage we will gather enough background to form a view on what type of expertise is required and then talk amongst our management team and with potential experts to see whose CVs we will put forward. We also conduct a conflicts check, to establish whether we can proceed with the engagement.
This generally leads to more disclosure on the background to the case and expert evidence required.
The law firm will then talk to one or more of the candidates we have put forward in order to make their selection decision.
Once an expert has been selected, GBRW Expert Witness signs an engagement letter with the instructing law firm and a matching engagement with the expert concerned. The law firm issues a letter of instruction directly to the expert and communicates directly with him or her from that point.
We bill on an hourly basis and do not make any charge for the expert search.
The steps described above may take place over a period of weeks or even months, but may also take place very rapidly when the case requires it – a number of our engagements have been concluded within 24 hours from the initial enquiry. We consider that two of our key USPs are our ability to assess what experts are best matched to a law firm’s requirements and then to propose well-qualified candidates as quickly as possible.
As an Expert Witness, what challenges do law firms looking to find the right expert face? How do you gather your expert opinion in such cases?
The pool of competent experts in financial sector litigation is surprisingly small and law firms looking for expert witnesses or advisers face a number of challenges:
Our experience - as experts ourselves and from working with our associates over an extended period - normally enables us to propose one or more candidates whom we consider the best equipped to address specific issues on which expert evidence is required. On occasions, we may suggest using more than one expert where the requirements of the case cannot be covered by a single individual.
What do you think makes a good financial sector expert witness?
A combination of factors, which are relevant to the fields in which we operate:
Is there anything you would like to add?
One of our major strengths is the activities of our affiliates GBRW Consulting and GBRW Learning, which often enable us to identify potential new experts when recent industry experience is important. These will not appear in the usual expert directories and websites.
We invest a lot of time in identifying and helping develop new experts. Our structured mentoring programme involves assisting them with research and presentation issues and carrying out a detailed critical review of their first draft and final reports. When required, we can also help prepare experts for the later stages of a dispute, such as experts’ meetings and cross-examination.
One key issue facing a new expert looking at their first case or two is the availability of PI cover, which is now essential since the Jones v Kaney ruling. Our mentoring approach also enables us to bring experts under the umbrella of GBRW Expert Witness’s PI policy when this is required.
GBRW Expert Witness Limited
T: +44 20 7562 8390 | M: +44 7710 324710
E: experts@gbrwexpertwitness.com
I am GBRW Expert Witness’s Managing Director and oversee its expert activities. I deal personally with lending and credit issues, which has included reports on banks’ analysis and approval procedures, trade finance and other forms of specialised lending. I’ve been cross-examined in several cases, most recently in the UK extradition hearing for the owner of Kingfisher Airlines in December last year. Of the 70 or so cases in which I’ve been involved, one of the most interesting was a dispute between two trade finance banks and the confectionery manufacturer Ferrero over a facility to finance the hazelnuts which went into the Ambassador’s favourite chocolates.
GBRW Expert Witness is a specialised practice based in the City of London which provides expert support, in the form of expert reports and/or advice, on banking, investment, insurance and other financial sector issues. This year our company celebrates our twenty-third anniversary of expert work. In the past ten years, our experts have worked on more than 600 cases involving civil and criminal court proceedings, arbitrations and mediations. Jurisdictions where we have worked include England and Wales, Scotland, Australia, Bahamas, Canada, Cayman Islands, Dubai, Hong Kong, Ireland, Jersey, New Zealand, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland and the United States.
Establishing a successful growing law firm in a fast-paced environment such as South Africa is quite a feat for any savvy businessperson. No less for Mr Thulani Matiki Norman Kgomo, attorney at TMN Kgomo & Associates, who since he was young was inspired by the best. Below he discusses his perspective on the South African legal landscape, some of the principal developments over the past few decades, and his vision for a better justice system.
How have you seen the world of law change since you began practising?
I have noticed a lot of changes in law from the way pleadings have been exchanged in the past compared with now. For example, most attorneys are using digital technology as a way of doing things; communicating via email and texts is the norm, but when we started 17 years ago, we would have to physically go and deliver documents to our opponents or to our clients. This is a very important change in the way law works in Africa in the past few years. There has now been a huge shift from paperwork to digital in most law firms.
Has this made your job easier?
It has definitely made my role a little easier. Another important change that has happened over the past few years, which ties into this, is the language that is used in Court. English is now widely and mostly used between colleagues and in Court. In the past, Afrikaans was most commonly used and if you wanted to specialise in law 20 years ago, you needed to know and be fluent in it. English is now the language of record and is used in all official communications, from drafting pleadings to correspondence with colleagues and clients.
Has this affected your work and clients?
I think the shift in language has made legal work a little easier. In the past it may have been the case that another attorney would communicate in Afrikaans and you would have to respond in English, which could cause problems between colleagues and translation. But now there is a common consensus that we are corresponding in English in our written and spoken discourse, making our work much easier.
What inspired you to specialise as an attorney?
When I was in high school, I wasn’t really exposed to that much career guidance. It was not uncommon for schools to not offer any information or help in regard to future work post graduating. With a lack of guidance and limited choices in which career to choose, you had to look up to specific role models, either on the TV or in newspapers, and follow them to help decide what career to pick. I was inspired by following the lives of Oliver Tambo and Nelson Mandela, because at that time they were the people who were constantly on the news and being spoken about in the 90s. That was what inspired me to become a lawyer.
Are there any developments in the South African legal sector you are advocating for?
I am advocating for changes in jurisprudence; in the future, we could move away from the western way of doing things, in terms of jurisprudence, to also look into African customs based in certain methods. The reason for this is that some of our more traditional officers don’t correctly interpret customary law when ruling on judgement, and that is due to a lack of understanding of various, different customs in South Africa. Therefore, I am advocating that if judicial officers and colleagues could understand customary law, to easily advise their clients on what needs to be done, how things are done, certain traditions and customs, and so on ...
Another issue which needs to be addressed is discrimination. No legal practitioner in our Court should face any discrimination, whether they are female, whether they are black, or younger than the rest; if you are admitted as an advocate, you should be treated and get the same respect as any of your colleagues that are appearing alongside you in Court. In some Courts, especially in smaller towns, there is still much discrimination. Senior male advocates and lawyers are often recognised and respected, but women, for example, are still not recognised as such and are majorly undermined. Young, upcoming attorneys also lack the respect they deserve.
Do you think there is a need for tighter restrictions on firearms in South Africa?
Yes, this is a very important question. If we do not have proper legislation in terms of firearm control, we may face similar situations such as those that have occurred in the US currently. I think the US is struggling to control the use of firearms, and if we do not start tightening our legislation, especially in terms of accessing firearm licences, we will face problems in the future. More so in terms of how firearms must be used and controlled by the licenced owner, because most of the time firearms are used by criminals. During investigations, we often find that firearms were taken from lawful owners, as they have been recklessly placed in cars or under their bed, not in safe-keeping as required by the authorities. Therefore, we need to tighten up these issues, in order to avoid the loss of our firearm freedoms.
What restrictions should be applied?
Legislation needs to be tighter and address: who is qualified to own the firearm and how many firearms one person can control. In comparison to other countries, it is easy to obtain a firearm licence in South Africa.
Another issue which I think is worth mentioning is the control of borders in South Africa. I think we are too flexible with our borders. We need more control over who has access to our borders. it is too easy to enter South Africa and lately, we have many illegal immigrants. although it is only a select few, of said legal immigrants, those who commit crimes we cannot trace due to lack of immigration records.
There have been many changes in legislation drafted and promulgated under president Cyril Ramaphosa; what further changes are you predicting? How do you expect this to affect your work?
I think changes will affect every legal practice. There are lot of changes coming in particular regards to issues dealing with land, and there are many amendments being made to our constitution. We must prepare, analyse and properly understand all of these changes.
Finally, what are three things you think make a good lawyer?
I think a good lawyer is one that is ethical, a lawyer that respects the general community in practical ways and a lawyer that respects his colleagues and the Courts. Lastly, a good lawyer is one that does not rush to comment or give advice that he or she has not done direct research on.
Is there anything you would like to add?
The last important thing I think I should comment on is that in the Courts and in the legal sphere, those involved must avoid getting into political debates, at all times, so that the Court can remain autonomous, respected and independent, without any political interference. This is very important in order to sustain our democracy. Therefore, if all lawyers could make it our second nature to enter Court without developing political debates, making neutral judgments, we will be able to build a strong, resilient justice system in our country.
I have discussed with colleagues and there have recently been judgements that were interfered with by political motives. We must remember that there is a separation of power where we must respect the work of the legislator and the legislator must respect the work of the executive and the judiciary.
Mr Thulani Matiki Norman Kgomo
Attorney
TMN Kgomo & Associates Inc.
TEL: 012 346 1346
FAX: 012 346 7487
info@kgomo.co.za
Mr Thulani Matiki Norman Kgomo started his legal profession at Kryyshaar & Jordaan Attorneys in Secunda Mpumalanga province, in September 1997 as a candidate attorney and was admitted as attorney in 2000. Qualifications: (B Proc. University of the North).
TMN Kgomo & Associates consists of a number of highly qualified professional attorneys. We are recognized as one of the leading law firms in Highveld Ridge District. A high premium is placed on the personal wellbeing of our directors, lawyers and support staff. We answer to all your legal requirements and offer professional and personalized services to a wide spectrum of clients.
Justin Shur speaks with Lawyer Monthly on conducting corporate internal investigations in the US and beyond, as well as successfully representing clients during government investigations.
Are enforcement actions by Department of Justice (DOJ) against non-US actors for overseas business practices a trend that is likely to continue?
US enforcement authorities have shown a willingness to prosecute foreign companies and executives for activities that occurred abroad. And there is no reason to believe that this trend will not continue. A number of American criminal laws apply beyond US borders. The FCPA, for example, permits the prosecution of individuals and businesses that engage in bribery overseas, even when the connection to the US is, at best, tenuous. Over the years, these types of cases have become increasingly common.
In fact, DOJ recently charged a foreign national, among others, in connection with an alleged scheme to bribe a Russian state-owned entity. While the allegations involved a US entity, the conduct at issue occurred largely outside the US. The alleged bribe payment moved through shell corporations in the Seychelles, the United Kingdom, and the British Virgin Islands, then to bank accounts in Cyprus, Latvia, and Switzerland. Until the legal limits of the US’s jurisdiction under these statutes are tested more fully, we can expect more actions by DOJ against non-US actors for overseas business practices.
In a government investigation, how do you successfully explain your client’s position to a prosecutor?
It can be very challenging because the prosecutor or regulator may have an extremely negative view that developed over time. But if you credibly explain why a certain request is reasonable or ultimately why the case does not warrant prosecution, in my experience, the government is going to listen and take you seriously. Credibility is the key. While I aggressively advocate on behalf of my clients, I do so without playing games. I’m candid about the evidence and straight forward about why prosecution is unwarranted. If you are a straight shooter and have a reputation for honesty and fair dealing, your representations to the government are more likely to be treated as reliable and credible. But if you make representations that turn out to be inaccurate, or take positions that are over the top and unsupported by evidence, your presentation will likely work against you.
What is the first step in a corporate internal investigation?
Developing a plan at the outset is essential to the success of any investigation. As part of the planning process, a decision needs to be made as to who will conduct and oversee the investigation and the scope and goals should be defined thereon. An investigative strategy should be developed, including the key phases of the investigation and a timeline for completing each phase.
Conducting an internal investigation has many benefits. It allows the company to obtain and analyse the relevant facts, stop and remedy any misconduct, and develop a plan to mitigate any potential liability. To obtain these benefits, however, the investigation must be well-planned. Without a clear-cut strategy, the company may unintentionally do more harm than good.
Are there unique challenges to internal investigations that have a cross-border element?
There are many unique challenges associated with cross-border investigations. One significant challenge is foreign data protection and privacy laws. While a vital part of any investigation is to obtain and analyse the relevant documents, collecting documents in New York may be a great deal easier than doing so in Germany.
