Prior to the banking royal commission, “there was not a clear class or even definition” of a regulatory lawyer. Now, this area of financial services legal practice has seen extraordinary growth, says one BigLaw partner.
Speaking recently with Lawyers Weekly, Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer partner Michael Vrisakis (pictured), who has practised in financial services regulation for more than three decades, reflected on the extent to which work for regulatory lawyers has grown in recent years.
“Pre-royal commission, there was not a clear class or even definition of a regulatory lawyer,” he said.
“Concurrent with the royal commission, a realisation emerged that there was a pronounced need for lawyers who could navigate technical areas of financial services law.”
The first two catalysing factors, Vrisakis outlined, “were the first body of law which required specialist technical skills, such as Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act, driven by client need and activity. Second, the need for firms to be able to point to specialist expertise in this area.”
A major part of the phenomenon, he went on, has been the rise and rise of regulator interventions.
“Regulatory lawyers are, of course, a broader breed than just financial services lawyers, but it is probably in this area that we have seen more growth than in any other area,” he said.
“Other areas where pronounced regulatory expertise is prevalent will include many other technical areas, where generalists are now seen as not necessarily capable of delivering the expertise and value to the client that specialists can bring.”
The growth of such a breed of practitioners, “of course, then leads to self-propulsion and further growth of the area, for ancillary reasons including significantly the emergence of the recognition of regulatory law in legal ranking publications,” Vrisakis said.
The increase in lawyers practising in this space, and the work on offer, is a “direct reflection It a direct reflection of the growing magnitude of client need, which is itself a reflection of enhanced regulator activity”, he explained.
“Related to this is also the importance of this area of law to clients, which is a function of the consequences of regulatory intervention. In many cases, the law has evolved in three main ways, which have acted as accelerants to the growth of the regulatory area of law and the growth of the ranks of regulatory lawyers,” Vrisakis said.
These are, he said, new penalty regimes for areas of financial services of law such as the growth of civil penalty provisions; new areas of regulation such as the Financial Accountability Regime (FAR); and new intensified regulatory intervention.
All of these, he said, “have led to the emergence of this new area of law, and then the increasing growth of this area of law”.
There are a handful of looming challenges for lawyers practising in this space, Vrisakis said.
“Clearly, in any technical area a key challenge lies in deciphering key legal issues where often the ‘grey dominates over the black and white’ in terms of areas of law which are either not clearly drafted and/or are not tested,” he said.
This can lead, he said, to difficulties that flow from the deciphering process, “including demonstrating that if the regulator should disagree with a particular legal interpretation, that your client has acted reasonably and responsibly”.
This, Vrisakis explained, is in the context of clients having no ability or little ability to seek judicial guidance, “without there being effectively a controversy with the regulator in circumstances where clients naturally wish normally to resolve differences of opinion and interpretation through cooperation and consensus at least in the first instance”.
On the flipside, he continued, opportunities naturally exist in this space through the growth in law, in firms’ enhanced engagement with the area, and in terms of being involved in such a vibrant and exciting area of law.
This is particularly so, he said, as the law expands and evolves in relation to new areas of financial products, such as crypto and new forms of financial services, such as superannuation, trustee, and claims handling services.
“Additionally, the area of law is extremely interesting not just because new law is emerging but because so much existing law has not been judicially considered or is now being judicially revisited,” he said.
Looking ahead in 2026, Vrisakis predicted that the required skillset for regulatory lawyers is “morphing towards a more holistic approach, whereby technical expertise constitutes the bricks and mortar of the role but the real special sauce, or in building terms, the fit out that is the key to client value, will be in predicting, if possible, and navigating optimal regulatory outcomes through a broader skillset of bridging the technical with the technique of best representing your client with the relevant regulator”.
When asked what advice he has for fellow regulatory lawyers moving forward into the new year and beyond, Vrisakis offered three tips.
Firstly, he said, “consider the expansive nature of this area of practice, and the flotilla of both established financial institutions, which vitally need this area of expertise, as well as the raft of new entrants expanding as new technology and products emerge”.
Secondly, he suggested choosing a firm or other employer with expertise, growth, and vision in this area.
And, finally, Vrisakis advised lawyers to think about career choices in this space “in terms of being a contentious or non-contentious practitioner, or both”.
Think, he said, about areas of sub-specialisation, such as which might reflect sub-classes of financial services or financial products, such as superannuation, insurance, funds management, and payment systems.
Jerome Doraisamy is the managing editor of professional services (including Lawyers Weekly, HR Leader, Accountants Daily, and Accounting Times). He is also the author of The Wellness Doctrines book series, an admitted solicitor in New South Wales, and a board director of the Minds Count Foundation.
You can email Jerome at:
