A&O Shearman, Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, Winston Taylor, and Hogan Lovells Cadwalader.
If you’re interested in international corporate law, these may be familiar names. Then again, they may be more familiar to you under different names entirely. In 2020, this list would feature eight separate firms. In 2026, all have undergone (or announced) mergers, creating four new, giant firms.
The past five years have seen an unprecedented number of mergers between law firms. Firms are increasing their competitive power through collaboration. Does this trend reflect the financial insecurity of this decade, with a global pandemic and unpredictable political interference (notably the Trump Administration’s fiscal policy)? Or does it instead represent something fundamentally changed in how legal services operate?
Reuters reports that law firm mergers increased 18% in 2025, with 59 mergers in the year. Large firms, in particular, were part of this trend, with 7 of these mergers involving firms with over one hundred lawyers. For those applying to leading international law firms, understanding this trend in the legal industry is a strong indicator of a forward-thinking, curious candidate.
So Why Merge?
Market dominance
Market Dominance is often a driving factor. We will see this with the forthcoming Winston Taylor Merger; both firms have strong specialist departments in Intellectual Property, and as such may have been competing for the same clients. This competition not only reduces the clients a law firm can attract, but it forces them to adopt competitive pricing, which may not reflect the value of their services. In combining two giants of the sector, the newly merged firm can attract and serve clients efficiently, with the combined expertise of two firms.
Diversification of offerings
Market Dominance is a factor in a great proportion of mergers, but occasionally the goal is precisely the opposite: diversification of offerings is achieved effectively through mergers. If one firm has strong teams in, say, Tax, and other specialises in Restructuring but lacks Tax expertise, by combining the teams (and even moving to a shared office), both firms can – collectively – offer a fuller service to their clients. This will frequently motivate smaller firms.
Geographical factors
Geographical Factors may also be the driving factor behind a merger. As a firm seeks to grow, it may look to set up offices in different regions, or even in different countries. It is efficient to use established offices and teams, and this can be achieved through a merger. Often, however, this is done through takeovers. A key example is A&O Shearman; UK Magic Circle firm Allen & Overy has been able to expand into the US markets, and Shearman & Sterling into the UK market.
Why are we seeing more mergers now?
Mergers are not without drawbacks – it is a significant financial commitment to merge two firms. These large operations require not only watertight contractual drafting and countless hours of negotiation, themselves costly expenditures, but the adjustments necessary to solidify a successful merger inevitably impact the other projects the firm can take on.
As with any form of restructuring, there is often internal reorganisation. This often isn’t in any way contentious; if one partner holds a deciding vote at Firm A, and another has the same power at Firm B, at Firm ‘AB’ this arrangement can no longer work. Any merger requires thorough exploration of how the authority and voting power will be divided between firms. Often the ‘larger’ firm, which brings in greater revenue for the newly combined firm, comes out of these deals with favourable terms.
Where, however, the two merging firms are both bringing similar bargaining power to the table, there are thousands of considerations and concessions to be made on both sides to ensure a successful transition. A recent example of such a merger is Ashurst’s upcoming merger with US firm Perkins Coie, each billion-dollar firms. The newly formed Ashurst Perkins Coie will have an estimated annual revenue of $2.7 billion, creating one of the largest financial forces on the legal market. But these details should all be outlined clearly in the merger agreement.
Finally, with mergers of substantial scale, national governments may impose some supervision. In the UK, we have the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). This regulatory approval is not as fast-paced as the legal sector, and can constitute a full review, which is an exhaustive process to prevent monopolising forces in the market.
In Summary
I write this from City, St George’s University, which itself was created through a significant merger in 2024. The university now spans three campuses, and provides leading specialist education in medical sciences, creative arts, and humanities subjects.
While the path to a successful, integrated merger is long and expensive, the potential gain seems to outweigh the risk. With more high-profile mergers underway, keen applicants should keep their eye on the merger market. This is just one way in which global markets are changing – firms are collaborating to be competitive.
For an article on acquisitions, I recommend the Law Society Gazette; for larger, international mergers, David Brown’s elaborates on the factors driving the trend. For more on the mergers mentioned in this article, see the links below:
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer
Amy is currently studying the Graduate Diploma in Law and is a member of the Lawbore Journalist Team 2025-26. She is an aspiring commercial solicitor, interested in copyright and contract law. In 2025, she graduated with BA (Hons) in Classics from Regent’s Park College, Oxford; there, she sat on the governing body of the Oxford Union, the Student Union’s Women’s Campaign, and was a founding member of Oxford Women in Government.