Many countries have enacted data protection and privacy laws that provide greater protection for data than the US. The data protected under these laws may include not only data ordinarily considered personal, but also business data that refers to employees, customers, or clients. As a result, these laws can create potential obstacles in an internal investigation, by limiting the company’s ability to collect, process, or review certain documents.
For this reason, at the outset of a cross-border investigation, it is important to be familiar with the data protection and privacy laws applicable to the company’s business. Depending on the jurisdictions where the relevant materials are housed, these laws may be a key consideration in developing a plan to gather documents and other information.
Justin Shur
600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
Tel: (202) 556-2005
Email: jshur@mololamken.com
Web: www.mololamken.com
Justin Shur, a Partner at MoloLamken LLP, is an experienced trial lawyer with a focus on representing clients in government enforcement and internal investigation matters. His clients include corporate entities, boards of directors, audit and special committees, and individuals facing difficult and often high-profile challenges. Shur’s work spans virtually every industry and regularly involves multi-jurisdictional issues throughout the United States, Asia, Europe, and Latin America.
MoloLamken LLP is a law firm focused exclusively on representing clients in complex litigation. We handle civil, criminal, and regulatory matters, as well as appeals, across the United States. Our clients span the globe. Our strength lies in the intellect, creativity, and tenacity of our lawyers and our experience in applying those traits to achieve great results for clients in serious matters.
Written by Christof Höhne, Partner at EIP
The race for patenting ‘self-driving’ cars is on! From Audi to Google, we have seen an increase in patent applications from influential companies, racing to get their invention on the streets first. With the future of driving shifting to fifth gear to change the way we see cars, Christof Höhne speaks on how this has impacted IP.
Electric cars are considered the automobile future – their development and parallel patenting is heavily incentivized by governments already pushing for quotas on electric cars: China, for instance, envisions as of 2019 a 10% quota from car manufacturers selling cars in China.
Innovation and advancement of cars does not stop at electric drives; the innovation race to fully autonomous driving vehicles is on. Significant research and development work, documented by an increasing number of patent applications in the field is going on. Ambitious goals of manufacturers envisage the availability of fully autonomous driving vehicles as early as 2020.
The development of autonomous driving does not start from scratch: A basis for this technology has been laid in patented telecommunication systems and car assistance systems available already today. Accordingly, while it may be a common perception that autonomous driving is a thing of the future, many cars of today already feature its very basics, such as ESC (Electronic Stability Control) or automatic distance control. These current assistance systems predominantly rely on data generated by the car, in response to which an action is triggered. The shift in innovation is now to get cars to communicate with each other and infrastructure, such as traffic lights.
Given the economic impact of autonomous driving vehicles, which, as a disruptive technology, may fully replace “classic” cars in the future, it is essential for car manufacturers of today to be a part of this new technology. Having a share in this new field will increasingly rely on access to patented technology. It is thus worth having a look at what the patent landscape looks like:
A recent study of the Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft of September 2017 has analysed a database at the World Intellectual Property Organization in terms of patent filings between January 2010 and July 2017 related to autonomous driving (5839 patents). According to the study, the top 10 companies in terms of filing patent applications were Bosch (958), followed by Audi (516), Continental (439), Ford (402), GM (380), BMW (370), Toyota (362), Volkswagen (343), Daimler (339) and Google (338).
The results of this study, which is, of course, only a current snap-shot, show two interesting things: German companies are currently among the key innovators; and innovation is not limited to classic car manufacturers – tech companies play an increasingly important role.
The increasing number of non-car manufacturers active in the field is only logic, as autonomous driving is an interplay of different technical disciplines, such as mechanics, computing and telecommunication. Accordingly, it is just as logic that strategic alliances are formed, to progress development. This development is, for instance, focused on platforms, software, navigation and infrastructure. Examples of strategic alliances are: The “Automotive Edge Computing Consortium” (inter alia Toyota, Intel and Ericsson); the sale of HERE maps service from Nokia to a consortium of BMW, Daimler and Audi (recently joined by Intel and NavInfo) and the “5G Automotive Association” (inter alia BMW, Audi, Daimler, Ericsson, Huawei, Intel, Nokia and Qualcomm).
It can thus be observed that several patents from different technical fields (mechanics, computing and telecommunication) are or will become relevant. To provide access to these patents and to ensure interoperability, standardization is key. Standardisation can also facilitate required administrative approval of autonomous driving cars. The importance of standardisation has just recently been emphasized by the European Commission in a communication dated November 29, 2017 (COM (2017) 712), in which it came to the conclusion that:
“Without formal standardisation and SEPs [standard essential patents], there would be, for example, no connected vehicles.”
Accordingly, while individual companies can make big individual contributions to autonomous driving, these have to be viewed in the context of the overall, very diverse patent landscape. This includes questions of freedom to operate and value of the invention. Successful strategies of companies active in the field will thus likely be to continue being part of strategic alliances and to take an active part in standardisation.
Christof is an attorney-at-law and head of EIP’s Düsseldorf office. The main focus of his work is patent litigation with particular expertise in the fields of electronics, pharmaceuticals and mechanical engineering. He also represents clients, alongside patent-attorneys, in parallel opposition and nullity proceedings before the European Patent Office, Federal Patent Court and Federal Supreme Court.
Getting terminated from work is never good news to bring home, especially from a job you love. But getting unfairly terminated from work, due to discrimination, brings even more emotion to surface. If you have ever been a victim of discrimination, you are familiar with that terrible feeling, especially when it happens at the workplace... you can often feel devastated, lost and depressed.
As part of a series special, we speak with one of New York’s top employment lawyers, William Phillips, who says, “the most rewarding part of our job is not just resolving a case, but rather when we see our clients start a new job and have a deserved fresh start.”
Throughout 2018 we will hear from Bill Phillips, and his team at Phillips & Associates, PLLC, on a variety of topics regarding employment law, from sexual harassment to racial discrimination.
This month, we get to know a little more about Bill and his team, the best way to achieve positive results for distressed clients, and the laws protecting employees in New York.
With years of experience behind you, give us an overview of employment law in New York.
The term “wrongful termination” is a misconception for New York employees. We get thousands of calls from employees who have been “wrongfully terminated”. The employment laws in New York are very clear, except for a couple of narrow exceptions. New York is an employment “at-will” State. This means that just as an employee can quit his or her job at any time, an employer can fire an employee at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all. However, it is unlawful to terminate someone based on a legally protected category such as age, disability, gender, pregnancy, race, religion, national origin or other protected trait covered under the law. Discrimination in the workplace occurs when an employee, in a protected class is unfairly treated or harassed in matters concerning hiring, promotions, compensation, layoffs, or forced retirement because of that protected class. Additionally, discrimination may occur even if there is not a termination or other adverse employment action. For example, it is illegal for an employer to allow discriminatory comments or behavior in the workplace that make it a hostile work environment for any employee. Examples of a hostile work environment include sexual harassment such as sexual advances, sexual comments, jokes or pornography.
Similarly, racist images or paraphernalia in the workplace such as nooses, threats of hanging, being lynched, and use of the n-word can amount to racial discrimination. While we have made great strides with regard to civil rights and laws to protect against race discrimination in the workplace, the reality is that racial harassment is still prevalent.
To sum it up, any words or actions based on a person’s protected traits or class that alter the terms and conditions of the workplace, and make it difficult to work, may constitute a hostile work environment, regardless of whether the person has been terminated.
In New York there are three main laws that protect employees from discrimination and sexual harassment: Title VII which is the Federal Law, the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”) and the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”). Employees working within the five boroughs of New York are fortunate to have the New York City Human Rights Law which is one of the most powerful anti-discrimination laws in the United States. It is interpreted liberally and protects more categories for individuals such as marital status, sexual orientation, military status, domestic violence, criminal conviction records, and predisposing genetic characteristics. The NYCHRL also provides harsher penalties to employers who are found liable for discrimination, such as unlimited compensatory damages, attorney fees, punitive damages, as well as lost wages. Additionally, Federal Statutes such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) provide similar protections for New York workers terminated on the basis of disability and age. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act likewise prohibits termination based on pregnancy or family responsibility.
What is the biggest hurdle for victims of discrimination to overcome?
Imbalance of Power and Finances: David vs Goliath
Employees were, and for the most part still are, at a big disadvantage in the workplace. There is a dramatic power imbalance between employees and the companies for which they work. This power balance can intensify after experiencing sexual harassment or discrimination. The company/employer often hires a large law firm to represent it, while the employee may have just lost their job, has very little money and no one to help them understand their rights.
Many discrimination law firms charge an upfront fee, anywhere from $500.00 to $5,000 for an initial consultation or retainer. We cannot, with good conscience, ask a person who just lost his or her job to pay us a fee. So, we offer free consultations to prospective clients. Additionally, we are a contingent employment law firm. This means we do not take any attorneys’ fees unless we are successful in obtaining a verdict or settlement.
More importantly, litigation itself is also costly. At Phillips & Associates, we fund the cost of litigation. Many firms do not have the financial resources to fund the cost of litigation properly. Therefore, while their attorney fees may be contingent, they ask the client to pay thousands of dollars for the litigation costs or they cut corners and may not litigate the case to the fullest extent. We spend the amount of money necessary to properly litigate our clients’ cases. We will take every deposition and pay for all discovery and expert reports. Clients need to take a close look at the law firm they want to hire and determine if that lawyer or firm has the funds and the resources to properly litigate the case to the end. We handle cases from inception through trial, even appeal if necessary.
What three factors would you say work towards ensuring you achieve successful results for your clients’ cases?
We always strive to provide quality representation along with a compassionate and personalized attorney-client relationship for each and every client.
Quality of Representation: Having “The Best of the Best”
Many of our Attorneys have achieved “best of” status.
In fact, William Phillips was selected as a “10 Best Labor and Employment Attorneys in New York” by the American Institute of Legal Counsel, 2017 and 2018 “Top 100 Labor & Employment Lawyer in New York” by the American Society of Legal Advocates, “Employment Discrimination Attorney of the Year in New York – 2018” by Corporate International, and was recently selected as a member “Lawyers of Distinction” in Employment and Labor Law. Partner Bryan Arce, has been repeatedly recognized as a “Super Lawyer” and is a member of the “Million Dollar Advocates Forum” along with being listed as “Top Discrimination Attorney” by AVVO, and being named one of the “Top Three Best Rated Employment Attorneys” in Newark, NJ by Three Best Rated.
Additionally, we have 10 other employment attorneys who have achieved “Super Lawyer” status and three additional employment attorneys who are members of the prestigious “Million and Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum”. Membership here is limited only to attorneys who have won or settled million and multi-million-dollar verdicts and settlements. Phillips & Associates spends thousands of dollars on legal education for all of our attorneys and staff. We are constantly attending seminars and lectures throughout the country to keep up with and better understand the ever-changing landscape of employment and discrimination law.
Having Compassion and Understanding
It is important to understand the emotional aspect of an employment law case. A person’s job is probably the second most important thing in his or her life next to his or her family. We spend more time at work with co-workers and supervisors then we spend at home. I, along with my partner, have personally experienced the loss of a job in my life… more than once. We understand the effect it has on your self-image. To lose your job is already terribly emotional. To lose your job after being discriminated against or sexually harassed at work can be devastating. We as lawyers need to understand the emotional suffering that this causes in a person’s life. It’s a blow to their ego, they lose confidence, they cannot pay their bills or support their family. They can also go through depression and anxiety. We know they are never going to forget what they went through, but we work very hard to get a financial settlement which offers some closure and the opportunity to start a new chapter in his or her life. In fact, often, the most rewarding part of our job is not the settlement; it’s when we see our clients start a new job and a deserved fresh start.
Offer a Personalized Service
Law is a service industry. Many lawyers forget that clients are customers. Customer service is just as important as results. Although we are providing legal services, we are also providing much more: emotional support, an outlet to vent, confidence that their case will be handled properly, constant contact and feedback, answered questions or concerns, and so much more than just law. Many law firms just do not understand that concept. The number one complaint in the legal field is a lawyer not responding to client calls. Many firms look at clients as just another case that the attorney is going to try and settle for money. But having an attorney-client relationship is just that… a relationship. Every person, every situation, and every case is different, so we must personalize that relationship for each client, situation and case. But what does not change is our quality and level of service, regardless of different circumstances.
