Mandate
Engagement formats
Four ways to instruct us — described in words, without tiers, figures or comparison tables.
Initial consultation
Suits a first conversation when you need to understand whether we can help and what shape an engagement might take. We review your summary, ask clarifying questions, and outline a possible scope. It is a structured discussion — not an open-ended audit of every document you hold.
Typically involves a senior lawyer and, where useful, a colleague who would work on the matter. Output is a scope note or proposal letter if you wish to proceed. The consultation ends when you have enough to decide — we do not extend it informally into full advice without agreement.
Retainer
A retainer suits organisations that need recurring access to counsel — contract reviews, policy updates, board papers, employment questions — without issuing a new instruction each time. Scope defines what categories of work are covered, how requests are prioritised, and how deliverables are tracked.
A named lawyer leads the relationship with support from colleagues as volume requires. Work is documented in a running file so continuity survives personnel changes on either side. Retainers renew by mutual agreement; either party may end with notice as set out in the letter.
Project
Project engagements cover defined deliverables with a clear end — a contract suite, a compliance pack, a restructuring documentation set, a negotiation sequence. Scope lists artefacts, milestones where helpful, and revision rounds included.
Project teams include a lead and drafters as complexity requires. We checkpoint with you at agreed stages rather than disappearing until a final drop. When the deliverables are accepted, the project closes unless you extend scope in writing.
Advisory
Advisory instructions suit episodic questions that need senior judgment without a full project infrastructure — a board memo on one decision, a mark-up of a single agreement, guidance on a compliance grey area. Scope is narrow by design.
One senior lawyer usually carries advisory work, drawing on colleagues for specialist input when needed. Deliverables are memos, calls summarised in writing, or annotated documents. Advisory ends when the question posed is answered — new questions need new scope.
Advisory suits in-house teams that usually draft internally but want a senior mark-up before a board meeting, or founders who need one memorandum on a single decision without opening a retainer. Because scope is narrow, turnaround can be faster than a full project — still bounded by the letter, not by informal expectation.
What we need from you
A clear description of the matter, relevant documents, named contacts, and realistic timelines. Decisions we cannot make for you — commercial trade-offs, internal approvals — should be identified early so drafts are not reworked unnecessarily.
Tell us if multiple stakeholders must approve documents and in what order. Tell us if counterparties impose template formats. Tell us if previous counsel left half-finished work — we prefer to see it before promising a clean draft.
Matters we refer out
Courtroom litigation as primary counsel, niche regulatory areas outside our practice, and any matter where conflict prevents us from acting. We explain referral plainly and without promising outcomes from other firms.
Immigration strategy beyond general employment documentation, criminal defence, and patent prosecution are examples of work we typically do not carry as lead counsel — not because they are unimportant, but because they benefit from dedicated specialist practices.
Every format is confirmed in an engagement letter before substantive work begins. If you are unsure which format fits, describe your situation in a first email — we will suggest a structure.
Formats can combine sequentially: an initial consultation may lead to a project; a project may convert to a retainer if volume warrants. Each transition gets its own written confirmation — we do not assume continuity without it.
Telok Ayer · Robinson corridor