In this podcast, founder of Legally Vocal, Nicholas d'Adhemar sits down with our head of life sciences Patrick Duxbury to discuss his involvement in the landmark agreement between AstraZeneca and Oxford University, his experiences in the last twenty years of his career and what led him down the path of life sciences law.
Transcript
Nino d'Adhemar - Hi and welcome to the latest episode of Legally Vocal, I am Nino d'Adhemar, the Founder and CEO of Apperio.
As mentioned on the last episode we have a new format this season and it has been great to hear that lots of you like the new look following our first episode last month with Josh Kay.
We are now into, what seems like, the 400th week of lockdown and it is only February. It has been a very busy time for me personally and also professionally. On a personal note, I turned 40 last month, it also snowed for the first time in my 40 years on my birthday, which was very exciting and, as if the momentous occasion could not get any better, I got a new cat called Blueberry - I say "I got it" but it has been sort of appropriated by my children.
I also hosted a panel on ESG investing and welcomed in a new Chairman and Non-Executive Director to Apperio. Anyway, I digress.
So, let me welcome our second guest this year, Patrick Duxbury, Partner at Gowling WLG UK. Welcome Patrick.
Patrick Duxbury: Hello everybody, hi.
Nino: Tell us a little bit about yourself.
Patrick: So I am a Partner, as you said, in Gowling WLG. I had a science background way back when. 30 years ago, but then converted to become a lawyer and have specialised probably for the last 25 years in working for life science companies, advising them on a broad range of transactions.
Nino: Fantastic. So, tell us a little bit about that transition from a micro-biologist and geneticist to. that decision to reclassify as a lawyer, which you did very effectively, you got a first along the way. What drew you to make that transition into law?
Patrick: So, actually it was. I had always considered myself to be a biologist, and probably still do at heart, but I. what happened was at the end of my first degree, I started reading about an issue that was developing at the time. There was a genetically engineered mouse that had been created by Harvard University, which was called Oncomouse, which was used as a model for effectively potentially developing treatments for oncology, for cancer indications. And Harvard applied to patent that and that raised a whole pleather of issues, as you might imagine. It was the early days. I suppose still relatively early days of patenting bio-technology inventions, we are talking about the late 80s and it created a huge furore in terms of opposition from various quarters to the idea of. I think what was, variously described, as trying to patent life.
I think it was at the time, and possibly still is, the most opposed patent and I just thought it was very interesting. interesting area. It was not one that I had particularly thought about until I had started reading about that topic and it led me down a path of wondering about the law. And, it just turned out at the time that law firms where starting for the first time to approach science graduates to become lawyers and that is what happened and I went from there.
Nino: With.(laughs). having done the opposite of becoming a lawyer and then transitioning into finance and then setting up a business. did you have the support of your friends and family when doing that?
Patrick: (Laughs) I think. yes, I think so. I think my dad sort of slightly wept when I said I was going to do another few years of studying.
Nino: Experienced that.
Patrick: (Laughs) but overall. yes I think he was very supportive, I think sort of incredulous probably at the time thinking.because I do not come from a family of lawyers at all and nobody else had sort of suggested it as a career option. But yes, I think everybody was supportive.
Nino: And. not that this is the only thing that you have done by any means but you were right at the forefront recently in advising AstraZeneca on the landmark collaboration agreement for the development and distribution of the University of Oxford's COVID-19 vaccine, which for obvious reasons was completed in a very short time frame. What were the main challenges that you faced, you and your team in terms of getting it across the line at such a speed?
Patrick: Well, I suppose it was just the sheer volume of work that needs to be done to get a deal like that signed off and if that has been compressed into a short timeframe that just brings its own challenges. Just that. are there enough. literally enough hours in the day. It was probably the first one, I think. Maybe the second one I had done where we were completing a deal from start to finish within the confines of lockdown, so having to do it all remotely.