How effective is mediation in employment law cases?
We find mediation to be very helpful in employment cases. We mediate through private mediations, as well as in State and Federal Courts, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and the State Division of Human Rights. Mediation provides the opportunity for the parties, both the employee and the employer, to control the final outcome of the case. Mediation is typically a private and confidential process whereby a mediator attempts to understand the dispute, understand “both sides of the story”, and guide the parties to a resolution. The mediator is a neutral party and does not act as a judge or a jury. The mediator is not going to determine a winner and a loser. The mediator may point out the strengths and weakness of each party’s case in order to facilitate a resolution, but will not choose sides.
Mediations can also help avoid the time and expense of the long drawn out litigation process. This applies to all parties involved. Typically, the employer will spend tens of thousands of dollars in attorneys’ fees to defend and litigate a case, and still may be “on the hook” for potentially tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars more if the employer loses at trial. Another advantage of mediation is that both the employee and employer get closure sooner and maintain privacy. The employee can move on with his or her life without reliving his/her story or fighting with the employer for years. Similarly, the employer can quickly get back to doing business without reliving the story and fighting with the employee for years.
The mediation process is not always successful, but it is generally a good process if both sides are negotiating in good faith. But good faith does not always get the job done and defense law firms understand that if we cannot agree on an appropriate settlement during the mediation process, we are prepared to file the case in court and go to trial if necessary.
Your firm makes every effort to obtain the maximum level of compensation for each client you serve, how do you ensure your team achieves this?
Many of our clients come to us because they want a dedicated team of high powered employment lawyers to stand up to their employer. They see the landscape of attorneys out there who practice in multiple areas of law handling real estate transactions, bankruptcy, divorce or personal injury along with employment law as a side business. Additionally, many firms represent and advocate for employees on one day but then turn around and represent and support the companies the next day. At Phillips & Associates, we only represent employees. Our only focus is employment discrimination and sexual harassment and we are very successful at it. We do not need to practice in other areas of law, or represent corporations, to make ends meet. Our depth of experience in handling employment cases, and the fact that we are a full-service law firm, makes us the go-to firm for many high net-worth individuals (HNIs) who appreciate the quality of our service. While we serve many HNIs, we analyze every case based on liability, regardless of how much a person earns. We don’t care if a person makes $250,000 or minimum wage. If he or she was illegally discriminated against or harassed, we can pursue the case.
Understanding Case Values to Obtain Maximum Value for Clients
Over the past seven years, our attorneys have obtained over $85,000,000 in settlements and verdicts for victims of discrimination. This year we expect to surpass $100,000,000. Most of our verdicts and settlements are single plaintiff employment related cases, not class action civil rights cases. Very few plaintiff’s firms can match our depth of knowledge with respect to the various potential damages relating to different causes of action. As civil attorneys litigating employment cases, we can really only seek monetary damages, whether it is for lost wages, emotional damages, attorneys’ fees or punitive damages. Regardless of the type of damage done, it will still come down to money. Having handled countless sexual harassment and discrimination cases, we understand the potential value of each case and have a database of privately settled discrimination and sexual harassment cases and verdicts from which to draw comparisons. Quite frankly, many discrimination attorneys have never handled a discrimination case valued over $250,000, let alone $1 million dollars. Additionally, other attorneys tend to value cases based solely on lost wages, often not considering, or not appreciating, the emotional toll the victim has experienced. If the attorney doesn’t understand the full value of a case, a client’s potential recovery can be “left on the table.” For example, an attorney may settle a case for $75,000 and go back to the office giving high fives, without having the experience to know that the real value of the settlement was actually $250,000. If the attorney doesn’t think the case is worth $250,000 they will never get it. Some attorneys ask their clients, “how much do you want?” We find this question one of the most ridiculous questions an attorney can ask. How would a client, not knowing the legal framework for damages, know how much his or her case could be worth? We as attorneys need to educate the client so he or she can understand the law, understand how his or her specific case fits into the law and make appropriate recommendations to the client regarding values and the associated risks of litigation. We are constantly conducting a risks vs benefits analysis throughout the litigation process.
Having the Resources to Fight Back Against Sexual Harassment & Discrimination
With 18 employment discrimination attorneys, we have the resources and financial backing to level the playing field with the large defense firms. When you hire Phillips & Associates, you hire an entire legal team to fight for your rights. Every one of our cases is staffed with a team of attorneys and support personnel. We handle cases from inception through trial, even appeal if necessary. We will not be out worked or buried in paperwork the way a solo or small law firm might be by the defense firm.
What changes have you seen in the past few years in the area of Employment Law?
The biggest change in 2018 has come courtesy of the #MeToo movement, and all the attention sexual harassment has received in the media lately. It has removed the stigma of being a victim of sexual harassment and empowered more women to come forward with their claims and hold their employers, or former employers, accountable for the past illegal conduct. Even more importantly, the movement has empowered other types of victims of harassment, such as racial or pregnancy discrimination victims, to come forward because he or she has realized that they are most likely not alone. We are now seeing many new cases dealing with old harassment because of #MeToo. Of course, New York City is at the forefront in providing protections for employees and the NYCHRL is a powerful tool for people who have been harassed, sexually or otherwise.
Disability
Disability discrimination and reasonable accommodations in the workplace are also a large part of our practice. New York recently expanded protections to employees seeking reasonable accommodations. Specifically, the law will require employers to be more proactive and engage in a “cooperative dialogue” with its employees who may need a reasonable accommodation. The law requires employers to provide employees with a final written decision regarding the accommodation. This law will come in to effect later this year.
Pregnancy
In addition, in 2016, the Protect Women from Pregnancy Discrimination bill went into effect in New York. It provides greater protection than federal law by requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employees who are pregnant. For example, employers are required to accommodate breastfeeding employees by giving them reasonable unpaid break time or by letting them use paid breaks or mealtimes to pump or express breast milk for a nursing child for up to three years after delivery. As part of the accommodations for breastfeeding women, employers are supposed to provide a private space that is close to the work area where the employee can pump or express milk. Importantly, under the Protect Women from Pregnancy Discrimination bill, the state law has been changed such that "pregnancy-related conditions" are now considered disabilities. New York employers are now required to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees with pregnancy-related conditions.
