A Day In The Life Of A Paralegal

A Day In The Life Of A Paralegal At EM Law

Recording a single day in the life of a paralegal would be misleading. I often spend a whole day performing one task. So it wouldn’t give you much scope to focus on such a short time period. Rather I will describe an assemblage of many days. Given the current circumstances – working from home and away from the office – I have spent a lot of time doing this – writing blogs. I will cast my mind back to early March last year. When we were last in the office. I had been travelling to and from Shoreditch for a grand total of nine weeks. Neil and I would be bouncing ideas off one another and I felt I was learning a lot fast. Then, before I knew it, Neil become a disembodied voice on the phone or a floating head on my laptop. As the firm seemed to get busier and busier I found myself cut off from everyday discussions and updates. On the upside I had more time to think and Neil had time to send me challenging tasks with longer deadlines. Anyway, before describing the kind of work I do here is a semi-fictional account of a day in the Shoreditch office…

Day in the life of a paralegal

It’s January or February or March, it doesn’t matter because it’s cold. I step out of the crowd at Shoreditch High Street Station to cross the road and walk quickly through the few lively streets towards Old Street. I pass the Old Blue Last where I saw a gig a few weeks ago and a Japanese restaurant where Neil and I enjoyed Ramen once. And then through the revolving doors and into the atrium of the White Collar Factory. An impressive industrial modernist space with the utilities exposed on the ceiling and a chunky singular concrete column imposing and cylindrical.

I walk up the stairs and, after passing through many doors, enter our small office. Neil is either there, having arrived 3 or 4 hours earlier if he is particularly busy, or he may be yet to arrive if he has time to take his children to school. Often there is work to do on arrival – reviewing a contract drafted the day before which is to be sent to a client later that day or finishing a bit of research to present to Neil that morning. The day is then spent reading, researching, drafting, discussing, overhearing conversations with clients and dealing with new enquiries.


A lot of time is spent researching specific points of law which I then present to Neil to help him take a view on how to move forward with a client. Examples include – cookie law, competition law for exclusive distribution agreements, incorporation of terms by reference into contracts, anti-money laundering legislation, bribery act, anonymising personal data etc. As you can see it’s a real mixed bag. I never know what the next bit of research will bring but the thing I probably spend the most time looking into is data protection. Given that the firm works for plenty of tech start-ups, data laws are often an area to be explored.


Reviewing contracts is a question of patiently sitting down and reading the document slowly and methodically. I tend to switch off completely from the outside world. The contracts can vary from software distribution agreements to drone tenders for governments in developing countries. Having a good eye for grammar and the logic needed to bind a contract together is important. I still feel like a novice but every time I review one of these documents I can tell I am improving. Which is satisfying.


Drafting can seem daunting to someone at my stage. I have drafted supply of goods contracts, SaaS contracts, introducer agreements and a letter to be sent to Counsel for an opinion on a bit of litigation. I have made many mistakes and getting feedback from Neil has been crucial for my development. I have enjoyed the challenge and it is an opportunity to be creative given that you have to come up with the most elegant, simple and effective solution for a client. Which will always be unique to the situation at hand. Being adaptable and mindful of the client’s needs is therefore crucial.


Less time spent in the office has meant more time for me to write blogs for the website and help with marketing. Writing blogs can be a fun exercise. It is similar to writing a short university essay, although your opinion is less important. At the same time it is important to write on the topics that clients will find useful and in language that is clear and relatable. This means one week I am writing about space law but the next about specific software agreements or the need for a representative under GDPR. Being engaging whilst helpful has been my aim.

New enquiries

I often speak to new clients over the phone and this is something in which my confidence has grown tremendously since working with EM law. You begin to get a sense of the kind of things clients are having issues with and you grow confidence in your own voice and ability to understand the issues at hand. My personal contact with clients themselves has been limited so this has been a good way of learning how to communicate in law.

Final observations

Reading. The more reading I do the better job I do on all accounts. Not giving up when you think you have looked everywhere for a piece of information is also important as you often find that just when you think all hope is lost, if you keep going, you find the bit of information you need in the next few clicks. Working as a paralegal at EM law is particularly exciting because of the close contact between myself and Neil which means I learn a lot about law, but it also gives it the feel of a start-up and each marketing decision is a new adventure.

Hopefully this gives you a rough idea of a day in the life of a paralegal. If you are thinking of a career in law I can definitely recommend it!

EM Law Retainer Arrangements

Legal Fees: Retainer Arrangements

Or at least they should be. If a lawyer has a client who pays standard rates and never questions the bill or hours spent then that lawyer is in an enviable position. If the standard rate is already very competitive then the client may be ok with this arrangement.

But most lawyers are willing to lower their hourly rate in exchange for a retainer arrangement with their client.

What are retainer arrangements?

They can take various forms.

A classic example is where a client pays a fixed rate every month for, say, 12 months and in return the lawyer offers a certain number of hours per month. In some retainer arrangements the client needs to use up the time credits in a month otherwise they will lose them – the time credits aren’t carried forward. In other retainer arrangements, the time credits may be carried forward in which case the arrangement is more like one where the client is simply buying time in bulk, to be used as and when the client wants throughout the year.

Either way, the client ends up paying an hourly rate that is less than standard. This is because it is valuable for the lawyer to know that there will be a set amount of cash coming in to the firm at a certain date every month – it provides cash flow certainty. This cash flow arrangement can also benefit the client – it gives the client the opportunity to spread the cost of legal services throughout the year.