And, actually I think. I would have said at the start that that probably would have been a hindrance. But it turned out, it was not. But, nonetheless, it was one of the first ones we had done from start to finish on Zoom calls. And, I guess the other sort of interesting thing was that it was very politically charged in that there was a desire by the UK government, I guess all governments to have some good news to say about the potential development of a vaccine. And the UK government was very closely involved in it and when you bring a third party into things that always complicates matters.
But we got through all that and we got it signed in a very quick timeframe for, as you say, the reasons were obvious while it needed to be done. Sometimes deadlines are fictitious, that one was real, probably as real as you will ever get.
Nino: Do you think you will ever do another deal like that, that is so in the forefront of everyone's kind of living rooms and minds?
Patrick: (Laughs) I have said this several times when people have sort of asked me a similar question. I do kind of hope, for everybody's sake, (laughter) that it is a once in a lifetime deal, I really do. But it was a fascinating deal to be involved in.
Nino: Yes. No, with respect (laughs) I hope it is to. (Laughter) I am not sure anyone wants to go through all of this again but. but before we jump into some questions and discussions around the legal world, we thought we would get some information from our guests, that you would not necessary find on their CV, with five quick fire questions.
Patrick: Yes, fire away.
Nino: The first one is - what is your favourite book?
Patrick: So, if. I guess if we are going sort of grown up books, then I would say it is probably Factfulness by Hans Rosling - if you have not read it, I would highly recommend it. It is all about using statistics to demonstration. Actually, why the world is a developing and improving place and not the opposite of that, which you can sometimes get the impression. is the case from reading the news.
And so. I am probably not describing it very well, but it is an excellent book and I would recommend it to anybody if you want to get a sort of positive view of the world. So that would be my grown up book. I think if it was sort of something not so grown up, I am a sucker for any sort of crime fiction.
Nino: (Laughs) a page-turner. Second question is TV shows or movies?
Patrick: TV shows, yes, definitely.
Nino: Third one, early bird or night owl.
Patrick: Definitely an early bird. My wife is definitely a night owl but we have managed to make that work over 25 years.
Nino: I might need some tips and advice later on (laughter) as I am the night owl and my wife is the early bird. No pressure on this one, but dogs or cats?
Patrick: Dogs, dogs every time, I apologise - obviously you said at the start that you have just got a cat (laughter) but I have always been a dog person - always had dogs all my life.
Nino: I like cats and just because I like cats, does not mean that I do not like dogs but. (laughter) but. yes living in London, it has got to be cats for me.
And, when through your inertia part- your good work we are allowed to travel again, where is next on your travel list.
Patrick: So, I think. I am a keen skier, have been almost all my life so I would love to go skiing. I do not think that is going to happen this year, but in terms of the bucket list place, I would say. actually it would be going back to somewhere that we went to for the first time a couple of years ago. Which was to the Okavango Delta in Botswana, which was absolutely spectacular and I have got a real yearning to go back there. It was absolutely amazing.
Nino: Yes, I can only imagine. Thank you for giving us some insight into your world and now if we go back into the world of legal. What are you most looking forward to in 2021? Are there any projects or initiatives that you feel particularly passionate about?
Patrick: The obvious sort of answer from my perspective at least is. as I said a few minutes ago, I have always been passionate about biology, life sciences and I remain so and I therefore just look forward to working with clients who are involved in that sector. And that is why, when I became a lawyer, I was sort of keen to make sure that I would stay in the sector and that is what I have managed to do.
And, I just love working for companies in the sector because they are doing amazing things and the Covid crisis has really sort of demonstrated what amazing work the sector can do. So that is what. I suppose my passion, in a work sense, is to continue to doing what I am already doing, which sounds a bit boring. but it is what it is.
The other thing that I am you know passionate about is that we are starting to do more and more pro bono work, which I think is a really important thing for law firms like Gowling and equivalents to be involved in. And I am working on one particular project which is a charity called "Kids In Need Of Defence" where we provide advice to children who do not yet have UK citizenship and therefore run the risk of being deported to a country that they have probably never even been to. So working with that charity is something that I think is really important and we are going to be doing more of.
