Aoifinn Devitt: This series is brought to you with the kind support of Evershed Sutherland. As a global top 10 law firm, Evershed Sutherland provides legal services to a global client base. With more than 3,000 lawyers, the firm operates in over 70 offices in more than 30 countries across Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and the United States. The firm recognizes that having diverse talent across its business brings many benefits. It is committed to accessing a wide range of views, perspectives, and thinking in all of its teams, and in this way is building a culture of inclusion where each person feels able to be their true self at work and reach their full potential. Diversity and inclusion is fundamental to the firm’s purpose of helping their clients, their people, and their communities to thrive, and inclusive is one of its 5 values.
Sheena: Take control of your career. Speak to people if you feel you’re not getting the opportunities. Talk to those individuals who can provide you with opportunities. Always be open, Have some transparency, be inquisitive, take a leap of faith. What’s the worst that can happen?
Aoifinn Devitt: I’m Aoifinn Devitt, and welcome to this 50 Faces focus series, which showcases the richness and diversity of inspiring people in the law. I’m joined today by Sheena Bhattiv, who is a partner at Eversheds Sutherland in their London office, with a practice area focused on complex commercial, business, and insolvency and restructuring disputes. Both litigation and arbitration, often with a cross-border element. Welcome, Sheena. Thanks for joining me today.
Sheena: Oh, thanks very much.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, let’s start by talking about your background. Where were you born and what was your path into law?
Sheena: I grew up in an Indian family in North London. My parents came to this country, I think, in the mid-’60s. They both grew up in Nairobi, Kenya, where there was and remains a large Indian community. Both came from very modest backgrounds, large families whose fathers weren’t professional. But I think when my dad came to this country, he came to study initially. He came here because he really wanted to better himself and provide a future for his family. And I’m afraid I did grow up in a very stereotypical Indian family where there was very much an expectation that I would go into a profession. But what’s amazing is I have a brother, and given the sort of generation, my father’s generation and my mother’s generation and their cultural background, they never saw a difference between my brother and I. It was very much gender parity. You know, you would do well, they would provide the foundation, and you would join a profession. So when I was studying for what we call A-levels in this country, I did lots of research as to what I may wish to do. I had a cousin who was a lawyer. I spoke to her, I spoke to people that were lawyers, and I thought that I would study law at university and then just see how things would go. I sort of fell into that track quite easily. But what was quite interesting, I, I went to law school, I then joined Freshfields as a trainee lawyer. I stayed there for 5 years after I qualified, but in my sort of late 20s, early 30s, I started questioning whether law was what I really wanted to do. And something else that I had always been interested in was medicine. And I did consider at that point whether I ought to requalify as a doctor. For various reasons, I didn’t. And knowing how happy I have been in my career, I’m very glad I didn’t. It’s interesting, you sort of stop in your tracks at some points in your career and think, am I doing the right thing? But I know I am.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, that’s so interesting. I was going to ask you about surprising turns, but clearly you averted a surprising turn. But I’d really love to dig into that because that time period you mentioned, the ’20s and ’30s, really are the critical points when many women leave the workforce. It’s often coinciding with, with family obligations. And what do you think it was for you that made you stay? And I know that you’ve taken maternity leave through your career. Can you talk a little bit about how it was coming back from that and why you decided ultimately to stay in the workforce?
Sheena: I set out to be a partner. I think in those days— I say those days, it wasn’t that long ago, but I think people’s outlooks have changed now— but in those days, I set out to be a partner, and I spent some time thinking when I should have my children, but just decided to have them at the right time. I took my first maternity leave in 2009, and I have to say both my maternity leaves probably did impact on my progress. And I can explain, you know, I made partner many, many years later and didn’t follow the usual trajectory. So when I went on maternity leave, I’d been working at the firm I was at for a number of years, not my current firm. I was regarded very highly. I had developed great relationships. I really liked the people I worked with and they liked me. I was very much in the running for partnership, but I have to say, albeit it was only now 13 years ago or so, I think mindsets were really different. Notwithstanding these great relationships, they knew me, I knew them. I think when I went on maternity leave and I did take 10 months off, and I think that’s commonplace in the UK, it was very much sort of out of sight, out of mind. And this was not deliberate. There was no malice intended, nothing like that. I think it was mindsets at the time and just human nature. So when I came back, I really felt as if I had lost time. And I had to build those relationships again and prove myself again. And then I had my second maternity leave and I felt the same again. And also when you’re not there, structures within your team change, people come in, people leave. So I did feel I came back having sort of lost those years and having to prove myself again. And when I came back, I guess after my second maternity leave, My husband then was in the army, he was traveling a lot. I was therefore working in a demanding industry, a demanding role with two young children. My firm then merged with another firm and there was a period of adjustment for the firm, bringing two firms together, two teams together. And with all of that in mind, I didn’t feel I sort of had what I’d say the sort of mental bandwidth to go for partnership. And I think at that stage, given where my firm was at, partnership probably wasn’t possible at that stage. So I took an Of Counsel role and decided to take a temporary step back from what I really wanted to do, wanted to achieve, which was partnership. You know, it wasn’t easy, and I often felt that I was selling myself short, but equally it was the right thing to do at the right time. And then, that is not to say I worked any differently. I worked extremely hard But it was a few years later, I felt that the circumstances were right, that the timings in my personal life were right, and I decided to take a leap of faith and seek that promotion. And so I didn’t follow the usual trajectory. I know people think that’s what you should still be doing, but I continued to work at the same pace, doing the same hours, but I took that sort of partnerships step back. I joined Evershed Sutherland in September last year as a partner, and I look at other partners who may be a lot younger than me, but I’ve had a different journey. I’ve learned a lot, I’ve experienced a lot. So I come into this role with a lot of experience behind me.
