The boutique law firm is not a new idea, but the growth of boutiques has been exponential in recent years. This year alone has seen widespread defections from large multinationals to boutiques and a multitude of new boutique firms opening. Boutiques are also now involved internationally in some of the most significant and highest value claims in the Courts today. When for decades, BigLaw (vast, multinational firms based on leverage and scale) has dominated the most important, most high-value and most highly contested claims, what is it that is driving the growing popularity of the smaller firm?
Clients are increasingly alive to the fact that, when it comes to litigation firepower, it's not the size of the firm that matters, but the strength of the team. Aided in part by the litigation funding boom, boutiques are very in, very fashionable, very now.
Founded all the way back in 2009, CANDEY isn't just riding the boutique wave, we helped chart the course, and we were recognised as Litigation Boutique of the Year in The Lawyer Awards 2025. Here are just a few of the reasons why we have always believed that boutiques do it better.
1. We cut the fat.
A smaller firm means a smaller team, and that's no bad thing. BigLaw is notorious for forming teams comprising dozens upon dozens of fee-earners: disputes are carved up between sub-teams working in silos, as a panel of partners jostle to keep the plates spinning. At a boutique firm, you will find that even the largest of matters are led by just one or two partners; a handful of associates might work under them, assisted by an efficient team of juniors. Decisions are sharper. Lines of communication are clearer. Accountability is direct. All fee-earners have sight of the whole dispute, which keeps conduct of the matter transparent and, importantly, keeps costs low.
2. We're flatter.
Boutiques tend not to share BigLaw's rigid hierarchies. We're more collegiate by nature, with associates and juniors who are unafraid to approach partners with their thoughts and ideas, and partners who see that as a strength, not a disruption. Our teams gel better together and produce more thought-through and original answers to our clients' problems. Everyone is invested in strategy and in driving the matter forward. For the client, that means advice that's sharper, strategies that are stress-tested from every angle, and a team that moves as one towards their goals – without the internal turf wars that can bog down a more hierarchical firm.
3. We're more agile.
Time is money, especially in litigation. When clients need to move fast, they don't want to wait for three partners, a sector head and a risk committee to sign off. Boutique firms have a natural aversion to unnecessary bureaucracy and our chain of command is shorter. Our teams are led by hands-on, senior litigators who have full authority to act. Decisions are taken faster, allowing our clients to seize the procedural initiative. This isn't just a matter of internal process: it can be the difference between making a claim in time and having no claim at all, or between freezing an asset and watching it vanish offshore. Speed is key.
4. We're a free house, not a tied house.
Conflicts are the biggest chink in BigLaw's armour. Whilst conflict checks are a necessary part of legal practice, their scope and impact often expand exponentially with the size of the firm in question. At BigLaw firms, it's not uncommon for promising instructions to be turned away because another team, in another city, once advised a distant subsidiary of the same corporate group that a prospective client now wants to act against. Boutique firms, by contrast, are far less encumbered by legacy relationships or sprawling rosters of institutional clients. Our independence allows us to act where larger firms cannot. For clients in fast-moving disputes – particularly those involving fraud, shareholder conflict, or cross-border enforcement – this independence is often what allows boutiques to step in when no one else can. Boutiques are fast becoming the go-to option for clients in need of a conflict-free team that can act fearlessly against corporate giants, particularly in the sectors of banking, insurance and technology.
5. We're more driven.
Often, boutique litigators are, themselves, ex-BigLaw. They have left in search of a firm that can offer them more control, better culture and increased closeness to their work. These aren't second-rate litigators who couldn't make it in BigLaw – they've been there, done that and got the t-shirt. Now, they are hungry to prove that they can win and grow without being a tiny part of a vast megacorp. Boutique litigators have more skin in the game, keeping close to the action, building their practice and maintaining their reputation. For the client, this means a legal team that is truly and personally invested in the outcome of their matter, not simply their billable hours.
6. We offer more for less.
Unlike BigLaw, boutiques can offer Magic Circle brains without the Magic Circle price tag, thanks – in large part – to the simple fact that boutique firms don't have BigLaw overheads. Clients of larger firms are paying not only for their legal team but also for the bloated machinery surrounding it: layers of management, international offices, marketing departments, countless complex internal systems, and more. Clients in contentious matters need strategic clarity, deep subject-matter expertise and decisive execution: boutiques can offer the same service for better value. Of course, better value doesn't mean 'cheap' and it doesn't mean 'cut-rate': it means that costs are proportionate to the complexity and risk of the matter. Boutiques are also more open to creative fee structures – from capped fees to blended rates, to damages-based agreements – which can align incentives more closely and give clients genuine cost control.
The rise of litigation boutiques is not a passing trend but a response to what serious clients increasingly want: leaner teams, faster decisions, deeper partner involvement and freedom from conflicts. Boutiques are fast becoming the litigant's weapon of choice, and at CANDEY, we have proved time and time again that the right small team can outperform the wrong big one. When the stakes are high and the fight is big, size really does matter – and smaller firms deliver more.
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.