Nino: Sounds absolutely fantastic. What has been your experience of. you touched on earlier about. of remote working in the past year and you know. leading a team virtually. Do you think that the sustain period is going to be. has it sped adoption of new tech? As much as you kind of assumed it would.
Patrick: Yes, I think it has been interesting. I think, like everybody, I suspect I have. we have all had our sort of ups and downs with remote working and I think, for me, probably the ideal mix would be going to something like a 50:50. I think working from home has tremendous advantages of. going back to the dog, I have probably walked the dog every single day for the last ten months or so which is. you know. is great for me. I am not so sure about the dog necessarily (laughter) but it is good for me.
And actually the technology you know has been amazing. It has been, from my perspective, incredibly robust. You know, we went from like I guess. all law firms went from having 1,500 people in the office on one day and having 1,500 people working from home the next day. And it was incredibly smooth and continues to be so. It has not been without its issues from time to time, but overall it has been remarkable and you do wonder how we would have dealt with this if it had been ten or certainly 20 years ago, it would have been a very different story.
And so yes, I think that. certainly the use of Zoom, Teams and other equivalent platforms has been tremendous, but it does not replace ultimately. some of that sort of physical interaction I think you are always going to need and there is only so much of it you can get from a Zoom call. So, I think we are going to need to ultimately need to go back into the office to some extent. I do not think we will go back to the extent that we did.
But yes, I mean overall I would say yes, technology has been a great boom and has been adopted I think, generally speaking with ease. We are also sort of as a firm, like all firms are, going down a path of starting to use artificial intelligent tools more and more and that is something I think will develop even more rapidly as time goes on.
Nino: So you think the pandemic has sort of accelerated that law firm kind of approach as to whether it is AI or other technology, it is now front and centre of sort of strategic initiatives.
Patrick: Yes, for sure. I mean. yes, I think it has been anyway for a long time you know for ten years or more I would say. it has probably had that position. But if anything it has just been accentuated by what has happened in the last 12 months, for sure.
Nino: Yes. It is interesting we. when we are allowed to get people back into the office on mass, we are. we have already announced that we are going to move to a hybrid approach, where people can have two days if they want, they are forced to, but two days working from home and three days in. I think the sort of why not fully remote, why not fully in?
I think you can see the clear benefits of being remote but certainly a business of our stage. and I can understand why within a firm as well you. whether. there are certain things that are just easier face to face. And there is also a certain amount of creativity that happens, not necessarily in the meeting but, on the way to the meeting and you cannot. that does not exist in Zoom, sadly.
Patrick: Yes, I completely agree that. I think we have worked very hard to try and maintain the sort of glue that you get as a team from working in the office together, through the use of all sorts of mechanisms, but all involving Zoom to a greater. or Teams to a greater or lesser extent. But it is clear that there is only so much of that you can replicate through that mechanism. In the end there is. you just lose something by not being together some of the time, I think. It just is clear, is it not?
Nino: Yes, absolutely, and especially thinking back to my days as a trainee, you know those early days, early years are particularly important. But going back into the tech side, what role has you know. legal technology played in your role over the last couple of years.
Patrick: Yes I suppose. I was thinking about this the other day actually. the biggest change. this is more over the length of my career but it has particularly accelerated, I think, in the last few years. Where, now I think it is true that most lawyers probably do most of their own document production, their own word-processing from sort of start to finish. And, I just would not have imagined that that would ever had been the case if I had sort of thought about it, looking forwards a few years ago. That lawyers would end up being in control of the whole process, from creating the document to amending the document to ultimately producing, probably the final execution copy.
Obviously, there is still some word-processing that gets done externally or by word-processing experts and certainly I do that. When it comes to formatting, I am still useless at all that. But you know the move to the lawyers doing all of that as part of their day job and the efficiencies it brings. I would not have thought it would but I think it does. it has brought enormous efficiencies to the way that lawyers deliver their jobs. That is probably for me the biggest thing that has happened and it has accelerated particularly over the last few years.
