Mark Walter, previously Slater + Gordon’s National Practice Leader of Commercial Litigation, has joined Aptum.
In his new role as Director, brings a wealth of experience and expertise to help shape the future of Aptum. Already, he has been instrumental in establishing Aptum’s commercial litigation referral relationship with Slater + Gordon.
We spoke to Mark about the transition, his interest in innovating litigation through risk sharing and about this new referral relationship when we sat down for an interview:
You’ve been a National Practice Group Leader at a big firm for a long time. How do you feel about the transition to a specialist litigator?
I don’t think the change is as significant as it seems. The work is just as varied, and sometimes when you’re in a big firm with a lot of different areas of expertise you’re actually a boutique practice within a large scale organisation.
It makes the transition to Aptum an exciting one because the expertise and resources we have with commercial litigation here are really focused. It’s a great opportunity to get involved on a deep level strategically, which I’m excited about.
That’s interesting. Probably not what most people would imagine.
Possibly. There’s a bit of a misconception that the size of a firm suggests the complexity they can deal with. But really it’s about being able to offer high quality litigation services and bringing experience to the fore in areas where you specialise. For us, that means being experts for commercial people—doing and executing all the right things regarding the actual customer experience—and making improvements to that where we can.
Throughout your career you’ve done a lot of work with risk sharing with clients when it comes to pricing. That hasn’t been very common for commercial litigation.
It is quite unusual for commercial litigation, risk sharing with value pricing. A lot of insolvency practitioners will do it. But in general commercial litigation it’s quite unusual. Most firms can’t carry it, or they’re nervous about achieving an outcome.
I have the advantage of having been around when ‘No Win, No Fee’ was introduced, which is a model that shares risk as well. When you’ve had decades of experience with that, you develop a pretty strong sensibility and instinct about what you can and can’t do with the pathways you have available, which is really important when you’re looking at larger scale commercial matters.
What do you think is the attraction for clients and lawyers to that idea of shared risk?
I think as a proposition, the value pricing resonates with clients because it isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach. That’s been my experience with it. But then again, if it’s just about the price then you’re probably not the right fit. There’s a lot more to it than the price being fixed. You become motivated by the same thing, which is the outcome. That suits clients because you tend to get very quick intuition by spending a lot more time at the front end. You find out where to go and what to do, rather than figuring out those things and the risks involved along the way. That comes through in the project management side of things too.
At the end of the day, clients care about the outcome. Anything we can do to increase the focus on that, the better. So the price doesn’t necessarily make or break your relationship. Clients will really want to know they’ve got a good lawyer and understand their position with the outcome. But when the price is established early, there’s less ambiguity so you don’t have to keep talking or thinking about it, which is a huge positive for clients and lawyers.
You mentioned getting faster intuition. I think that’s important.
It means you take control of the narrative, and whatever that is, you can communicate it to the client a lot more easily.
Sourcing litigation funding is something else you have expertise in. Tell us about that. What’s the impact you have?
Litigation funding is essentially another way for clients to share the risk of their case. What happens is a third party funds the case so it can go forward, and they pay the lawyer all the legal fees they need. At the end of the case, the third party gets a percentage of the proceeds, essentially rewarding them for taking on that risk. It’s great for improving access for clients who might not have the means to pursue a case that is complex or large scale if it goes all the way. The issue is a remarkably low level of understanding about litigation funding amongst consumers, which is a real problem.
Why do you think that is?
I think it’s an opportunity clients often don’t know they have. The problem stops at thinking they can’t afford to take legal action. This is probably understandable because litigation funding is such a small world, and almost impossible to navigate for the individual. If clients go to a litigation funder directly with a case that is underdeveloped, they’ve probably got a 1% chance to make up that funding. If they team up with a lawyer and can build up the case, and the case is good, the prospects escalate rapidly.
And how do you help there?
There’s a few ways. The first is that ability to craft, analyse, assess and present the case well to litigation funders. One of the benefits of my experience in commercial litigation on the plaintiff side is being able to assess risks, and knowing when to take them. Second, it’s having relationships with litigation funders and knowing how to navigate that world. Those relationships help you cut through the process faster. Third, is the consequence of having those relationships with funders, which is trust. Having a lawyer that has a proven record with getting results gives funders confidence that you will get the best out of the case.
Those are the three main things for acquiring funding, though just as equally it’s about helping clients understand the best funding option for the situation at hand.
You’ve been instrumental in setting up our agreement with Slater + Gordon to have commercial litigation work referred to Aptum. How do you see that developing?
Yeah, it’s fantastic. Slater + Gordon wants to focus on the traditional parts of their practice. Aptum emerged, and an opportunity was carved out for a specialist litigator. So we’ve worked together to get the best for both of us.
It’s great for us to send the message that if you come to Aptum, you have the knowledge that all we do is litigate. We can navigate and execute litigation at a very high level because we aren’t distracted by doing anything else. That lack of distraction can be very powerful. It’s a great way to maintain focus and execution of our craft.
I think there are all kinds of opportunities that come out of it, too. The Slater + Gordon brand attracts clients that want to share risk, so the consistency there is great that we’re poised to provide that kind of relationship or we can help find funding solutions. It opens the gates for more relationships with firms with broader legal expertise to direct their commercial litigation to litigation specialists. I think it makes the industry more focused. I see that creating better client-practitioner relationships long term too.
Firms getting increasingly focused on their niches could be a sign of change in the industry. There’s a lot of fairly homogenous firms out there in terms of how things are done, so it’s an incentive to create a point of difference.
We’re excited to have Mark’s expertise and experience join our leadership, bolstering our standing as Australia’s specialists in dispute resolution and experts in litigation.