The other way in which retainer arrangements should benefit both client and lawyer is that they should remove or at least seriously reduce the need for there to be discussions around what the cost of a piece of work is going to be. This means that time is saved and, let’s face it, no-one likes discussions around fees and what they should be.

Just expanding on this point above: if you are a client you may be thinking “yeah, Neil, you would say that - of course you don’t want a check on what you do by having to give estimates on how long things are going to take and at what cost” but wait a minute:

You aren’t going to sign up to a retainer arrangement unless you trust the lawyer. So retainer arrangements are for where you are satisfied that you have found a lawyer who is good at their job and who you trust won’t overcharge you.

A client should see a lawyer who is on a retainer arrangement as performing a role like an in-house lawyer i.e. an employee. Do you ask your employees what it’s going to cost to do a piece of work? No. They are paid a salary and they just get on with things.

Let’s say – extreme example – I go on to a retainer arrangement where my hourly rate is the equivalent of £30 an hour. Aren’t you now going to let me just get on with things rather than we have discussions around how long each item of work is going to take? I think you would probably just let me crack on because you know that you are getting a great rate. So let’s come up with a more realistic example: If my standard hourly rate is £300 per hour but our retainer arrangement brings my rate down to £150 per hour – and don’t forget you have already worked with me for a while so you see how I do things – I would expect you to let me get on with the work you sent me rather than give time estimates for each item that we need to agree on. Don’t forget you will see how my time accrues by time reporting and you can always shout if you aren’t happy.

So, basically, a lawyer should reduce their rate (which the client benefits from) in return for cash flow certainty (which the client also benefits from) and in return for not having the hassle of having to estimate how long it is going to take to do things every time work comes in (which the client also benefits from given the trusted relationship).

A win-win.

EM Law Hourly Rates

Legal Fees: Hourly rate or fixed rate?

Answer: Clients don’t necessarily benefit one way or the other – whatever mechanism is used, it’s all about trust.

The last few years the message loud and clear to lawyers has been that we need to get away from charging legal fees by the hour and offer clients a fixed rate for the work we do. “Clients want certainty.”

Fair enough.

But they probably don’t want to be ripped off either.

I don’t know that many lawyers who are prepared to tell me what they charge for an item of work but I know a few. They are lawyers working in firms of around 30 plus partners and Legal 500 recognised coming in around band 3 or 4. For non-lawyers that means they are in firms who are recognised as being very good but who aren’t top City firms. In the regions they are amongst the leading firms in their area.

When these contacts of mine tell me what they charge in legal fees at a fixed rate for certain pieces of work I think to myself “how do they get away with that?!” In some cases they are charging a fixed quote that is three times more expensive than if an hourly rate had been agreed.

Moving away from the hourly rate model to the fixed rate model seems to have benefitted some lawyers financially but I’m not sure that was what clients had in mind when they said they didn’t like the uncertainty of hourly rates.

Typically, when asked for a fixed rate a lawyer will think about what the job would take to do on an hourly basis and then provide an uplift of an additional 30 percent to provide a cushion in case they underestimated the time they thought it would take to do the work. Not only that but they will caveat the fixed rate by using words such as “as long as nothing unusual arises” or words to that effect.

Earlier this year I engaged a lawyer myself to help with a personal matter. Here is an extract from the email exchange I had with him around legal fees:

Me: “….Can I just check: you are estimating “around £1500”.

Can you provide a fixed quote for this or not? If not what does “around” mean – what’s the exposure on fees that I would be under…..”

Him: “…..My estimate is loosely based on my charging rate of £300 per hour plus VAT but you can treat my quote of £1,500 (plus £500 for a notice) plus VAT and disbursements as effectively a fixed quote so long as the matter is relatively straightforward and does not involve unexpected complications……”

What does “relatively straightforward” or “unexpected complications” mean?

I don’t know either.

Did I go back to this lawyer to query what he meant? No – I just got on with it and trusted that he wouldn’t overcharge me because this lawyer had been recommended to me by a friend. I’ll let you know if this comes back to bite me.

What is the lawyer doing here? He’s giving me a fixed quote that will remain fixed as long as nothing unusual happens (as far as he is concerned). How is this different from an hourly rate? It isn’t much different. I would hope that I would at least get a couple of hours slack if he spends 2 hours more than he thought the work would take but after that suddenly this will turn into an “unusual” case and I’ll have to pay more.

So I have to trust this lawyer that he won’t take advantage and overcharge. The fact that I have a “fixed rate” doesn’t really change anything.

Flipping this over to the lawyer’s perspective: why should the lawyer end up doing a load of work that he can’t charge for if things don’t go smoothly? I don’t think lawyers should be expected to pick up the pieces where things don’t go smoothly and it’s not their fault. So that’s the other reason why I accepted that lawyer’s quote.

But how do I know if things have become bumpy as a result of my lawyer failing to do things properly? I don’t.

Having a lawyer charge legal fees on a fixed quote rather than an hourly rate does not mean that you are saving money. In fact you are probably paying extra for having a bit more certainty as to what the bill will be – unless something unusual happens in which case you will pay more.

So it all boils down to this: it doesn’t really matter whether your lawyer is charging an hourly rate or a fixed rate - the only way you are going to end up paying a fair price for your legal work is by finding a lawyer you can trust. Let that be your focus.