Nino: Yes, and it is funny. on the previous question you mentioned what would have happened if Covid had happened 20 years ago or something. I had not actually thought about that, because all these tools that we use. I mean I am not sure. it has enabled us to. there was an initial bit where we all kind of took stock of what was going on and kind of got a. made sure we had a comfortable chair to sit on and may be a second screen and obviously Zoom.
But you know. 20 years it would have been. we did not even have lap-tops, I do not think, let alone Zoom, so.
Patrick: No, I remember. yes, I am definitely old enough to remember very clearly the first time a lawyer brought a lap-top to a meeting and started amending a document and you know we were all absolutely amazed (laughter). Somebody was able to do. You know the idea was extraordinary and I was laughing with my PA, who has been my PA for over 20 years, the other day, that I was quite a late adopter of a mobile phone. I could sort of see where it would take you and boy was I proved right (laughter).
But you know nowadays, the idea of trying to resist having a mobile phone is kind of hilarious, but there you go.
Nino: Yes. The next question is. from our own experience we see that transparency on legal spend or KPI setting has a hugely positive influence on building relationships with. between law firms and their clients. What do you think are the most important factors for you when building relationships with your clients?
Patrick: So, I think there is. it is still the case and I can only comment really from the sort of work I do, I suppose, and it probably does depend on the area you are in. But I think it is still the case that there is nothing better than doing a really good job for your clients and I think, when you get to the sort of level I get to, I suppose it is having that strategic ability to advise. I think that goes a long way with building good relationships with clients and also working at. you know the personal connection, I think is still incredibly important. You need to be able to build those personal relationships. So, a combination of doing a good job, building personal connections is still vital and I think always will be.
Nino: Yes, I think people underestimate the relationships and I think people. clients certainly seem to follow the. I guess the partner more than the firm in some respects. You know, you see it when people move they often bring clients with them for that reason. It is down to the strength of the relationships and completely agree the best lawyers are, and always will be, those that have the ability to provide not just the legal advice, but the commercial, kind of, strategic advice as well.
In a recent survey commissioned by ourselves, Apperio, we found that 75% of legal leaders in private equity firms would value having better predictability of spend over an absolute reduction in legal spend i.e. they wanted to have predictability over cost cutting. Does this ring true with your own experiences in the life sciences sector.
Patrick: Yes, it does. I think that is true of all clients. I mean it is true in our. just in our daily lives. None of us like to engage somebody to do a job for us and then find that the bill is much higher than we thought it was going to be. That is never a pleasant place to be and so it is not surprising is it, that that is what clients want as well and so, it absolutely resonates.
And I think it is incredibly important that there is a sort of proper agreement reached at the start of any project as to how that project is going to be billed and what the total sum is going to be, based on a scope. I think lawyers have got better at it, but I am sure there is a lot more that we can still do to improve and inevitably you know scope on projects does change. And I think if that happens, then again it is part of the lawyer's job to be actively engaged in discussions with the client to sort of work out how the scope has changed and what impact, if any, it is going to have on the fees.
So that is an on-going continually process. It is not just something that happens at the start and then at the end you say "oh well, the bill is twice what we thought it was going to be because things changed". That needs to be a constant conversation so that predictability is there.
Nino: Yes, it is sort of (laughs). it is like every episode of Grand Designs ever (laughter). It ends up taking longer and costing more (laughter) and everyone wants the predictability. It is just how you do it in practice and surely something around you know proper planning in the beginning and transparency throughout, I think goes some way towards that.
Patrick: Is it just me then? You know I am not the only one who sits there sort of almost shouting at the television when Grand Designs is on saying "don't you realise how this show works, you are inevitably going to blow that budget by at least double - that's how the show works" (laughter).
Nino: There is. marital struggles, a baby will appear at some point (laughter) and it will be 2x what it original costs. it is a winning formula. What do you think are the biggest challenges facing law firms over the next year/year and a half?