Caregiver Protection
Along those lines, in 2015, New York City released a new rule designed to protect employees, and others, from facing discrimination based on his or her role as a caregiver. It bars discrimination against caregivers altogether. This means that employers cannot deny employment to, or take an adverse action against, job applicants or workers who serve as caregivers for a minor child or a recipient of care.
Transgender Rights
Also in 2015, the New York City Commission on Human Rights released a document providing guidance to employers, businesses, and housing establishments regarding the protections provided under the NYCHRL. According to the measure, transgender individuals still face extremely high rates of discrimination, including prejudices against an individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation. The guidance makes it clear that discrimination under the NYCHRL “includes discrimination on the basis of gender identity, gender expression, and transgender status.” Discrimination occurs when an individual receives treatment that is inferior to the treatment received by others because of his or her gender or perceived gender.
William K. Phillips
Managing Partner
PHILLIPS & ASSOCIATES
45 Broadway, Suite 620
New York, New York 10006
Tel: 212-248-7431
www.newyorkcitydiscriminationlawyer.com
Bill Phillips is the managing partner of Phillips & Associates, one of the largest plaintiffs’ only employment law firms in New York. The firm handles cases involving sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace including pregnancy, race, disability, religion, gender, and sexual orientation and other protected traits. Phillips & Associates also handles other areas of harassment at work such as retaliation and wrongful termination. Most recently Phillips & Associates was selected as one of the “10 Best Employment & Labor Law Firms” in New York” by the American Institute of Legal Counsel.
Focusing on dismissal proceedings and the aftercare of clients post-casework, Antonio Eduardo Gómez de Enterría, Partner and Head of the Employment practice at Herbert Smith Freehills' Madrid office, takes Lawyer Monthly on a journey of understanding the trivial relationship between employer and employee at the centre of labour disputes.
When representing corporate entities in labour disputes, what challenges do you face?
Company representation in labour disputes is always presided by the need to find a balance between the company's economic interests and corporate social responsibility. In this regard the Spanish courts often broadly apply a "pro-operator" construction approach beyond reasonable doubt. This construction principle makes the job of corporate lawyers particularly difficult in labour proceedings. However, independently of this theory, it is particularly rewarding and challenging to search for creative solutions to labour issues that make it possible to reconcile companies' financial clout with a treatment of their employees that is not only legally proper, but also socially respectable.
What are common reasons for ex-employees filing for unfair dismissal; what can companies do to avoid lawsuits in this case?
Dismissal claims have changed over the years. The reasons underlying claims have changed according to different economic cycles. In times of boom, when unemployment rates were low or even close to "full employment", dismissal claims tend to focus on obtaining the maximum severance possible and, consequently, the reasons triggering the dismissal are often brought into question. On the other hand, at the bust end of financial cycles, when finding a new job has become increasingly difficult, the wish to continue working for companies has triggered a significant increase in the number of claims seeking dismissals to be declared null and void due to violations of fundamental rights or, in case of collective dismissals, due to the existence of procedural errors that could lead to the same conclusion: annulled dismissals.
Taking these circumstances into account, to avoid these claims, companies must be careful when devising and structuring dismissal proceedings, in their choice and justification of the grounds for dismissal and in the delivery of letters of dismissal to the affected employees, attempting at all times to treat them properly so that the dismissal, albeit always traumatic, is not also perceived as an aggression.
What is the most challenging contentious, transactional and advisory matter you face with employment law? How do you work through such challenges?
Disputes are, obviously, always particularly challenging – especially those that bring into question collective dismissal proceedings. This is due to different factors: The first, the financial impact of an unfavourable judicial decision, which normally doubles, or even trebles, the costs of the process. Secondly, the difficulty in having the courts understand business economic concepts and management realities that they are not normally familiar with; it is especially challenging (i) to encourage the members of the court to relinquish their original viewpoint, which is normally that of protecting the interest, and (ii) to have them understand concepts such as the corporate profitability, the necessary return on shareholders' investments and the company's necessary competitive position.
Two elements are vital to undertake legal proceedings of this kind: preparation and imagination. Both elements are key (i) to performing the analysis necessary to explain the grounds for the company's decision to dismiss and (ii) to devise a social plan with placement measures that will ensure that the affected employees have a number of different options once they leave. These proceedings must also be undertaken in the knowledge that sound arguments can be made that the proceedings are the only option available for the company to ensure its long-term survival, that it has protected the maximum number of jobs possible and that it has also taken the measures necessary to provide alternative options that are economically respectable and socially responsible.
Eduardo Gómez de Enterría
Partner
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
Employment, Pensions & Incentives
+34 91 423 40 32
I have 20 years of experience in labour law, pensions and incentives and have developed my practice across all areas of labour law and, in particular, collective bargaining, corporate restructuring processes and collective dismissals. I have specific training in collective dismissals from Harvard University and Instituto de Empresa.
Herbert Smith Freehills is one of the world’s leading professional services businesses, bringing together the best people across our 27 offices, to meet all your legal services needs globally.
INOS 17-049 GmbH, a Munich-based company controlled by the Stargate Capital GmbH fund, completed the acquisition of Werther International SpA, an Italian company with operating units in France, the US, Denmark and Poland, and distributors in 150 countries globally operating in the production, assembly and marketing of car equipment.
Portolano Cavallo assisted the acquiring company INOS 17-049 GmbH with a team composed of the counsel Luca Gambini and the associated Ginevra Sforza, while the sellers were assisted by the Alberti & Fontana law firm, with the team including Partner Francesco Fontana and lawyer Marta Grazioli.
Alberti & Fontana s.t.p., a law firm registered in the special Bar and Law Society of Vicenza, Italy, was established in January 2005 by the founding partners Francesco Fontana and Nicola Alberti. United by their common enthusiasm and ongoing dialectics in delving into legal topics linked to corporate dynamics, Alberti & Fontana deals with M&A, industrial and intellectual property (trademarks, patents, unfair competition, copyright), labor and corporate law, out-of-court stage (drawing up and providing consultancy for corporate contracts, company deeds, license contracts), as well as contentious, arbitral and administrative proceedings.
