Category: Interviews

With preparations for the 2025 CEE General Counsel Summit in full swing, AMB Legal Partner Davor Majstorovic shares his thoughts about the upcoming event and what he’s looking forward to the most.

CEELM: Why did you decide to participate in the GC Summit?

Majstorovic: The CEE GC Summit is a great chance to meet people from different industries, connect with other General Counsels, and hear about the latest developments – not just in law, but in business and beyond. It’s an opportunity to step outside the day-to-day legal work and gain fresh perspectives that can be useful in so many ways.

CEELM: What are you most looking forward to at the event?

Majstorovic: I’m most excited about meeting new people and having real discussions on the key issues shaping the legal world. I’m especially interested in hearing perspectives beyond just SEE, looking at CEE and global trends as well. The last time I attended something like this in Belgrade, about six or seven years ago, I was an in-house lawyer. The discussions back then covered many corporate and business topics that turned out to be incredibly valuable. Now, coming from the external side, I see just how important these insights are from both perspectives.

CEELM: What insights or discussions do you expect to hear from General Counsels at this year’s summit?

Majstorovic: The agenda isn’t still available, but I’d love to hear more about data protection – it’s such a pressing topic right now. M&A and corporate legal trends are also on my radar. The way regulations are evolving, especially around private individuals, is really changing how we look at the legal system. In my work, whenever there’s a legal issue that needs to be handled under domestic or international law, I am always looking for practical, real-world solutions. Therefore, I’m hoping to get some takeaways that can actually be applied in practice.

CEELM: Why should General Counsels make sure to attend this summit?

Majstorovic: For GCs, this is one of the best ways to gain fresh insights from other industries, exchange experiences, and pick up practical ideas. It’s not just about the legal side – court decisions, regulations, and compliance – but also about how legal teams operate within companies, how they structure their work, and how they contribute to the bigger picture. One topic that always stands out is employee satisfaction and retention. Learning how other companies keep their people engaged and happy can be just as valuable as any legal update. Whether you’re an in-house or external lawyer, this summit is an amazing opportunity to step outside your own company’s bubble and see how others are tackling similar challenges.

With preparations for the 2025 CEE Legal Matters Regional General Counsel Summit and Deal of the Year awards gala in Prague in full swing, Marton Eorsi, a Corporate Finance Partner at Addleshaw Goddard’s London office, shares his thoughts about the upcoming event and what he’s looking forward to the most.

CEELM: Why did Addleshaw Goddard decide to participate in the CEE Legal Matters Regional GC Summit in Prague?

Eorsi: Our decision to participate was driven by our commitment to engaging with those events that perfectly align with our CEE strategy. We focus on upper mid-market corporates in the region—dynamic, international companies that see themselves as global players and seek to operate in a cross-border capacity. 

This summit perfectly matches the environment in which we operate and aspire to grow. Moreover, the event is specifically designed with General Counsels in mind, which offers a more strategic and impactful approach than events centered solely on law firms.

CEELM: What are you most looking forward to at the GC Summit?

Eorsi: I’m excited to hear directly from General Counsels about the opportunities and risks they face—these are the very insights that help us stay ahead of the curve with timely advice and allow us to be properly prepared for any and all potential needs our clients might have. 

Beyond the formal sessions, the summit promises a vibrant cultural and social experience, enriched by the famous Eastern European hospitality. The blend of technical sessions and networking opportunities is something I’m very much looking forward to and I genuinely can’t wait for it all to start.

CEELM: Why should General Counsels make sure to attend this summit?

Eorsi: With our new office opening in Warsaw and our strong commitment to the CEE region, we are demonstrating our dedication to serving our clients in a focused and strategic way—and being present is the best way to do so. We wish to invite General Counsels to experience firsthand the effort and expertise that Addleshaw Goddard brings to the table. Our Warsaw presence is a tangible sign of our commitment, and we hope it underscores the value we place on building lasting partnerships.

Furthermore, I firmly believe that the summit is a fantastic opportunity to connect with new colleagues and reconnect with familiar faces. It’s all about strengthening existing relationships and forging new ones—showing that we not only talk the talk but also walk the walk. I’m confident this event will pave the way for even stronger client collaborations in the future, for all attendees.

On 19 September 2024, BDK Advokati celebrated 20 years since its establishment. BDK Advokati Managing Partner Tijana Kojovic and Senior Partner and Head of the Montenegrin office Luka Popovic reflect on this milestone and discuss the journey of the firm, its evolution, achievements, and aspirations for the future.

CEELM: When and how was the firm set up, and who was involved in its founding? 

Kojovic: The firm was set up in 2004 by myself, under the name Kojovic Law Office. Dragoljub Cibulic, now an Equity Partner in the firm, was my first Associate. By 2008, we had expanded to eight people, which was midsize at that time. That year, we were joined by a team from PwC Legal, including Vladimir Dasic who is an Equity Partner in the firm. This is when we rebranded and the firm took the shape of a partnership and continued to grow organically. Today, we have six Equity Partners, including Luka, who leads our Montenegro office, and a team of close to 40 lawyers.

CEELM: 2008 sounds like an interesting year for expansion. What drove the decision?

Kojovic: As a transitional economy not fully integrated into the global market, Serbia wasn’t hit as hard by global events right away. By 2008, we had already established ourselves in the market. Our goal was to grow into a true partnership and the opportunity arose at that time. New partners added to our solid foundation, allowing us to expand.

CEELM: When and why did the firm begin expanding beyond Serbia?

Kojovic: We were very entrepreneurial from the start. We began looking at the broader region as early as 2005, just a year after we launched in Serbia. At that time, there was a wave of privatizations in Montenegro, and we advised on those from our Belgrade office. In 2006, we worked on the privatization of Telekom Srpske in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We established a presence in Montenegro in 2009. Luka joined us in Montenegro 12 years ago, which marked a new phase when we developed a strong local team that is fully integrated into the firm. Our approach has always been to build a truly unified firm.

Popovic: Indeed, I joined BDK Advokati in May 2012, at which point the firm had already been present in Montenegro for a bit over two years. Initially, it was a small office with just two of us, and our work was largely tied to cross-border deals and regulatory work. From there, we began to grow, and now we have a team of seven people, including six lawyers. We have established ourselves as one of the leading corporate law firms in Montenegro. We have also succeeded in retaining people. Recruiting and retaining talented people in a small market is difficult, as the talent pool is small. This profession requires individuals who are ambitious, motivated, and willing to work hard.

It is important to note that our firm is not just driven by lawyers from our headquarters. Some of our lawyers based in Montenegro are leading practices in other countries where we operate.

CEELM: And when did the firm expand into Bosnia and Herzegovina?

