.svg)
.webp)
Straightforward commercial work - lease negotiations, property transactions, business agreements - that take weeks when they should take days. Questions that go to junior lawyers, who check with senior lawyers, who come back with more questions. The meter running the entire time, and nobody able to tell you what the final bill will be.
Too often, this is what people experience when working with lawyers.
I understand why it often works that way. Traditional law firm structures require layers of review and hourly billing. But I also understand that this model rarely serves SMEs well. Business owners and property investors need certainty, speed, and direct access to experienced counsel. They don't need elaborate research memos or multiple rounds of review for routine commercial matters.
When I started my own practice, I knew I wanted to work differently.
What is "New Law"? Legal practices built around fixed fees, direct principal access, and technology efficiency rather than traditional hourly billing and firm hierarchy.
Who does it serve? SMEs, property investors, and business owners who need commercial legal work without traditional firm overhead and uncertainty.
How is it different? You work directly with an experienced lawyer, know costs upfront, and get faster responses through technology and streamlined processes.
What's the trade-off? Works best for commercial property and business matters. Complex litigation or matters requiring large teams still suit traditional firms.
Key benefit: Certainty and speed. You know what you're paying and you're working with someone who understands your commercial objectives.
When evaluating legal services, ask prospective lawyers how their pricing works and whether you'll work with them directly or be handed to junior staff. Discuss typical response times for straightforward questions. If you're getting vague answers about fees ("depends on complexity") or access ("we have a team approach"), you're likely looking at a traditional model. That's fine for some matters, but understand what you're signing up for. For routine commercial work, fixed fees and direct principal access often provide better value and certainty.
The traditional law firm model evolved to serve large corporate clients with complex, unpredictable legal needs. Hourly billing makes sense when you genuinely don't know how much time a matter will require. Multiple lawyers reviewing work makes sense when you're managing significant risk for major corporations.
For SMEs, though, this creates three persistent problems:
Uncertainty about costs. When you're quoted hourly rates, you're essentially signing up for an unknown final bill. Lawyers will estimate, but those estimates are rarely binding. A straightforward commercial lease review might cost $3,000 or $8,000 depending on how many questions arise and how many people touch the file.
Junior lawyers handling your work. Law firm economics require junior lawyers to do much of the actual work, supervised by senior lawyers. This makes commercial sense for the firm, but it means your matter is being handled by someone with less experience, who needs to check decisions with someone else, which adds time and cost.
Response time delays. When questions need to go up and down a hierarchy, simple clarifications take days instead of hours. For business decisions that need to move forward, this creates real commercial problems.
These aren't failures of traditional firms - they're features of a model designed for different clients and different types of work.
Over the past decade, "New Law" firms have emerged specifically to serve clients who don't need or want the traditional model. The movement combines three elements:
Fixed pricing for defined scopes. When legal work is routine and predictable (and most commercial property and business work is), you can price it as a project rather than by the hour. This gives clients certainty and removes the perverse incentive to spend more time on matters.
Direct access to experienced lawyers. Without firm overhead and partnership structures, experienced lawyers can work directly with clients on matters that would normally be delegated to junior staff. This speeds decisions and improves quality.
Technology enablement. Modern practice management tools, secure client portals, and efficient document systems reduce administrative time and cost. This allows lower fixed fees than traditional hourly billing would require.
The model works because it aligns lawyer and client interests: both want efficient, high-quality work completed quickly.
I built LexAlia around four principles:
Fixed fees for most matters. Property transactions, lease negotiations, business structuring, commercial agreements - these are largely predictable in scope. I quote a fixed fee based on the actual work required, not hours I might spend. If a matter turns out simpler than expected, you don't pay more. If it's more complex, I absorb that because I priced the risk.
Direct principal access. You work with me personally. No handoffs to junior lawyers. No layers of review. When you have questions, you're asking someone with 15+ years of experience who can answer them directly.
Commercial-first approach. Having worked in property development before practicing law, I understand that legal advice needs to serve commercial objectives. Sometimes the legally perfect solution is commercially impractical. I focus on finding legal solutions that make commercial sense.
Technology efficiency. Secure client portals, digital signing, cloud-based practice management - these aren't impressive on their own, but they eliminate the administrative delays that add cost in traditional firms.
Three real examples show how this model creates value:
Property closing certainty. A client was purchasing a commercial property for $2.1 million. Traditional quote: $4,500-$8,000 depending on complexity. My fixed fee: $5,500 regardless of complications. When due diligence revealed some title issues requiring extra work, the fee stayed the same. The client knew their legal cost from day one and could plan accordingly. No surprises.
Lease negotiation speed. A business owner needed to negotiate a retail lease quickly to secure a location before a competitor. In a traditional firm, each question would go junior lawyer → senior lawyer → back to client, taking 2-3 days per round. Working directly with me, we handled questions in hours via phone and email. Lease executed in six days instead of three weeks. The commercial opportunity didn't wait for traditional processes.
Acquisition risk-flagging. A client was buying an established business. The financial statements looked solid, but having structured businesses myself, I noticed the owner was using a unit trust structure that created some tax complications on sale. Traditional lawyers would identify this during due diligence. But because I understand business operations and not just legal structure, I could immediately assess whether it was a deal-breaker (it wasn't) and how to structure the purchase to address it. This commercial judgment - understanding not just the legal issue but its business implications - comes from experience on both sides of transactions.
In each case, the value wasn't just cost or speed. It was certainty, direct access, and commercial understanding combined.
LexAlia's model works well for:
It works less well for:
I'm honest about this because the model only works when it genuinely serves the client better. For matters outside this scope, I'll refer you to firms better equipped to handle them.
I work with property investors and business owners on commercial property transactions, business acquisitions and sales, commercial leasing, and business structuring. The fixed fee approach means you know costs upfront. Direct access means decisions move at business speed, not law firm hierarchy speed. And my commercial background means legal advice that makes commercial sense.
For property transactions, this might be $4,500-$7,500 depending on complexity. For business sales, typically $6,000-$12,000. For lease negotiations, $3,500-$6,000. These are fixed fees - they don't change if the matter takes longer than expected.
Consider a "New Law" approach if:
Traditional firms might suit better if:
Worth a conversation:
I price based on the expected scope. Most commercial property and business matters follow predictable patterns. When something genuinely unusual arises, we discuss whether it's within scope or requires a separate fee discussion.
I refer you to appropriate specialists and can coordinate if needed. The model only works when I'm genuinely the right person for the matter. For litigation, family law, or highly specialized areas, I'll point you to lawyers who practice in those areas.
Yes - secure client portals, digital signing, cloud-based document management. But the technology serves efficiency, not scale. I use it to reduce administrative time so I can focus on legal and commercial judgment.
For commercial property and business matters at SME scale, yes. You get experience without paying for it to train junior lawyers. But for matters requiring specialist expertise I don't have, you're better with someone who practices in that area regardless of firm structure.
You have my mobile. For genuine commercial urgency (settlement deadlines, time-sensitive negotiations), I respond directly. This isn't about being available 24/7 - it's about not putting hierarchy between clients and decisions when timing matters.
.webp)
.webp)
