Baker & McKenzie Amsterdam N.V. Review

Ook al sta je met bakken geld klaar om juridische bijstand in te kopen: ze nemen de moeite nog niet om je terug te bellen en een afspraak te maken. Wat een arrogantie.

Thus...

So at the beginning of the 21st century we had this case.

Pretty soon we arrived at Baker & McKenzie.
They are known, so then as a 'stupid blonde' you naturally think that they are also good.

In the meantime, I personally have the impression that these large offices are only suitable for companies, extremely wealthy private individuals, governments or people who regularly deal with legal matters for whatever reason. Such customers are of course interesting for such an office and for that they like to do their best ... so that the customer stays with them.
People who happen to get involved in a court case are not that interesting and they will not do their best for it ... they will not see it again, even if the case goes well.

Why do I have this impression?

Let's just start with "what happened" ...

... the reception was pleasant. The young lawyer immediately called a 'friend' professor and explained the matter to him.
We heard how the professor apparently saw arguments in our favor.
Then the young lawyer asked if the professor was willing to write these arguments in favor of our case in a written opinion.
The professor liked to do that ... of course against a 'reasonable' honorar (believe around 2000).

The young lawyer, strengthened by the professor, did like the case.

The advice (a paper rag that you can present to the judge to make an impression along the lines of "look, professor and so it agrees with us!") Took a long time.

A slight 'unrest' arose.

After much inquiries came the 'advice'!

However, everyone was silent. The professor suddenly had a completely different opinion on paper. 100% to our disadvantage.
But no assignment was given for that at all ... the assignment was to put that positive message that was communicated by telephone on paper.
Naja ... that around 2000, - had to be paid of course.
And you also pay, because you feel the frightening 'us know us' atmosphere and you think quickly in a slight chase that the professor may also know a few judges ... etc.

Was the young lawyer neither full nor "we are going against it" .. after Mr. Professor had changed his opinion, another wind blew. Mr. was not so interested anymore. Let the case bleed a little to death and indicated that we should find another lawyer.
On the lines of "we only take things that we are sure we will win!".

Yes ... in such a way it is of course not surprising that you also win all your business.

After ... then we came to another lawyer (apparently one for losers?).

The counterparty in this case came to court with a recommendation at a given moment.

What, however, outlined our surprise !!!

This advice before the counterparty was written by one and the same professor as the one who had written that advice for Baker & McKenzie.

Then the monkey came up.

Mr emeritus professor (blablabla ... integer, but not so!) Already had a nice piece for him before Baker & McKenzie called him.
When Baker & McKenzie called him, he didn't know it was the same thing. Apparently he only saw a possibility to put a nice sum in the basket again.
When he got the file to write the advice, his breath stopped ...
... oops!

What surprises me is that at Baker & McKenzie so much depended on what some 'professor' meant. Can they not think for themselves?
And why then do you have to transfer those 'BakerMc' thousands of euros if that from which that whole thing depends (that rag of that professor) already costs around 2000?

But above all: why should you look for an "other lawyer" when your case is apparently not a "cat in the bowl"?

Whatever!
They do everything with them.
I don't really care anymore.

Exceptionally skilled and reasonably priced resources compared to some of their international offices. A pleasure to work with them.