Kojovic: We started handling work in Bosnia in 2006 from our Belgrade office and then established a team in Banja Luka in 2013. Our first associate in Banja Luka, Dijana Pejic Sinik, is still part of our team. Even though we have been covering the entire country with our Banja Luka team, we are now expanding to Sarajevo. This will round up and strengthen our presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while clients will get additional comfort with the team present in the capital. Speaking about expansion, we are also looking into North Macedonia and expect to be there as well by the end of this year.

CEELM: Looking back at the past 20 years, if you could do it all over again, what would you change?

Kojovic: I would have expanded into the region earlier. We started in 2004, about four years after the first contours of a market economy started to be formed following the Milosevic era. We quickly caught up the pace with the firms who had been longer in the market. We focused on becoming a truly full-service firm for corporate and institutional clients, building expertise across all practice areas. We can confidently say that we are one of few full-service firms in Serbia, capable of offering equally in-depth expertise across practice areas and sectors. Expansion is a natural consequence of our conviction that we can offer quality service in a broader geography to clients who trust us.

Popovic: One key thing I constantly think about is building the next generation of young lawyers who can deliver at the standard our firm is known for. That is challenging, and I often wonder if we could have brought some talented individuals on board earlier. It is really about ensuring we have the right people to carry the firm forward. On balance, I think we have done a good job. We are one of the most visible corporate law firms in Montenegro.

CEELM: What is the main lesson you would share with someone looking to start their own firm?

Kojovic: Develop your knowledge and expertise. Position yourself as a trusted partner of your clients, no matter how few of them you have at the beginning. Word of mouth is the best form of marketing – if one client is happy and recommends you to others, that recommendation is more valuable than any traditional marketing effort. As you grow, you will be marketing your capabilities on multiple fronts but remember that expertise and the quality of your service are ultimately what sells the best.

CEELM: What would you say your proudest moment has been over the 20 years?

Popovic: CEE Legal Matters’ double 2023 CEE Deal of the Year Award in Warsaw was definitely a proud moment.

Kojovic: I am living my proudest moment now, reflecting on the progress we have made and the fact that we are truly firm and that I have partners with whom I share both the successes and the challenges. That sense of partnership and collective achievement is my biggest accomplishment.

CEELM: What is your firm’s mid-term focus?

Kojovic: Our primary focus will be on consolidating our presence in the Western Balkans, and on building expertise and fostering a mindset among our lawyers that acknowledges and takes into account global and EU regulatory developments. Even if the countries we cover are not EU members, we need to take the EU developments into account as if our countries were members. All our jurisdictions are significantly influenced by what happens in Brussels. We have been investing in know-how in advance and will be doing so even more. We are currently investing in expertise on new regulations designed for the digital economy.

Popovic: Given the possibility of Montenegro joining the EU sooner than expected – perhaps within four years – this focus becomes even more relevant. The ability to develop expertise that is beyond local is increasingly important.

CEELM: Finally, where do you aspire to see BDK in the future?

Kojovic: I envision BDK as a reputable European brand with an office in Brussels!

Earlier in 2024, DLA Piper published its Medical Devices Advertising: CEE Comparison Guide, which reviews advertising regulations for medical devices in Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Life sciences team members who worked on the guide spoke with CEE Legal Matters about some of the regulatory differences across CEE and the practical implications for businesses.

In this interview:

• Amalia Musat, Counsel, DLA Piper Romania
• Andrzej Balicki, Partner, DLA Piper Poland
• Irina Macovei, Counsel, DLA Piper Romania
• Jolanta Dabrowicz, Counsel, DLA Piper Poland
• Petr Samec, Senior Associate, DLA Piper Czech Republic
• Veronika Appl, Counsel, DLA Piper Austria

CEELM: As background, why did you choose to focus on this specific area of medical device advertising, and what made it particularly relevant for the CEE region in your view?

Balicki: I’d highlight three fundamental points. First, advertising is critical to the medical sector. Second, when looking at a global perspective, the health, beauty, and personal care sector is a leader in advertising spending, not just regionally but worldwide. Third, advertising for medical devices is not regulated at the EU level. While there is a general ban on misleading advertising under Article 7 of the European Union Medical Devices Regulation, there are no specific rules or detailed guidance on how to implement these rules in practice.

Samec: It’s particularly interesting for us because this is a new development. In the Czech Republic, we’ve had advertising regulations since 1995. While advertising for medicinal products has been here since 2006, the regulation for medical devices was introduced in May 2021 and is quite recent, which makes it especially noteworthy for us.

Macovei: In the realm of life sciences regulation, medical devices have often been overlooked. The category encompasses everything from bandages and needles to toothbrushes to medical equipment, with many complex products in between. Today, medical devices also cover software and digital tools used in hospitals, which has led to changes in how these devices are advertised. The focus is now on preventing misleading advertising and ensuring that claims reflect the actual properties of the devices. For us in Romania, this represents a significant shift. Before 2021, we had no specific regulations for advertising medical devices, but our authorities are now moving toward a regulatory approach similar to that of medicines. This is a substantial change for us.

Appl: In addition to what’s been said before, I’d like to highlight that we’re part of the international DLA Piper community. We regularly observe trends and differences across various countries, focusing on comparing different jurisdictions rather than concentrating on just one. Our goal was to simplify the legal landscape for medical devices across the CEE markets by creating a comprehensive advertising guide for the CEE region. As Irina mentioned, regulations in Austria and other countries include numerous laws that can be challenging for clients to navigate. Our aim was to provide a clear overview while emphasizing the importance of assessing the specific details and advertising claims of each medical device.

CEELM: What were the main commonalities/trends shared across the surveyed CEE jurisdictions?

Dabrowicz: In nearly all jurisdictions, medical device regulations cover several topics due to the diverse range of devices and the expectations from both the sector and the public. These regulations often include technical requirements such as disclaimers and mandatory disclosures. The structure of medical device advertising tends to resemble that of medicinal products.

Balicki: In Poland, regulations were drafted in a way that closely mirrors parts of the medicines law, with some sections nearly copy-pasted. The initial draft of the regulation was intended to address medical devices, but it still contained literal references to medicines.

Samec: This also applies to the Czech Republic, where we have a single act covering both medicinal products and medical devices, whereas some sections regulating medical devices almost copy medicinal products.

Macovei: In my opinion, it’s all about efficiency – why reinvent the wheel when you already have a draft to work from? I agree that this approach appears to be the case in Romania. The challenge lies in getting our authorities to effectively implement these regulations. While the current approach seems reasonable, the wide variety of devices makes implementation difficult. We’re still in the beginning stage, so it remains to be seen how it will unfold.

