Two law firms scooped first and second place in lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) charity Stonewall’s Top 100 Employers 2019 list, which rates organisations for LGBT-inclusive policies. Pinsent Masons took first place in the list (it was second last year) followed by Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner. Overall, law firms featured prominently, with Baker McKenzie in tenth place, and Dentons, Travers Smith, Norton Rose Fulbright, Hogan Lovells, Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance, and Taylor Wessing ranked in the top 50. Pinsent Masons senior partner Richard Foley said the firm ‘has created an inclusive workplace that enables everyone to be themselves’.
23 January 2019
Stonewall rankings 2019 released
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams
Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant
Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias
International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner
Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven
Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth
NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
