find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Insurance Lawyer (3-5 PAE)
Category: Insurance and Superannuation Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Dynamic organisation ·
View details
Legal Counsel
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: North Sydney NSW 2060
· 18 month fixed term contract · 3-5 years PQE with TMT exposure
View details
Clients v shareholders: conflicting priorities in the IP sector

Clients v shareholders: conflicting priorities in the IP sector

Andy Mukherji

In the last two years, the Australian intellectual property practice area has seen a number of significant changes, presenting new opportunities and challenges for lawyers, writes Andy Mukherji.

The amendments to the Australian Patents Act, which took effect in 2013, allowed Australian patent attorney firms to incorporate. As a result, several of this country’s largest firms have publicly listed and embarked upon aggressive mergers and acquisitions.

• In November 2014, Spruson & Ferguson listed on the ASX as Intellectual Property Holdings (IPH Limited). Since then IPH has acquired Fisher Adams Kelly, Pizzeys, Callinans and, most recently, Cullens.

• Shelston IP publicly listed as Xenith IP Group Limited in 2015 and is now in the process of acquiring Watermark.

• In August 2016, Davies Collison Cave and Freehills Patent Attorneys publicly listed under the holding company Qantm Intellectual Property Ltd.

Simultaneously, all of these listed firms are scrambling to scoop up as many smaller players as possible. Big bucks and share options are being exchanged as competition for market share heats up.

There are two side-effects of these acquisitions:

Firstly, they are creating lofty expectations among investors and that is imposing additional pressure on the listed firms to maximise shareholder returns.

Secondly, they are eliminating choice, competition and independence from the industry. Consider this: in my state, Queensland, over 50 per cent of private practice patent and trademark attorneys now work for one entity, IPH.

To date, news coverage of these activities has focused on firm valuations, share price fluctuations and speculation about the financial windfall that will be enjoyed by the former partners or owners of the acquired firms.

Little has been said about the interests of the clients who are being serviced by these firms.

Earlier this year, The Australian Financial Review reported that Justice Geoffrey Nettle, an Australian High Court Judge, raised concerns that accounting rules and the complexities associated with the public listing of a law firm can ultimately work against the interests of clients. Justice Nettle specifically pointed out that the public listing of law firms can place additional pressure on attorneys and lawyers working for public companies. In summary, he emphasised there are inherent conflicts of interest between acting for clients and for shareholders.

Conflicts of interest can be real, perceived or potential.

Given the state of the IP market in Australia, the debate about the conflict between client and shareholder interests will, and should, intensify.

Andy Mukherji is a patent attorney and associate of Michael Buck IP, an independent intellectual property firm based in Brisbane, Australia. Andy’s areas of expertise include mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, materials science, physics and nanotechnology. He works with inventors, enterprises, research institutes and universities on patent projects involving technologies that are applicable to sectors spanning from mining to medical.

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Clients v shareholders: conflicting priorities in the IP sector
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
LCA president Fiona McLeod SC
Aug 17 2017
Where social fault lines meet the justice gap in Aus
After just returning from a tour of the Northern Territory, LCA president Fiona McLeod SC speaks wit...
Marriage equality flag
Aug 17 2017
ALHR backs High Court challenge to marriage equality postal vote
Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR) has voiced its support for a constitutional challenge to ...
Give advice
Aug 17 2017
A-G issues advice on judiciary’s public presence
Commonwealth Attorney-General George Brandis QC has offered his advice on the public presence of jud...
APPOINTMENTS
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
opinion
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
Help
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...