Balicki: I’d also add that, in Poland, there is a positive outlook because having regulations for medical devices that are similar to those we’ve had experience with for a long time helps us understand and predict how authorities will act. This familiarity should make it easier for companies to operate. Although there are established practices, these products aren’t just a copy-paste job, and there are still aspects that need to be discussed with the authorities.

Musat: The area I am focused on – advertising of self-care medical devices – was not addressed when the EU regulation came into force in terms of advertising. However, the local authority took this as an opportunity to impose in the implementation legislation a specific pre-approval procedure for advertising materials and to regulate advertising channels. We also anticipate that advertising for medical devices will become more restricted and focused on providing correct and complete information to consumers. As the regulatory environment becomes increasingly stringent, we expect significant delays in the procedures due to the additional burden on the already busy regulator, which is handling compliance on medicines’ advertising as well.

Macovei: It’s important to differentiate between countries in CEE when it comes to regulations. Some countries have had regulations in place for a long time and have seen them implemented effectively. On the other hand, in countries such as Romania, while we have the legislation, it only outlines principles without specific implementation norms. This creates uncertainty, as we can only anticipate potential outcomes – both positive and negative. All of us here are experts in life sciences regulation and are familiar with the challenges of medicine advertising. The question remains whether there is sufficient capacity to review all applications and if it’s necessary to apply these regulations to all products on the market. We’ll have clearer answers once the regulations are fully drafted.

Appl: I completely agree. From an Austrian legal perspective, we’ve had regulations in place for quite some time but they are spread across different laws. The main one is the Medical Devices Act, which makes a distinction between who you can advertise to, distinguishing between healthcare professionals and consumers. There are also differences depending on the type of medical device being advertised. Additionally, general rules of our Unfair Competition Act apply, with the overarching principle that advertising must never be misleading. However, the exact details of what constitutes a misleading claim may remain unclear, especially as there is currently little substantial case law in Austria, making it challenging to assess potential issues in advance.

CEELM: You mainly focus on local legislation. Do you expect that the topic will be regulated at the EU level anytime soon?

Macovei: Nothing that I’m aware of indicates that an EU-wide regulation is on the horizon. It would be beneficial to have such a regulation but there is none being drafted currently. This is partly because local regulations are being developed independently, and we don’t even have a unified approach for medicines. Member states have chosen to handle this as part of their national approaches, with only a few limited exceptions for general advertising rules. Beyond that, it remains largely a national matter.

CEELM: What were the most distinguishing elements that stood out when looking at the specifics?

Appl: I’ll start with the commonalities – I think a common factor across CEE countries is the distinction between advertising to healthcare professionals and to consumers. The differences lie in how advertising should be conducted. For example, in Austria, the Medical Devices Act specifies which types of medical devices cannot be advertised to consumers, in particular products that require a doctor’s prescription. Further, there are also certain rules on the nature of the advertising message, in particular, that it must be primarily informative and factual, focusing on providing objective information, and that comparative advertising is not permitted.

Samec: In most CEE countries, regulations for advertising to healthcare professionals are distinguished from regulations for the general public. We have found it interesting that for example in Slovakia, there is no such distinction at all. Recently, we had several clients dealing with medical device samples, and we found that regulation is quite varied: in half of the countries, such as Hungary and Croatia, it is regulated, while in Austria, Poland, and Slovakia, it is not. A recent client request about the provision of samples in quantities highlighted that while this is well-regulated in the Czech Republic, it remains less regulated in other countries.

Musat: In Romania, the distinction between advertising toward the general public and healthcare professionals is becoming more defined, with a notable change being the requirement for preapproval of advertising materials. Since the legislation is still evolving, I anticipate the introduction of secondary laws that may regulate certain channels or impose additional content or compliance requirements and more responsibility for the entities responsible for promotion. Local authorities are looking to highly regulated countries like Denmark and France, and we expect similar regulations to be adopted here soon.

CEELM: What are the most important legislative updates on the horizon in terms of medical device advertising that you’re keeping an eye on?

Musat: Currently, we’re expecting secondary legislation in Romania and we keep an eye on the regulator’s approach to procedural and content rules, marketing, and retail activities.

Macovei: We should also keep an eye on any communications from the regulator to see if our authorities consider forming a joint effort or working group to align their approach. While it’s uncertain if this is feasible or even on their radar, it’s something worth monitoring.

Dabrowicz: As for Poland, we’ve received some signals about upcoming changes in advertising regulations for medical products. The Ministry of Health has indicated that it wants to adjust the rules to regulate electronic communications to some extent. While this is crucial for medical products, it could also have implications for medical devices.

Samec: In the Czech Republic, the regulation seems to be settled now, with a general act that comprehensively covers most product-related aspects. Additionally, the regulator has issued several guidelines that, while not legally binding, provide insight into how they will interpret and assess potential breaches of the law. We typically use these guidelines as the foundation for our advice. They include provisions on the distribution of medical device samples and detailed interpretations of advertising to both the general public and healthcare professionals. Given this, we don’t anticipate significant changes on the horizon.

CEELM: Do you think the new regulations will affect the competitive landscape in the medical device industry?

Balicki: We don’t see much influence since the regulations don’t cover that aspect directly. However, the adoption of new medical regulations does require companies to adjust their internal procedures, as mentioned earlier, to align with the new requirements. Companies with extensive experience in medicinal products are generally better equipped to navigate these changes, which can even offer a competitive advantage in certain countries.

CEELM: What changes will medical device companies need to make to their promotional strategies?

Dabrowicz: All clients now need to ensure that materials are reviewed at the local level, as a global review alone is no longer sufficient. The adoption of these laws typically requires new internal procedures, and it’s generally easier for companies with larger portfolios to adapt, as they can often replicate some of their existing processes.

Musat: In principle, apart from the content of the materials, companies should put in place contractual documentation with advertising partners which should clearly set the content guidelines and outline the contractual responsibilities of each party. Additionally, implementing a pre-approval procedure will be important to ensure all materials comply with the new regulations before they are released.

It’s also worth noting that some companies have recruited regulatory professionals with experience from more regulated medicine sectors, which often involves bringing in individuals from companies familiar with strict regulations. In Europe, the advertising of prescription drugs is allowed in strict conditions only for healthcare professionals. The new recruits are likely to bring a wealth of knowledge from these more regulated environments, which will be valuable in navigating the new requirements.

Macovei: Building on that, this represents a significant shift for companies that were not previously regulated. They will need to train their staff to understand what qualifies as advertising under the new rules. In the past, they were used to freely communicating with healthcare professionals, but now this will only be permissible under specific conditions. Companies will need to implement new policies and foster a change in mindset to ensure compliance. This transition could involve additional costs and efforts, and might not be as smooth as we’d prefer.

Appl: I see a clear difference in Austria. As regulations have been in place for a few years, companies already familiar with the Austrian market are aware of the restrictions on advertising. Although training employees on new regulations can be challenging, it becomes less of an issue once internal policies are established. Companies entering the Austrian market are often unfamiliar with the national regulations and need to acquire this knowledge quickly, as ignorance of local regulations cannot prevent penalties.

CEELM: Now that the guide is out, what will be the next focus for the life sciences team of DLA Piper?

Balicki: We’re not done with the topic of advertising regulations for medical devices yet. We plan to organize a webinar to develop the topic further, with our clients and other guests invited to join.

Macovei: It will be interesting to observe how the digital landscape, particularly software as a digital device, evolves. The pandemic has accelerated advancements in this area, and it will be crucial to see how these developments are regulated and how authorities enforce the new legislation. Key regulatory aspects will include advertising practices, data protection, cybersecurity, and emerging developments in AI. These changes are expected to drive significant health improvements and offer much to look forward to in the future.

JPM & Partners has recently embarked on a transformative journey of both rebranding its operations and integrating with the law offices of Lana Vukmirovic Misic in Montenegro – a “long-time JPM friend and partner.” JPM & Partners Senior Partners Nenad Popovic and Lana Vukmirovic Misic discuss the firm’s recent rebranding, strategic expansion, and the motivations behind these as well as what comes next for the firm.

CEELM: Focusing firstly on the rebranding – can you explain the motivation behind updating the name of your firm?

Popovic: This is actually the second time we have made improvements to the registered name of our firm. Initially, it was Jankovic Popovic Mitic, then it became JPM Jankovic Popovic Mitic. The latest rebranding was implemented to further develop our brand and recognize the importance of partnership. We have been in the market for a long time and plan to remain here for even longer: we value the partnership model both internally and externally, and we wanted to emphasize this concept in the market.

Simplifying the brand was also a goal. However, the JPM abbreviation – which initially coincided with our seniority order at the time – taken by itself created a distinctiveness challenge. To overcome this, we decided to adopt the name JPM & Partners, as it not only acknowledges the partners within our firm, but also our external partners and those who have moved on to establish successful firms after being part of our team.

CEELM: What are the key objectives of the rebranding initiative?

Popovic: The primary objective is to bring more people under one brand. We aim to integrate law firms from different jurisdictions and create a unified organization that consistently delivers high-quality services across regions. Our main goal is to ensure that clients feel comfortable and confident, knowing they can expect the same level of excellence from JPM & Partners in any jurisdiction.

CEELM: How will the rebranding impact the firm’s strategy, structure, work, and partnerships?

Popovic: The rebranding process will involve incorporating more senior partners, particularly those who are responsible for specific jurisdictions. Initially, we are not planning on integrating the business financially. Instead, the focus will be on integrating operations and assessing the volume of business generated. Over time, we will develop financial models and structures, taking into consideration the unique nature of valuing law firms. The main objective is to maintain consistent quality across jurisdictions and ensure that clients have access to the same level of expertise and reliability. Additionally, the rebranding aims to leverage local resources in other projects and utilize the broader expertise of the firm.

CEELM: You mentioned external partners – could you tell us more about those external partnerships?

Popovic: We have established strong relationships with several law firms in the region, such as our partners in Lex Mundi.

We believe in having local partners on the ground, as it enables us to provide better coverage and maintain the same level of quality work. Our approach is focused on developing true partnerships with capable and reliable local firms that align with our values. The integration of these firms under the JPM & Partners brand will bring additional value to our clients and allow us to leverage their expertise in our projects.

We are excited about the first integration and, while we have goals and timelines in place, we are particularly eager to gain valuable experience from this process, which will guide our future steps.

CEELM: Could you tell us a bit more about joining forces with Vukmirovic Misic?

Popovic: The satisfaction of cooperating with the Vukmirovic Misic law firm during the last couple of years, feedback from the clients that we have advised together, and the feeling that we fit together was the reason we have decided to proceed with the integration. 

At JPM have always felt, having the experience from our brief but successful joint venture in Sarajevo 20 years ago with our partner at the time from Austria, that outsourcing legal services to other ex-Yugoslav jurisdictions from Belgrade, is not the right way. The best way to serve the client is good local service. Only in cases where the local legal service is lacking resources in certain areas should we bring in our knowledge and experience. 

This, together with the legal tech we are using and the potential for clients who are present in both jurisdictions to be served with the same level of expertise and experience, is, in our opinion, the best way to approach expanding into the jurisdictions of Western Balkan countries. 

CEELM: Lana, turning this to your viewpoint a bit more: what was the rationale for the move on your end?

Vukmirovic Misic: Anyone who worked on cross-border transactions or multi-jurisdiction issues in the region knows how difficult it is to put together different firms under the same umbrella of standards and approaches. This applies regardless of participation in different alliances. I am convinced that only a one-brand approach with shared values, standards, and technologies can create a standardized service for clients in different jurisdictions in the region.

Considering the size of the regional markets, it makes perfect sense to exchange knowledge and experience in all areas. And I am not only referring to the expertise we often look for from our colleagues in Belgrade (such as arbitration) but also vice versa (e.g., hospitality & tourism, financial services). This is particularly important since the countries in the region have often different industry strengths or are more advanced in certain sectors.

For us, aside from the great cooperation we had and the shared values of our firms, the commitment of JPM & Partners to innovation and technologies and a joint vision is what put us together.

Additionally, I feel that this integration is an excellent sign of the Montenegrin legal market evolving. Going back 15 years, Montenegro had no local firms doing this type of work. Most of my generation of lawyers grew up, in a sense, with Belgrade-based firms. With this kind of cooperation, I think that we are finally seeing the Montenegrin market maturing, with firms being true partners.

CEELM: What structure are you creating and will that be a blueprint going forward? What’s changing from how you’ve been working together in the past?

Popovic: We are taking a one-brand approach that is recognizable and accepted in our industry. We share JPM & Partners business and service standards and guidelines, legal technology, and we are expanding not only our geographical presence but also our client base and expertise, while remaining separate legal entities pursuant to local bar rules.

Furthermore, Lana is now our Senior Partner and together with other JPM Senior Partners is participating in all day-to-day business activities along with being in charge of providing legal services in Montenegro. This also includes the expansion to other Western Balkans jurisdictions where we are considering and discussing further steps applying the same one-brand approach with established and recognized local law firms.

Vukmirovic Misic: To add to what Nenad said, we are now also sharing the same domain and marketing.

CEELM: How does integrating these law firms under the JPM & Partners brand benefit your clients?

