Lawyer Salary

thoughts on the unsuccessful plaintiff being asked to pay almost 800k in costs to TTSH?

Originally Posted by Ivy Law

I am a PQE 3 lawyer, who is specialised in civil and commercial litigation.

I am thinking of setting up my own chinatown 1 man law firm.

Anyone here has done so? Is it likely for me to make more money than being employed by big4?

I looked at my billables and I generated alot of money for the firm. However, I only get paid a small fraction of it.

If I go out on my own, is it very hard to find clients?

For a 3 PQE lawyer to think of setting up a chinatown firm, you probably are not in the B4. To compare between setting up your own shop with B4 pay, you need to first have both options open to you. The correct question to ask is: should i stay put at where i am now to earn the 4.8k or so a month, or set up shop yourself. The answer lies in whether you know how to generate files about 20k of work a month (while doing the work yourself), or 25k of work a month (with a junior assoc who is willing to work for the 3 PQE you).

Lawyers good people or not.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

When they have international tie-ups, a lot of the time, there is no full integration, meaning some are mayer brown lawyers and some are PK Wong lawyers.

Those you see on the PK Wong side only are the fully local side.

You do see some lawyers holding appointments in both entities though. It is a bit confusing.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

this is quite bad. B4 your batch is already at 10.5-11, with 4-5 months bonus

OP here. Should I try applying now? Are B4s, bigger mid sized firms hiring? Looking at corp in particular.

My notice is 2 months. A recruiter told me to stick on a bit more at my current firm otherwise jumping around doesn’t look so good.

Are there any big firms working on hybrid model. Current firm is all days in.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

thoughts on the unsuccessful plaintiff being asked to pay almost 800k in costs to TTSH?

what abt ur thoughts

Originally Posted by Unregistered

what abt ur thoughts

TTSH hired better lawyers?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

TTSH hired better lawyers?

6 Counsel for the defendants submitted that I ought to take the conduct of the plaintiff into account. It is true that a major amendment was made to the claim a week before the trial commenced. Affidavits of crucial witnesses were filed without leave. The trial had to be vacated and re-scheduled. The action itself was badly conceived. However, all that cannot be blamed on the plaintiff who is only the administrator of the deceased’ estate as the action could only proceed on medical and legal advice.

7 How the action progressed and ended as it did have been set out in my judgment of 13 October 2022. What advice the plaintiff received, however, is not a matter of inquiry before me. Costs are not meant to punish a failed civil action, but when a reasonable offer to settle was refused and the party refusing ended worse off than the terms offered, the other party should not have to bear the resulting costs that might have been saved. In this case, even an offer of mediation was rebuffed. In such circumstances, the law allows the court, unless for strong reasons otherwise, to order indemnity costs. I am of the view that the defendants here ought to be compensated by indemnity costs, and I so order.

'nuff said

Originally Posted by Unregistered

6 Counsel for the defendants submitted that I ought to take the conduct of the plaintiff into account. It is true that a major amendment was made to the claim a week before the trial commenced. Affidavits of crucial witnesses were filed without leave. The trial had to be vacated and re-scheduled. The action itself was badly conceived. However, all that cannot be blamed on the plaintiff who is only the administrator of the deceased’ estate as the action could only proceed on medical and legal advice.

7 How the action progressed and ended as it did have been set out in my judgment of 13 October 2022. What advice the plaintiff received, however, is not a matter of inquiry before me. Costs are not meant to punish a failed civil action, but when a reasonable offer to settle was refused and the party refusing ended worse off than the terms offered, the other party should not have to bear the resulting costs that might have been saved. In this case, even an offer of mediation was rebuffed. In such circumstances, the law allows the court, unless for strong reasons otherwise, to order indemnity costs. I am of the view that the defendants here ought to be compensated by indemnity costs, and I so order.

'nuff said

can plaintiff sue his lawyers for negligence?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

can plaintiff sue his lawyers for negligence?

Who are the lawyers? Why negligence?