The legal market in England and Wales has long been defined by tactical lateral hires and strategic appointments that signal where firms see the next wave of work. Two such moves have now been announced with near-simultaneous timing, each reinforcing the upward trajectory of contentious practice groups at their respective firms. Collyer Bristow has recruited a new commercial disputes head from Joelson, while Michelmores has brought in a Twenty Essex silk to lead its international arbitration and trade offering. Together, these appointments reflect a broader recalibration of disputes capabilities among mid-sized and regional firms seeking to compete with the Magic Circle and the stronger international players on complex, high-value litigation and arbitration mandates.
Collyer Bristow appoints new commercial disputes chief from Joelson
The London-headquartered firm Collyer Bristow has moved to strengthen its commercial litigation and dispute resolution practice by hiring a new head from the mid-market firm Joelson. The incoming partner, whose name was not disclosed in the announcement beyond the broad description of a commercial disputes specialist, joins a firm that has invested significantly in its contentious offering over the past two years. Collyer Bristow, best known for its strength in private client work, family law, and real estate disputes, has been quietly building a corporate and commercial litigation capability that can handle cross-border, multi-party litigation for both institutional and high-net-worth clients.
The move from Joelson is notable not only because it brings a seasoned practitioner with a track record of handling shareholder disputes, contract claims, and professional negligence actions, but also because it signals that Collyer Bristow is willing to compete for top-tier talent against firms with larger balance sheets. Joelson itself has a strong reputation in commercial litigation, particularly in the technology and media sectors. The departure of a disputes head to a rival firm underscores the fluidity of the current lateral market, where compensation, platform, and practice group autonomy are increasingly decisive factors.
What the appointment means for Collyer Bristow’s litigation strategy
Collyer Bristow’s existing disputes team already handles a steady flow of cases involving contractual interpretation, fraud, and asset recovery. The addition of a senior figure from Joelson adds bandwidth and credibility for larger-scale commercial and corporate litigation, particularly matters that require deep understanding of the tech and creative industries. The firm is expected to leverage this hire to pitch for work from mid-sized companies, private equity-backed portfolio companies, and family offices that prefer a firm with a more bespoke service model than the larger full-service firms.
From a market perspective, this appointment fits a pattern observable across London’s mid-tier legal landscape: firms that once focused on private client and transactional work are now building integrated dispute resolution practices that allow them to hold onto clients through the litigation lifecycle. For Collyer Bristow, this reduces the risk of losing clients to the large litigation boutiques or the Big Four’s growing legal wings, which have become increasingly aggressive in pursuing commercial disputes work.
Michelmores brings Twenty Essex silk as head of international arbitration and trade
On the other side of the same competitive landscape, Exeter-headquartered Michelmores has announced the appointment of a silk from Twenty Essex, the well-regarded set of barristers’ chambers, to lead its international arbitration and trade practice. The new head, described as a Twenty Essex silk, will oversee a practice that has grown substantially in recent years, driven by the firm’s strengths in energy, infrastructure, and agribusiness — sectors that generate a steady pipeline of cross-border contractual and investment disputes.
Michelmores has long been a dominant player in the South West, but its ambitions are clearly London-facing and international. The firm has been investing in London-based partners and building a disputes capability that can match the service delivery of City firms while offering a more regional cost base and a culture that stresses partner-led client service. The arrival of a silk from Twenty Essex — a chambers renowned for its strength in public international law, investment treaty arbitration, and commercial arbitration — signals a step change in Michelmores’ ability to handle high-stakes international arbitration cases, particularly those arising under the rules of the ICC, LCIA, and UNCITRAL.
Why a Twenty Essex silk chose a regional firm over a London set
The decision by a barrister from a leading London chambers to move to a firm — even as a partner rather than as a tenant — reflects a broader structural shift in the legal market. The line between barristers and solicitors has blurred, with increasing numbers of senior silks choosing to join law firms to benefit from client relationships, better control over case strategy, and the ability to build and manage a larger team. For the silk in question, Michelmores offers a platform where international arbitration is not just a practice area but a core strategic priority. The firm’s strong presence in the energy sector — offshore wind, renewables, and traditional oil and gas — provides a natural source of disputes work that requires both technical understanding and arbitration expertise.