Popovic: As we progress with the rebranding and integration process, we want to assure our clients that the same level of quality and commitment they have come to expect from us will be maintained. Our focus is on building a strong network of partners who not only bring additional value but also share our values and work together as true partners. By integrating law firms from various jurisdictions, we aim to create a seamless experience for our clients, where they can rely on the expertise and reliability of the JPM & Partners brand, no matter the location. We understand the challenges of working in smaller markets and the importance of having local partners who understand the nuances and intricacies of their respective jurisdictions.

CEELM: What role does technology play in the integration process?

Popovic: Technology will play a vital role in this integration process. We have successfully implemented legal tech solutions, such as AI in document review and business development, and we continue to explore new ways to leverage technology for the benefit of our clients and the efficiency of our operations. This allows us to seamlessly integrate teams and resources across different jurisdictions, ensuring a cohesive and collaborative approach.

CEELM: Are there any challenges you anticipate during the rebranding and integration process?

Popovic: While the rebranding and integration process may pose certain challenges, particularly in terms of technology implementation and ensuring consistent quality across jurisdictions, we are confident that our experience, expertise, and commitment to partnership will guide us through these obstacles. We want to assure our clients that we are fully dedicated to providing them with the same level of excellence and personalized service they have come to expect from us.

CEELM: Any last thoughts to share with our readers?

Popovic: The rebranding and integration process at JPM & Partners represents our commitment to recognizing and cherishing the partnership model both internally and externally. By uniting law firms under a single brand, we aim to provide our clients with seamless access to high-quality legal services across multiple jurisdictions. We are excited about the opportunities this endeavor will bring and look forward to continuing our journey with a strong focus on collaboration, innovation, and delivering exceptional results for our clients.

M&A in the CEE region has been a captivating theater of evolving trends and geopolitical dynamics of late. Schoenherr Partner Markus Piuk shares his insights on the current market trends and delves into the influence of the US-China relationship, the status of Russian-based transactions, the resilience of the CEE M&A market, and the prospects of industry consolidation and growth.

CEELM: What’s the latest on M&A activity in CEE?

Piuk: The markets are more active than I expected: there is a lot of movement, despite the not-so-great economic news and the conflict in Ukraine. And there is comparatively more M&A activity in the region, yet on a smaller scale than what’s being reported by colleagues in Western jurisdictions. The more you look West, the slower it is – but with larger transactions.

CEELM: What is driving the M&A work in the region?

Piuk: The M&A levels in the CEE region can be attributed to a multitude of factors, geopolitics not the least of those. Notably, the strained US-China relationship has prompted Chinese investors to look beyond their traditional markets. CEE has become appealing due to its relative stability and growing economic power. Chinese investors have restructured their approach, enhancing their M&A teams and thoroughly understanding the business landscape in the Eastern EU.

Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, and Hungary are top contenders for Chinese investment, each offering distinct opportunities. Hungary works best for government-controlled companies, while the others are targeted more for private companies. And there is also quite an interest in Turkiye. Ultimately, Chinese investors are screening and looking for investment opportunities across the region and are much more prepared to adhere to local and EU M&A rules. I would assume there will be a fair share of Chinese-rooted M&A work in the future.

Additionally, Russian-based M&A work, which had diminished, is now making a comeback for a good reason: for many major regional or global transactions ties with Russia are almost a given. Depending on the nationality of the buyer, there needs to be a carve-out of the Russian assets from the transaction perimeter. And that’s not always easy due to the restrictions in place: you need an actual decree signed by the Russian government. However, we’re happy to report we managed to get that for a couple of transactions. So, it’s becoming a workable solution, which is good news for transactions that are on hold: it is now possible to implement direct carve-out of Russian assets.

Finally, the region’s local capital, particularly in Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, has also driven substantial activity. That would have been my guess 15 years ago: to have strong local capital and sizable activity driven by local money, with true regional players. And this is great news and a factor of force for the entire region – the capital is already here, ready to be deployed locally. Serbia also has some emerging regional players reaching out to the former Yugoslav countries and further afield (in sectors like online gambling). And the best thing about all this? It’s looking like local entrepreneurs are showing confidence in the region and its prospects – they no longer feel the need to move their money to the west.

CEELM: And what can you tell us about the buyers, the sellers, and the most attractive targets?

Piuk: Buyers in the CEE region – including the Chinese investors mentioned earlier – are more prepared and informed than ever. They seek to adhere to EU regulations while targeting companies that fit their strategic goals. Still, I would say we’re yet under the spell of a mismatch in price expectations. Given the context, purchasers expect to buy cheap – which doesn’t happen, as almost nobody is pressured to sell for now. Sellers, on the other hand, still have the price valuations from 18 months ago in mind. That price mismatch will take some time to resolve. But when those price expectations do meet each other, we expect many more transactions to happen.

Regarding industries, interestingly, M&A activity in the CEE region isn’t limited to specific industries. Infrastructure and energy projects are thriving, but we’re witnessing activity across various sectors. Notably, the technology and private equity sectors have faced some investor caution in recent times, and it’s become more difficult to raise venture capital. A brilliant idea that would have drowned in money two years ago is having difficulty today. But that’s not necessarily CEE specific, either. And the region’s entrepreneurs are more used to that reality, so they are adapting and continuing to pursue opportunities. Finally, distressed asset transactions seem likely to increase in the future, driven by a challenging economic environment and higher interest rates.

CEELM: Following from that, how do you expect the markets to shape up in the future?

Piuk: Right now, CEE markets are not that young anymore. All large international groups have already made their decisions about whether to focus on our specific markets. So, I’m expecting further consolidation in retail, insurance, and banks. It’s a healthy consolidation process that’s been on the cards for a while – allowing players to refocus on core markets. As the region is increasing in wealth, we’ll also see international players step in with production facilities or distribution assets and invest in the region. That will be balanced by some others deciding to leave. All this repositioning will lead to more M&A work. But the one constant is that the market is increasing in size and economic power. The CEE region is on the map, and every player will need to have a plan in place, essentially for how to engage or not engage in CEE.

And I also expect there will be opportunistic purchasing, as we’re approaching a more challenging economic environment with rather high interest rates and a slowing economy. So distressed asset transactions might increase, primarily buy-restructure-sell transactions, which is always good work for lawyers, of course. Finally, buyers are increasingly focusing on the great human capital in CEE. And that’s a strong proposition: you’re buying into quality human capital and into markets that are outgrowing the Western EU. In the end, it’s just simple math on the returns you can expect.

CEELM: And what challenges do you foresee for M&A lawyers and their work in the coming year?

Piuk: Looking ahead, the next 12 months hold promise for the M&A practice in CEE. If distressed transactions become more prevalent, M&A lawyers can expect a surge in work that requires speed and precision. Despite potential challenges, the region’s economic power is on the rise, so I don’t think we’ll lack work.

Still, just like in many other parts of the world, the legal profession in CEE is experiencing challenges related to talent acquisition and retention. The younger generation seeks a different work-life balance and a flexible environment, and law firms are actively exploring solutions to cater to these needs. While AI and technological investments are becoming increasingly relevant, the human touch will remain crucial, especially in negotiations and certain drafting processes – so I don’t see the war for talent abating anytime soon.

CEELM: Tell us a bit about the deal and your firm’s role in getting it across the finish line. 

Savoric: We acted as a legal advisor to the funds of the leading global banks Goldman Sachs and Softbank in their EUR 500 million investment into the Croatian Rimac Group unicorn, now known as Bugatti-Rimac. The Rimac Group is a Croatian tech and electric supercar production company, famously known for the world’s fastest-accelerating production car, the Rimac Nevera. The Softbank and Goldman Sachs investment funds gave this leading electrified vehicle manufacturer and technology group a valuation of more than EUR 2 billion. The raised capital will be used primarily for the further development of Rimac Technology in the field of serial production for global automakers. This is also the largest investment in the Rimac Group so far – but also in a Croatian start-up or scale-up – investors such as Porsche, Hyundai, and Kia or Chinese battery manufacturer Camel Group have so far invested about USD 320 million. Founder and CEO Mate Rimac will remain the largest shareholder of the Rimac Group, the majority shareholder of the recently developed Bugatti-Rimac, and the sole shareholder of Rimac Technology.

Partner Nina Radic Kuzik was our team leader for the SoftBank investment, while Partner Mia Lazic led our team advising on the Goldman Sachs investment. The lead advisor for SoftBank was White & Case, while the lead advisor for Goldman Sachs was Linklaters.

CEELM: At what stage did you become involved and what do you believe it was about your firm/team that won you the mandate?

Savoric: As one of the leading Croatian law firms, in particular having an impeccable track record in private equity investments, we are one of the first choices for “best friends” law firms in the UK and US, so we were selected and appointed by the client and those firms. We were involved in the early stages of the transaction, providing comprehensive Croatian legal advice and guidance to both the Goldman Sachs and SoftBank investment funds. Our team’s extensive experience in cross-border investments, equity injections, and corporate law, coupled with our deep understanding of the automotive and technology sectors, positioned us as the ideal choice for this mandate. Our unwavering commitment to excellence and our ability to navigate complex legal landscapes ultimately won us the trust of these esteemed clients.

CEELM: What do you believe were the main considerations for which the jurors picked this deal as the winner?

Savoric: We strongly believe that the winner is chosen not by the largest deals in terms of their value, but by how challenging they were and how the team was able to handle them and get them across the finish line. We believe and hope our colleagues – the reputable jurors – realized how challenging and important this deal was. Working with two different clients on the same project was a challenge in itself, but having to set up firm privacy walls was a one-of-a-kind experience.

The jurors who selected this deal as the winner most likely considered several key factors. Firstly, the sheer magnitude of the investment and the involvement of two prominent global investors underscore the significance of this transaction. Secondly, the deal highlights the growing prominence of the Croatian market and the CEE region as a whole, attracting international attention and fostering economic growth. Lastly, the successful completion of this deal demonstrates the exceptional capabilities of our firm and our team, showcasing our ability to handle complex transactions under pressure.

CEELM: What were the most complex aspects of the deal from a legal perspective? And what were some of the biggest difficulties faced in the process?

Savoric: The deal presented several intricate challenges. One of the more complex aspects was simultaneously acting for two clients and providing tailor-made advice and guidance with bullet-proof privacy walls. The main thing obviously was to provide focused, solution-oriented Croatian law advice and guidance at the highest standards, and, finally, navigate the regulatory requirements to successfully close this deal. The biggest difficulties faced in the process included coordinating with multiple parties involved in the transaction, managing timelines, and addressing any unexpected issues that arose. Additionally, the deal required a thorough understanding of the technology and automotive industries, as well as the unique intellectual property considerations associated with Rimac Group’s cutting-edge innovations. Our team had to meticulously address these complexities while ensuring that the interests of both Goldman Sachs and SoftBank were protected throughout the process.

CEELM: In contrast, what, in your opinion, went particularly smoothly and what do you believe contributed to it?

Savoric: Despite the challenges, certain aspects of the deal proceeded remarkably smoothly. Our team’s proactive approach to communication and collaboration with the great and reputable White & Case and Linklaters facilitated a seamless negotiation process. Furthermore, both international and local counsels’ in-depth knowledge of the relevant industries and legal frameworks enabled us to anticipate potential roadblocks and devise effective solutions, ensuring a successful outcome for all parties.

CEELM: In your view, what is the significance of this deal for the Croatian market?

Savoric: This deal represents a significant milestone for the Croatian market, as it represents a significant investment in a local company with significant growth potential. It also demonstrates the country’s ability to attract substantial foreign investment and showcases the potential of its burgeoning tech and automotive sectors. The investment in the Rimac Group will likely spur further growth and innovation within the industry, creating new opportunities for local businesses and talent. 

CEELM: What about the wider CEE region?

Savoric: The deal’s impact extends beyond Croatia, as it signals a growing interest in the CEE region from global investors. The success of this transaction may encourage further investments in the area, particularly in sectors such as technology, automotive, and renewable energy, stimulating economic growth and fostering innovation throughout the region.

CEELM: A company like Rimac is a rare breed – do you believe we can expect other similar deals in the near future? Why/Why not?

Savoric: While the Rimac Group, now named Bugatti-Rimac, is indeed a rare breed, we strongly believe that this deal will pave the way for similar transactions in the near future. The success of this investment showcases the immense potential of the Croatian market and the CEE region and it will undeniably inspire other innovative companies to pursue their ambitions and attract international investors. As the region as a whole, and Croatia in particular, continues to evolve and produce groundbreaking technologies and as global investors continue to seek opportunities in emerging markets, we expect to see more deals of this nature. 

This article was originally published in Issue 10.5 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here. 

As Lexpo – The Legal Innovation Event returns in 2023 after a three-year hiatus, showcasing the latest trends in legal innovation in Continental Europe, CEELM spoke with Dentons Europe Director of Innovation and Member of Lexpo’s Advisory Board Andrea Miskolczi to gain an insight into the current state of technology and innovation in CEE, and what the event’s attendees have to look forward to.

CEELM: To start with, how would you describe the current state of innovation in CEE in recent years?

Miskolczi: Overall, the pandemic played a role as a catalyst in adopting technology. While its impact was not as strong as we had anticipated, there has been steady and somewhat slow progress in this regard. There have been some positive changes such as an increase in remote work-related tools and the popularity of collaboration and electronic signatures solutions, but there is still room for improvement in the adoption of technology.

