Insurance law specialist Bill Papastergiadis made headlines in September when he and three other partners left the insurance litigation team of Herbert Geer & Rundle, taking eight lawyers and twelve support staff with them.

The exodus wasn't inspired by a clash with HGR's management, he says. In fact, Papastergiadis lost quite a bit of sleep over the move.

"We had a fantastic time at Herbert Geer and Rundle and it was from my perspective a sad day when we decided that we would better position ourselves by being at Moray & Agnew.

"The opportunity with Moray & Agnew came out of the blue - I wasn't on the market. I agonised for a very long time over the move; it could have been in excess of eight to nine months."

Nevertheless, the step seems to have been the right one for Papastergiadis and his team. They have melded well with the partners and the first few months have been "remarkably good."

Finding a niche
Fundamental to the move to Moray & Agnew is Papastergiadis' view on the workings of an insurance law practice. He believes that only under the wing of a specialist firm will insurance lawyers be able to develop to their full potential.

The environment of a commercial law firm can obstruct insurance lawyers from providing the best quality services against sharp competitive prices.

"There are difficulties that arise from having insurance and commercial divisions coexisting, says Papastergiadis. "I think that's a real issue at the moment."

"In recent times, very well structured insurance groups have moved from larger firms into specialist boutique insurance firms, so they're able to better service their clients and don't have the conflicting fee structures in practices."

Fee rates for insurance clients charged by boutique firms are often less than what is charged by commercial lawyers, he says.

Besides fee rates, the expenses of large firms on the front of an office can be considerable. "You might not need the expense that a mega firm might require and that's a cost saving which you can pass on to your clients."

The ability to offer competitive prices, however, is not the only thing that concerns Papastergiadis. He is also a strong believer in the idea that insurance firms need to offer specialised services to meet the demands of different types of clients. Commercial law firms don't always want to invest in these services.

"Quite often we have a volume practice, which means you receive a number of instructions from the same client over a period of time. That client wants to monitor the outcomes and compare the results, and then you might implement strategies to minimise any areas of cost inefficiencies," he explains.

"You utilise your technology in a way to provide performance and compliance criteria. A commercial firm is not particularly interested in that, because it doesn't have the volume work."

A commercial client might only send you one or two matters per year, he says, and it might not be interested in monitoring and comparing results. "So, accordingly, in terms of framing your own information technology systems, they will vary between the areas of practice and how you invest in it."

This brings us to one of Papastergiadis' favourite topics: IT.

Many insurers require remote access to matter-related data, and an insurance firm, therefore, would try to introduce these systems and processes and makes sure it has the resources to achieve that, he argues. Moray & Agnew is among the firms that have invested heavily in IT.

The specific requirements of an insurance practice make it better suited to a boutique firm, he says, and is seeing more and more insurance lawyers coming to the same conclusion.

"I think it's a trend that has become apparent in recent times in the market place. You can certainly see evidence of that in, for example, a number of Minter Ellison's lawyers joining the UK firm Kennedys."

The competition
Papastergiadis is not too concerned about the establishment of a Sydney office by Kennedys. He sees them as competition, but not as key competitors.

"They don't have an eastern seaboard presence; they're still a small firm in Sydney," he says. "But they have some very good operators there."

He believes a broad presentation of the eastern states is important in the battle to win tenders. "We see some of the insurers are focused on ensuring they have representation on their legal panels along the eastern seaboard. They would like to see consistent and efficient services being offered in a variety of states.

"We have seen that having a presence and a strong presence in a variety of states, has helped us in being appointed to the panel of a number of insurers."

The possible establishment of a Kennedys office in Melbourne, as partner Mark Doepel recently indicated, would certainly increase their competitive capabilities, Papastergiadis believes.

"The Melbourne market is a significant market with a lot of insurance work and a lot of cases are being run out of this jurisdiction," he comments.

He sees Philips Fox and Lander & Rogers as Moray & Agnew's main competitors. "Both firms have a presence in a number of states and also have the depth and critical mass to provide good services," he says.

However, he believes Moray & Agnew's investment in IT has given the firm a strong card in the competitive market.

"Clients [in the insurance industry] require specific data and want to monitor performance. It is important that their providers have leading, cutting edge technologies, and this will separate some firms from others. I've seen tenders from some insurers in which this is one of the key criteria."