Michelmores also benefits from a strong network of referrals from other firms and from its own transactional teams. The new head will be responsible for developing the firm’s profile in international trade disputes, including sanctions-related work, WTO compliance matters, and bilateral investment treaty claims. The appointment positions Michelmores to act for both UK-based companies operating abroad and foreign investors seeking to enforce rights under UK law or international treaties.
Contextualising both moves: the disputes market in 2025
These two appointments come at a time when the disputes market in England and Wales is experiencing a period of exceptional activity. The post-pandemic surge in commercial litigation has not abated; economic uncertainty, geopolitical instability, and supply chain disruptions have generated a steady flow of contractual breakdowns, shareholder disagreements, and cross-border disputes. Both Collyer Bristow and Michelmores are positioning themselves to capture a share of that work by hiring senior talent with established reputations and client followings.
The strategy of both firms illustrates a common calculation: that clients in the mid-to-high net worth and mid-market corporate space increasingly want the quality and depth of a top-tier disputes practice but without the overheads and bureaucracy of the largest international firms. They want partners who can lead complex litigation and arbitration with the same expertise as a City silk but who are directly accessible and who understand the commercial realities of their clients’ industries. Collyer Bristow’s hire from Joelson and Michelmores’ appointment of a Twenty Essex silk are both direct responses to that demand.
What is a Twenty Essex silk and why does its move to Michelmores matter?
What is a Twenty Essex silk? Twenty Essex is a leading London barristers’ chambers specialising in commercial litigation, public international law, and international arbitration. A “silk” refers to a Queen’s Counsel or King’s Counsel (KC), a barrister who has been appointed as senior counsel in recognition of exceptional advocacy and legal expertise. Silks from Twenty Essex are frequently instructed in high-profile investment treaty arbitrations, shipping disputes, and multi-jurisdictional commercial cases. The move of a Twenty Essex silk to a law firm is significant because it brings deep advocacy experience and a network of international arbitrators and counsel directly into the firm’s partnership, enabling it to lead arbitrations from the outset rather than delegating to external barristers.
This matters because Michelmores can now offer clients a fully integrated arbitration service: from case assessment and strategy through to full representation at hearings. The firm no longer needs to rely on external counsel for the most demanding advocacy work, which shortens the communication chain, reduces costs, and gives clients greater control over the conduct of their cases. It also signals to the market that Michelmores is serious about competing for the highest-value arbitral disputes, particularly in the energy and infrastructure sectors where the firm already holds significant transactional relationships.
The strategic timing behind the two hires
Both appointments occur against a backdrop of regulatory change and shifting client expectations. The UK’s post-Brexit trade landscape continues to generate new forms of disputes, from customs classification disagreements to allegations of breach of trade agreements. At the same time, the rise of ESG-related litigation and the increasing willingness of shareholders to bring derivative claims and unfair prejudice petitions mean that commercial disputes are becoming more complex, more multi-faceted, and more likely to involve issues of corporate governance and sustainability.
Collyer Bristow’s new disputes chief comes from a firm that has deep expertise in exactly these types of modern commercial disputes. Joelson’s practice has been particularly active in technology-related shareholder disputes and in acting for creative businesses caught in intellectual property and contractual conflicts. This experience is directly transferable to Collyer Bristow’s client base, which includes a growing number of tech entrepreneurs, venture capital-backed companies, and family-owned businesses that have scaled rapidly and now face disputes related to their growth.
Michelmores, for its part, has been building its international arbitration team over several years. The addition of a Twenty Essex silk is the culmination of that strategy. The firm now has the internal capability to act as sole counsel in significant arbitrations, which was previously impossible without partnering with a London chambers. This reduces the firm’s dependence on external barristers and increases its margins per matter, while also allowing it to offer more competitive fixed-fee or capped-fee arrangements that clients increasingly demand.
How the two firms compare in disputes capability before and after the hires
Before the hires, Collyer Bristow’s disputes practice was solid but lacked a dedicated commercial disputes head with a City-level profile. The team was competent in handling real estate disputes, probate litigation, and smaller-scale commercial claims, but it often struggled to win mandates for the most complex corporate disputes, particularly those involving multinational parties or cross-border elements. The new appointment from Joelson addresses that gap directly, bringing a partner who has been involved in matters worth tens of millions of pounds and who has experience managing multi-party litigation in the High Court and in arbitration.