Partner and CEO Francesco Fontana noted: “Taking care of any and all details is the aim of my job and the distinctiveness of M&A’s expertise”.
What were the buyers’ apprehensions with this deal and how did you use your expertise to help work them through it?
The primary need, for both of the buyer and the seller, was to execute a share and stock purchase agreement with the prospect of continuing to work together after the closing date. Therefore, the imperative issue was to carefully calibrate the representations and warranties, so as to arrive at a fair economic compromise after carefully assessing the risks that each party would have assumed.
How was this deal unique? Did anything take you by surprise?
The deal presented two main problems: on the one hand the debt management and on the other the structure of the business.
The corporate operation, indeed, involved not only the parent company but also the various subsidiaries, both Italian and foreign, which were all interested parties.
Our team has deep experience in a variety of industrial sectors, allowing us to provide practical advice and innovative solutions along with market leading technical know-how.
Our approach to the client is different from one to another and is tailored to meet each client’s unique transaction needs. Our main strengths are: deep care for every detail; involve the clients and share with them the critical issues and the results obtained, as well as offering maximum confidentiality in every single operation followed.
The unique characteristics of the deal were the need to ensure, after the M&A closing date, the carve out of a certain business unit (not pertaining to the deal) and another carve out of assets related to real estate.
In order to help work the parties through the business’ features and for the purpose to offer the best solution, our team has introduced commercial agreements and a call option into the corporate law theme.
In particular, the commercial agreements were aimed at maintaining the deal for a period of time, necessary in order to achieve a profitable carve out without compromising the going concern, and furthermore, while offering guarantees for both the sellers and the buyer.
A management buy-out (MBO) was established earlier this year, with manufacturer Tesla UK Ltd. The company, based in Birmingham UK manufactures and supplies into the heating and plumbing industries, providing products to national and independent merchants and distributors in the UK and overseas. The company generates a turnover in excess of £10m.
Insider Media Limited reported that the management team’s leader Patricia Quinn, Managing Director of Tesla UK Limited, said: "This transaction presents a great opportunity for myself and the wider management team.
"We look forward to continuing to develop innovative products and to maintaining and growing our customer and supplier relationships."
The shareholders were advised by Chris Wright of Blackhams Solicitors, who Lawyer Monthly have spoken with.
Interview with Chris Wright of Blackhams Solicitors.
Please tell me about your involvement in the deal?
My involvement concerned advising the selling shareholders on all the legal aspects of the transactions, drafting, negotiating and approving the key documents for the share disposal, confidentiality agreements, the Share Purchase Agreement, Shareholders’ Agreement, warranties, banking documents, and loan notes.
Why is this a good deal for all involved?
From inception, the original director and controlling shareholders through hard work and effort built up the sale business relatively swiftly both organically and by acquisition into an international business, in the process moving production back to the UK from Pakistan. It held several key patents in the heating and plumbing industry and has grown into a major brand in their market. They now wish to take a step back from the business and concentrate on another unconnected business in which their interests lie. At the same time, by selling to the continuing younger management team, this team are best placed to take this successful business to the next level in the long term and gave them a stake in the equity. Further, by selling to the existing management, key customers could be assured a smooth transition and assured continuity with business very much as usual. For the key stakeholders brand security could be assured.
What challenges arose? How did you navigate them?
Firstly, as a key player in the sale, it was important that ongoing pre-contract negotiations were kept confidential, as they were commercial sensitive.
Secondly, although the Vendors were stepping back from this successful business as part of a long term “retirement” strategy, they nevertheless remain interested and are developing an unconnected business which also traded from the same premises and for which short-term occupation would be required following the sale of the main business, but without hindering the expansion plans of Tesla post sale.
Thirdly, with the Vendors having less day to day control in the management of the business in more recent times, the Vendors sought more limited obligations as to warranties for the business.
The Vendors’ personal wishes were of course commercial: to maximise the sale price whilst at the same time keeping fees, relatively speaking, to a minimum. At the same time, common with a sale and purchase, the Purchasers’ financial means to meet fees and the purchase price were limited.
The Vendors’ unconnected business was carved out of the sale and continued occupation of the premises was provided by a fluid, but minimum term licence tied to financial objectives.
The balance between the Vendors’ warranties and Purchasers’ requirements in respect of the financial respect of the business was achieved by a locked box accounting method to confirm the price.
On the funding and fees mitigation front, a successful result was achieved by vendor assistance through term loan notes to provide funding for part of the purchase price, and by the parties’ collaboration in securing continuation of the existing banking facilities through inter-party agreements with the Bank.
What was one key lesson you take away from this transaction?
By adopting a co-operative approach and taking into account all the requirements of the various parties where possible, we were able to achieve a commercially and legally satisfactory result for our client vendors.
How do you hope this deal to set precedent for others in 2018?
The precedent set by this deal is to demonstrate that notwithstanding the so called negative influence of Brexit, confidence in management buy outs where Purchasers are keen to proceed, and Vendors are willing to defer and elements of the purchase price remains high and commercially rewarding for all parties prepared to take a medium and long-term view. As a consequence, Blackhams have recently established a new team of commercial and commercial property lawyers comprising Neil Ireland as Head of Department, Peter Smart and myself as members. Based at our head office in Birmingham and with a combined experience of over 75 years with major firms in the Midlands, we deal with all aspects of work of a commercial nature.
EOS Investment Management (EOS IM) confirms the acquisition of Atex, the third deal in close succession. Atex is the latest company to be added to EOS IM’s portfolio, which is currently primarily invested into the real economy in Italy due to its competitive privately owned companies, with good profitability, a solid financial structure and high growth potential.
EOS IM has acquired a majority stake in the company. Atex is a multinational company with a manufacturing presence in both Italy and United States. It is a leader in the production and sale of non-woven fabrics.
Founded in 1993, Atex’s headquarters is located in the north of Italy, and boasts a high value added production facility, utilising a specialist polymer extrusion process.