Patrick: So, I actually think, going back to the whole sort of Covid, working from home point, one of the biggest issues goes back to the war. you know what is referred to as the war battalion - I do not really like that phrase, but I will use it because I think everybody understands what it means.
But there is. it is going to be interesting to see how that develops in that. and I think it is probably particularly an issue for regional firms, firms that only are based in the regions where previously you were able to sort of have a differentiator based on your geographical location. So, if somebody wanted to work in Birmingham say, as an example, and that was where they wanted to base their lives, you would go to a Birmingham firm.
But I think you know what we have shown, as we have just discussed, is that you can work very effectively from home. You do not need to be an office all the time and I can well imagine that certainly those firms based in London, and even in other centres around the globe, will be thinking "well, why don't we recruit from these regional sort of places?" You know, pay more than I am sure they are being paid in the region and attract what would be very good talent and I can just see that is going to be quite a rapidly developing issue for firms having to complete in a way that they previously have not had to, for that very reason.
Nino: Do you think, just to follow up in terms of your clients, or you know whether existing or future clients, that Covid has changed the way you work with them? Do you think well we will kind of go back to how it was before, in terms of their expectations, delivery, whether it is Zoom calls etc. or do you think again it will be a bit of hybrid in the future?
Patrick: I think it will be a bit of a hybrid. But what I am pretty sure is going to happen. the sort of cross-border deals that I have been used to being involved in for the last 20 years where, inevitably, you would spend some of the deal time travelling to jurisdiction X to have a meeting about the deal. You know, probably two or three days of meetings with the counter-party, I think a lot. not a lot. some of that will be replaced by Zoom, you know not travelling.
So, I would be very surprised if we go back to everybody always jumping on planes to go to places to have meetings. I think we have all proved that you do not need to do that all of the time. I think there is still going to be some need to do it but it will not be done as much. And I know clients. I have spoken to clients who were you know absolutely horrified by the prospect of having to do transactions remotely because they have always done it the way that I have just described.
And actually have been incredibly surprised about how efficient doing a deal remotely has been and you know, subject to some of the things that we have already talked about, how possible it has been to do transactions without the need to meet. So, yes, I think that is going to be the biggest change probably is that there is not so much business travel in that way which is probably not good news if you are an airline who relies on business travel. But that. I would be surprised if we go back to as much as that as we did in the past.
Nino: Yes, it is amazing how. you know talking to some of the funds that are. some clients of ours that are private equity funds, who have embarked on fund raises and some very successful fund raises in. you know when they are raising new funds. And, if you had asked them a year ago they would say "we will never ever be able to raise money from a certain type of LP", a limited partner, who gives them. who provides them with the capital. "We will never be able to raise money unless we have that kind of face to face meeting."
In fact it is even in some of the fund mandates that they have and low and behold, necessity being the mother of all invention, they have got it done, because they had to kind of find a way and then people realise actually, this is not so bad. I, for what it is worth, I agree. I still think there will still be an element. certain meetings that will require face to face, and you will still have to travel for those, but there will be a lot of stuff around the sides, as you say, and the example you gave is, I think, exactly right.
You think to yourself, "do I need to sort of leave on a Sunday, spend a couple of nights (laughs) in some hotel, just for a couple of meetings?" Probably not.
Thank you so much Patrick. So we have come to the end of our discussion with Patrick and thank you for joining us on Legally Vocal. It has been a pleasure hearing about your experiences and learning a bit more about the world of life sciences and life science law. And, particularly thank you for getting that Astra Zeneca vaccine to us nice and quickly. Thank you so much Patrick.
Patrick: Yes, thank you, thanks for having me.
Nino: Please join us for the next episode of Legally Vocal. If you have not already, subscribe on your podcast platform of choice. You can also find this and all the episodes of legally vocal on Apperio's website or on the Legally Vocal page on LinkedIn. I am Nino d'Adhemar and thanks for joining us.
Read the original article on GowlingWLG.com
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