Michelmores, before the Twenty Essex silk arrived, had a growing international arbitration practice but relied heavily on outsourcing the advocacy and cross-examination to barristers. The firm had strong sector knowledge in energy and agribusiness but lacked the internal advocacy capability to lead cases from start to finish. The arrival of a silk fundamentally changes that dynamic. Michelmores now has a partner who can not only design arbitration strategy but also cross-examine witnesses and present oral argument at hearings, which is rare for a regional firm. This gives the firm a distinct competitive advantage when pitching for work against other regional players and even against some City firms that do not have a silk on the partnership.
Competitive implications for rival firms
The immediate effect of these hires is to increase the pressure on other mid-market and regional firms that are also trying to grow their disputes practices. Firms such as Boodle Hatfield, Farrer & Co, and Forsters, which compete with Collyer Bristow on private client and commercial work, will now need to consider whether their own disputes teams are strong enough to retain clients who may be attracted by the new capability. Similarly, Michelmores’ move puts firms like Ashfords, Bevan Brittan, and even some of the London-based regional players on notice that the South West’s leading firm is no longer a second-tier choice for international arbitration.
For the barrister sets, the hire is a further sign that the traditional division between barristers and solicitors is eroding. Twenty Essex loses a silk, but it gains a relationship with a firm that will now be more likely to instruct the chambers for cases that require additional counsel or expert advice. The overall volume of work flowing to the chambers may actually increase, as Michelmores’ arbitration practice grows and the firm needs to bring in additional barristers for particularly large or multi-sit arbitrations.
How clients benefit from the new leadership
For clients of Collyer Bristow, the appointment means they can now bring their most significant commercial disputes to a firm that understands their business and can handle the entire lifecycle of a claim, from pre-action correspondence to trial and appeal. The new head brings a network of contacts among forensic accountants, expert witnesses, and overseas counsel that the firm previously accessed only on an ad hoc basis. This institutional memory and relationship depth translates into faster, more efficient case management and better outcomes for clients.
Clients of Michelmores, particularly those in the energy and agricultural sectors, gain direct access to a silk-level practitioner who has argued before some of the world’s most respected arbitral tribunals. For a company facing a multi-million dollar dispute under an ICC or LCIA arbitration clause, having that advocacy capability inside the law firm means that the barrister is already deeply familiar with the client’s business and the facts of the case before the arbitration even begins. This is a material improvement over the traditional model, where a solicitor hands over a brief to a barrister who then spends weeks get up to speed.
Forward outlook: what these hires suggest about the market’s direction
The lateral hiring of disputes partners is not new, but the specific nature of these two appointments — one from a mid-market competitor and one from a barristers’ set — points to a maturing of the disputes market. Firms are no longer just adding headcount; they are targeting specific gaps in their service delivery and trying to reshape their competitive position. Collyer Bristow is signalling that it wants to be a genuine alternative to the litigation departments of the large national firms. Michelmores is signalling that it wants to compete with London-based firms for international arbitration work.
Both firms are also betting on the durability of the disputes market. While transactional work can be highly cyclical, disputes often remain robust even during downturns — indeed, they tend to increase during periods of economic stress. The appointments hedge against a potential downturn in M&A and real estate transactions, ensuring that both firms have a revenue stream that is less dependent on the health of the deal market.
For the legal profession in England and Wales, the trend of senior barristers joining law firms is likely to continue. As more silks follow the example set by Michelmores’ new head, the distinction between solicitors and barristers will become even more blurred. That could lead to a restructuring of the traditional referral model, with large law firms building comprehensive in-house advocacy capabilities that reduce the need for independent barristers except for the very largest matters. In such a scenario, the settings of chambers may need to evolve to offer more flexible membership arrangements or risk losing their best talent to the firms.
What is clear is that both Collyer Bristow and Michelmores are making deliberate, strategic investments in their disputes leadership at a time when the market values depth over breadth and expertise over mere presence. The firms that will thrive in the next decade are those that can field a disputes team where every partner is a recognised authority in a specific niche. These two hires advance that objective in concrete, measurable ways, and they will be watched closely by competitors, clients, and recruitment consultants alike. The next wave of lateral moves in the disputes space may well be determined by how successfully these two appointments integrate and drive revenue. If they succeed, the template will be copied. If they falter, the lesson will be equally instructive.