Recently, there has been a lot of buzz around ChatGPT, as well as large language models/generative AI technologies in general. This has generated a huge curiosity, and I believe that this is momentum for other types of technologies, rather than traditional automation solutions like document automation or low-code project management platforms, to also attract new interest. However, with this buzz comes a fear of AI and that might also affect technology adoption in general. Fear is never a good motivator to try something out.

CEELM: Under the current circumstances, what are the specific strategies adopted by your firm – Dentons – to remain up to date with modern technology trends?

Miskolczi: At Dentons in Europe, we are leveraging this newfound interest to discuss other software solutions as well. There are many tools that our lawyers can use immediately. In connection with large language models/generative AI tools, instead of hastily jumping on board with the first available solutions, we aim to approach this strategically. We are testing key solutions, evaluating when and where we can optimize investments, and carefully considering how we can access technology and what our ideal technology portfolio should look like in the future.

Moreover, we will examine how we can use legal data and whether we need to clean and prepare it for making the most of these technologies. We will also determine the necessary skills and training that lawyers require and assess the future composition of teams. Our approach is not limited to just three or four alternatives. Instead, we aim to take a step back and consider our firm and industry as a whole. This includes examining what it means and identifying steps we can take regarding people, processes, data, and technology.

CEELM: In what ways could Lexpo assist legal professionals in addressing the present challenges?

Miskolczi: To begin with, the conference, scheduled on June 12-13 in Amsterdam, will showcase a plethora of available legal tech software solutions. Lexpo presents an excellent opportunity to explore the market, both in terms of vendors and workshops. Additionally, we will have several interesting presentations and panel discussions about some of the hottest topics. For example, we will host sessions on generative AI, discuss the role of leaders in ensuring successful technology adoption, and there will be very relevant sessions on legal operations or cybersecurity.

It’s worth noting that the event isn’t solely focused on law firms. There will be several sessions dedicated to in-house legal departments, covering both similar and distinct topics. Lexpo’s international nature is also a significant advantage, as it provides a platform for attendees from Spain to Warsaw, and other locations across Europe to participate in the conference. Thus, Lexpo is an excellent opportunity to connect with professionals from different countries and engage in meaningful discussions about the latest legal technology developments.

CEELM: How would lawyers from CEE gain advantages from participating in the event?

Miskolczi: The conference doesn’t have a specific regional focus, but rather an international one that could be of interest to CEE participants. Attending Lexpo provides an opportunity to learn about the latest developments, what other market participants are doing, and the vendors and topics available. Unlike conferences held in New York or London, where the software provided might not be available beyond the country, attendees from CEE will leave with a better understanding of both general and specific software and tasks, making it an international yet practical event.

CEELMDirect Profile Pick: A series of interviews with partners and firms with Premium profiles on the CEELMDirect legal directory. Today’s interview: Gjorgji Georgievski, Partner at ODI Law in Skopje. 

CEELMDirect: Hi Gjorgji, and thanks for speaking with us. Let’s start at the beginning. What led you into the law in the first place?

Georgievski: It was my mother who sparked my interest in law. She worked as an in-house legal counsel at the Macedonian Natural Science Museum for her entire career. When I was in high school, she would occasionally bring her work home, and I found myself drawn to the piles of documents scattered across our dining table. However, it was her involvement in litigation that truly piqued my interest in law. As she represented the Natural Science Museum in multiple court cases, she would share the details of the trials with me. Her passion for the law was infectious, and she was always willing to answer my questions, no matter how trivial they seemed. Through these conversations with my mother, I became captivated by the intellectual challenges of practicing law. Then, during my sophomore year, my fascination transformed into a fierce determination to become a lawyer. Watching the movie The Devil’s Advocate had a significant impact on me. I was mesmerized by the character of Kevin Lomax, played by Keanu Reeves, the ambitious young criminal defense attorney who is recruited by a prestigious law firm headed by the charismatic and diabolical John Milton, played by Al Pacino. He quickly becomes the best lawyer in the firm and works on high-profile cases.

CEELMDirect: Once you began law school, what was your favorite course and professor?

Georgievski: As someone who imagined myself becoming a criminal defense attorney, Criminal Law was easily my favorite course in law school. And of all my brilliant professors, Gjorgji Marjanovic stood out as my absolute favorite. With a long and distinguished academic career, Professor Marjanovic taught criminal law and related subjects at various universities across Macedonia, Serbia, and Slovenia. He had also served as a visiting professor at esteemed institutions in Germany, Italy, Austria, and the US. But what really set him apart was his ability to make complex legal concepts easy to understand and downright entertaining. His lectures were the most sought-after in law school, and for a good reason. His passion for the law was infectious, and he had a knack for injecting humor into even the driest of topics. He was a true gem in the world of legal academia, and I feel grateful to have been one of his students.

CEELMDirect: So, as a lawyer, how would you describe your job? What is it, at a fundamental level, you do for your clients?

Georgievski: In my opinion, at the core of the legal profession lies the responsibility of lawyers to ensure that clients receive a sense of security and clarity in a world often rife with ambiguity and uncertainty. This is achieved through a combination of legal risk management techniques, which involve identifying, mitigating, and resolving potential legal issues before they escalate into major conflicts. However, when legal risks do arise, a lawyer’s duty is to act on behalf of clients and represent them in disputes to ensure that their interests are protected, and their legal rights are upheld. Ultimately, in my opinion, the objective of the legal profession is to help clients navigate the complex and ever-changing legal landscape with confidence and clarity and to provide them with the certainty they need to move forward with their business, personal, and professional goals.

CEELMDirect: Now a personal question. Let’s say I’m coming to Skopje for a weekend. What one place or activity should I absolutely not miss?

Georgievski: When you’re in Skopje, one place you simply cannot miss is the Old Bazaar. This vibrant marketplace is a true gem of the city, boasting a rich history that dates back centuries. In fact, it is one of the largest and oldest bazaars in the entire Balkan region. The bazaar is a bustling hub of activity, with a wide array of shops and restaurants offering everything from handmade crafts and jewelry to traditional Macedonian cuisine. When it comes to Macedonian cuisine, the Old Bazaar is an absolute treasure trove of delicious dishes and local specialties. The bazaar is home to a number of restaurants and eateries that specialize in traditional Macedonian cuisine, with menus that are sure to leave you feeling satisfied and happy. One such dish not to be missed is the famous Macedonian kebab, a grilled meat dish typically made with pork or lamb and served with fresh bread and a side of ajvar, a savory red pepper and eggplant spread. If you’re looking for something sweet, be sure to try some traditional Macedonian desserts like tulumba, a sweet pastry made with fried dough and soaked in syrup, or baklava, a rich and decadent pastry made with layers of phyllo dough and honey.