In 2000, after achieving commercial success abroad, Atex built a cutting-edge production plant in Gainesville (Georgia, USA), which has now become Atex Inc. In 2016, Atex had a turnover of about 50 million euro, with strong operating margins (14% Ebitda) and a solid financial position.
EOS IM’s acquisition will enable Atex to further develop its ambitious yet pragmatic new industrial strategy, which entails both the enhancing of the key senior team resources and the strengthening of production plants in order to penetrate new market niches. The plan is also to widen the Atex offering through new acquisitions, always under the hallmark of identifying talent, flexibility and quality, which are part of Atex’s historical DNA.
Intesa Sanpaolo, also through its Branch in New York, acted as a lending bank for the transaction. While Banca IMI (Intesa Sanpaolo Group) acted as Mandated Lead Arranger, Bookrunner and Agent.
EOS IM has been assisted by the Banking team at McDermott Will & Emery for legal aspects and for fiscal aspects related to Atex Inc. Ludovici Piccone & Partners law firm has assisted EOS IM for the fiscal due diligence of Atex SpA, while EY Transaction Advisory Services and KPMG have acted as advisors respectively for the accounting due diligence and the ESG due diligence. The commercial/ strategic due diligence has been carried out with the support of Roland Berger. Intesa Sanpaolo Group has been supported, for the legal aspects related to the transaction, by Gatti, Pavesi, Bianchi and by the American firm Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP.
Interview with Michelle Barnett at Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Please tell me about your involvement in the deal?
I lead the team at Seyfarth to prepare the governance requirements, including the Georgia merger documents, the adjustments in management responsibilities and in the board, and the facilitation of financing through the Georgia filings, and the process for appointing proper US officers for rapid signatures and timely deliveries to meet the client’s needs for closing date.
Did any challenges arise when undergoing due diligence for this deal? If so, how did you work around them?
The significant concerns were in the structure of the board and management team, which required assessment of prior management experience, advise on administrative expediency and sufficiency, and some political attention with the decision makers.
How will this deal help your clients develop internationally? Is there anything you do to ensure this development succeeds?
The business side seems to be in good shape, and our role at Seyfarth is to continue our support of the local team, though in the light of the new ownership expectations.
Going under the knife is a delicate process; you want it to go right, yet unfortunately, that isn’t always the case. Fuan Chan speaks to us on why cases appear in court and how to protect yourself from negligence in the aesthetic industry.
What are common cases you are instructed on as an expert witness?
Why are these cases so common and what do you think professionals should do to avoid legal sanction?
You need to have a good consultation and establish good rapport with the patient and properly assess and manage your patient’s expectations. Patient selection is also crucial and the surgeon ought to well inform patients so that they can made an educated decision. I would also suggest a cooling period of two weeks and a second consultation or more, if indicated and necessary to ensure the above points are met.
Finally, and most importantly, you must learn to say no to the patient if it is in the best interest of the patient and your practice and its credibility.
Do you think there needs to be tighter regulations on aesthetics in order to avoid legal cases?
Yes. There is lack of regulation in the aesthetic sector. Tighter regulations help to protect patient safety by ensuring only the fully trained and accredited healthcare professionals are allowed to perform aesthetic or cosmetic surgery. Tighter regulations also help to eliminate, if not minimise, the issue of non-specialist doctors carrying out cosmetic surgery in non-accredited facilities, which again, is putting patient safety at risk.
With aesthetics making rapid advancement in society, how would you advise clients to keep on top, to ensure their practitioner is ‘up-to-date’ and will offer the best treatment?
One of the most important elements of any surgery or treatment - from abdominoplasty (tummy tuck) to a facelift to a ‘nose job’ to a Botox injection -, is the skill and experience of the practitioner. You should go to a reliable and highly experienced plastic surgeon who is fully accredited. They should also be experienced in the particular treatment you are going to them for. A good plastic surgeon will be able to share how often they have performed the treatment in question and show examples of before and after results.
A plastic, reconstructive and cosmetic surgeon should be properly accredited. Here in Ireland they should hold FRCSI(Plast) or FRCS(Plast) qualifications and also be an accredited consultant plastic surgeon. The cosmetic surgeon’s professional profile often is readily available on accredited professional societies such as Irish Association of Plastic Surgeon and also will hold active full membership of international societies such as American Association of Plastic Surgeons or International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery or Aesthetic Plastic or The American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.
The next step is making a preliminary enquiry with the clinic regarding the treatment. If the response is positive, attending a face to face consultation will often enable the client to have a sense of the ‘quality’ and ‘standard’ of the cosmetic surgeon.
Mr. Fuan Chan MD FRCSI(Plast)
Suite 14, Blackrock Clinic
Rock Road
Blackrock
Co. Dublin
+353 (0)1 206 4219
info@fchan.ie
Mr. Fuan Chan MD FRCSI(Plast) is a graduate of Trinity College Dublin, the first Consultant Plastic Surgeon in Ireland of Chinese descent. He is a fully accredited Consultant Plastic Surgeon and an IAPS (Irish Association of Plastic Surgeons) full member. He is also an international full member of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), which is the most prestigious and recognised membership for any fully-accredited and qualified Consultant Plastic Surgeon in the world. He is also a full member of highly regarded International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.
He started private practice in the Blackrock Clinic, the leading private hospital in Dublin, Ireland since 2015. Mr Chan specialises in cosmetic plastic surgery, non-surgical rejuvenation (botox & fillers), skin cancer surgery, acute plastics trauma surgery and reconstructive surgery.
Mr. Fuan Chan is so far the only Consultant Plastic Surgeon in Ireland that has completed a one-year fellowship in UCLA, Los Angeles, which gave him the opportunity to work with many leading Plastic Surgeons in Los Angeles who are affiliated to UCLA. He has earned numerous awards and gold medals in plastic surgery at national and international scientific meetings with more than 25 peer-reviewed publications and delivered more than 30 presentations at plastic surgery scientific meetings in Ireland, Europe, USA and Asia.
Mr. Fuan Chan MD FRCSI(Plast) is equipped with excellence in medico-legal report writing, courtroom skills and Cross-examination skills. He has been instructed to write medical reports and instructed on as an expert witness.