The Old Bazaar is also home to a number of cultural landmarks that are well worth visiting. One such landmark is the 15th-century Stone Bridge, which spans the Vardar River and serves as a symbol of Skopje’s rich history and cultural heritage. You can also explore the Daut Pasha Hammam, a stunning Turkish bathhouse that has been fully restored and now serves as a venue for cultural events and exhibitions. Another highlight of the Old Bazaar is the Kapan Han, a historic caravanserai built in the 15th century to provide shelter for travelers and merchants passing through the region. Today, it has been restored and transformed into a charming complex of shops, galleries, and cafes.

CEELMDirect: I think I already know the answer to this, but just in case: What’s your favorite book or movie about the practice of law, and why?

Georgievski: Without a doubt, my favorite movie about the practice of law is the one that ignited my passion for becoming a lawyer: The Devil’s Advocate. The film tells the story of a driven young criminal defense attorney who finds himself grappling with a series of ethical dilemmas upon joining a prestigious law firm. Exploring themes of ambition, morality, and the nature of evil, the movie is anchored by a powerful performance from one of my all-time favorite actors, Al Pacino.

One of the most unforgettable quotes from the film comes from Pacino’s character during a pivotal scene, where he delivers the line: “Vanity, definitely my favorite sin.” It’s a line that perfectly encapsulates the film’s central themes, as well as the allure and seductive power of the legal profession.

As someone who has been deeply inspired by the world of law, The Devil’s Advocate continues to hold a special place in my heart. The film features some of the most iconic depictions of legal practice ever captured on screen and offers a nuanced exploration of the complex moral and ethical issues that lawyers often face in their work. For anyone interested in the law or simply looking for a great film, The Devil’s Advocate is an absolute must-see.

CEELMDirect: I’m sold. Thanks so much for speaking with us!

CEELMDirect Profile Pick: A series of interviews with partners and firms with Premium profiles on the CEELMDirect legal directory. Today’s interview: Hugh Owen, Head of Legal at PwC CEE.

CEELMDirect: Hi Hugh, and thanks for speaking with us. Let’s start at the beginning. What led you to the law in the first place?

Owen: It was the question: Arts or Sciences? At a certain point in my schooling, I had to make some choices about what I wanted to study. I was actually much better at maths and science, but I really struggled with the fact that there were right and wrong answers. What I liked about literature and history was the chance to express myself – that it was possible to have your own interpretations. Perhaps to a certain extent, I didn’t like being wrong, and I relished the chance to build different and sustainable narratives. More simply, my father said that I was terribly argumentative and that a career in law beckoned. I didn’t disagree with him.

CEELMDirect: Once you got to law school, what was your favorite course and professor?

Owen: Well, funnily enough, I didn’t exactly excel at contract law at university, which is a little ironic (and a pity as we were taught by the legendary Tony Guest). I went to King’s College London, and I have to say that the quality of teaching there was outstanding. We had amazing lecturers like Professor Ashworth for Criminal Law and David Hayton on Trusts. I particularly enjoyed Criminology and Jurisprudence – I think I enjoyed them because of their philosophical aspects. I was fascinated by the idea of the social contract, how societies work, and what holds them together. In the end, though, I gravitated towards Tax. I studied with the much-loved and late Jeff Price and Adrian Shipwright, and I ended up helping them write a couple of books on Tax law. I enjoyed Tax because Jeff breathed life and fun into what could otherwise have been a rather dry topic, and he taught it brilliantly. I was quite diligent and eventually ended up working in Tax at Allen & Overy for a couple of years. But I didn’t learn my childhood lesson and ended up leaving Tax because I felt that it was too much “right or wrong,” and I had no room to express myself. I had forgotten that I didn’t really like that aspect.

CEELMDirect: What’s your favorite book or movie about the law?

Owen: The Life of Brian.

CEELMDirect: Turning serious, for a moment. You joined PwC in September of 2021. What’s your vision for PwC Legal? What role do you think it can play in the region?

Owen: I want PwC Legal in CEE to become “more than a law firm.” PwC Legal has rebranded to Legal Business Solutions, but it’s not just a brand thing – it’s a redefinition of what legal services can be with an organization like PwC. I don’t really want to just show up and say, “OK, we need to hire more lawyers in real estate, competition, M&A, etc.” Yes, we do need to hire more lawyers across the whole of CEE, but I don’t want to do that just to chase the tails of big, traditional law firms. PwC has, in CEE, hundreds of people who are at the top of their game in advisory, deals, tax, audit, and a myriad of other services. If PwC lawyers can come together effectively with all these colleagues, we have the chance to present a very attractive, unique, and superior service to our clients. We talk about solving our clients’ problems, and I think that the low-hanging fruit is right there – for PwC lawyers to be part of a more permanent, long-term team of advisors solving clients’ problems. And we have the capability and the head start to blend technological aspects into legal business solutions too. The candidates that are approaching us now are telling us that these aspects set us apart from traditional law firm competition and can be an attractive proposition for them. I have painted this all very poetically, and I know that, at the moment, the mechanics of this are far more prosaic, but I am confident that we are now moving forward with a clearer sense of where we want to be in only a few years’ time.

CEELMDirect: Getting back to your personal experience: What firm social event or retreat have you personally enjoyed most over the years, and why?

Owen: There are several, if I may. The first is an event in Spain, many years ago, where we more or less went out into the desert and reflected very deeply indeed on who we were, what made us tick, and how we could rebuild ourselves into an ambitious, driven, successful practice. Although I got almost all of the key conclusions profoundly and iconoclastically wrong, it still worked, even for me.

The second is a training event in Amsterdam, run by Caroline Webb, called Strategic Conversations, where once again we reflected on what our clients really thought of us (they were very kind indeed, by the way) and how we should be more confident in ourselves; how the people around us value our opinions in a more holistic sense, not just what we think and say as lawyers. I think that it was the first step in understanding what it took to become a boardroom advisor. I also learned a number of very deep things about myself that determined the perhaps less obvious path that I took in my career in the last 10-15 years.

The third is my first partner event in Dubai (again many years ago), a fairly razzmatazz event, where I was hit by the feeling: “Wow, I am part of something really quite outstanding here.” Always a worry that somehow I didn’t deserve it or belong there, but I did cherish the bright-eyed moment for a while.

The fourth and final is an offsite to which I was invited by A&O Poland even after I had already left A&O. It was such a deeply kind and personal gesture, one that really did make me feel that, after all, perhaps I did belong a little more to that family than I had thought I did.

I have only been with PwC a short while, and much of that emerging from a pandemic, but I am looking forward to, I am sure, many wonderful events yet to come!

CEELMDirect: Thanks so much, Hugh, and best of luck at PwC Legal!