Aoifinn Devitt: So interesting what you mentioned about what you felt on returning from maternity leave and the need to rebuild those networks. Now that paternity leave is becoming more and more accepted, more the norm, perhaps not to the same degree as maternity leave is, is it common But do you think that men experience the same adjustments when they return? Or is it that women are the kind of other other because they already have the issue of being perhaps underrepresented? Does maternity leave set them back in a different way?
Sheena: It’s really interesting you ask that question. I was talking to somebody in my team only yesterday, a male associate with children, and I think women have their own very distinct issues. For a lot of women still, I think they’re the primary child carer. They will be the ones getting home and looking after the children, relieving their childcare individuals. But I think for many men, the issues are the same. I think it is a difficult profession to be in as a parent. It’s hugely demanding. The hours are long. That work-life balance is so difficult to achieve. And therefore, I do think that both women and men are facing some of the same issues. And I was talking to this associate yesterday about the possibility of partnership. He is fantastic. His career progression— I mean, he should be a partner. And his response was, I’m not certain if that’s what I want. I don’t know, will it give me work-life balance? How am I going to achieve all of that? Know, You I find the hours and the competing demands hard as it is. So I don’t think it’s necessarily just a gender issue, although it is, I still maintain, harder for women. And I think the statistics show that.
Aoifinn Devitt: And just in terms of the work-life balance, which is so key now that we have more flexibility built in as a norm, more of a hybrid working existence. And I think you described how you approach your team, you nurture your team. How do you think we can try to get this right? Maybe. In the next 5 to 10 years as a profession?
Sheena: I think flexibility is going to be hugely important. I maintain that the pandemic has propelled the legal profession, in particular in the UK, forward by 5 or 10 years. But for the pandemic, this flexibility, achieving more work-life balance, I just don’t think we would have been there. But flexibility is so key, and what is fantastic about Evershed Sutherland, and quite unique I think, is that it really is trailblazing when it comes to flexibility. So there are partners who work 4 days a week or take a Friday afternoon off to pick up their children, or stop at 3, pick up their children, and then log on again. There are partners who do that, there are associates who do that, there are associates who are up for promotion that do that. For me, that is really unique, and it’s giving people the opportunity to still work at the levels that they do, provide client excellence, continue their careers in this industry, but give them the opportunity to have their family life. And what I’m also finding is that, and in particular after the pandemic, that clients are so amenable to this. And I see more transparency. So again, I was, and I, this conversation comes at a time when I’ve been having these sorts of conversations internally But we were discussing as a team being very open with your clients. If they set a deadline to get them something, we’re not talking about court deadlines, these are internal deadlines, and you know that that’s going to be your non-working day, for instance, the ability to be open with clients, say, look, is it possible if this isn’t a fixed deadline, I get it to you the next day because tomorrow is my non-working day. I have to say, this is really unusual. I have not come from a background where people have done this, but I’m in admiration for those that do it. At my firm, and I think this is the way forward. It’s a way of retaining talent. We have a lot of senior female associates who can really see partnership as the next step in circumstances where they have more of a work-life balance.
Aoifinn Devitt: So this podcast focuses on minority voices, and from your vantage point, you said you grew up in an Indian family. How well do you think the legal profession is doing in terms of diversifying its base by ethnicity as well as by gender?
Sheena: I think it has a long way to go. I can only speak for, I guess, solicitors rather than barristers because that is the area I work in, but there is a long way to go. The statistics show that only 20% of all lawyers are Black, Asian, or from a minority ethnic group. There are, for instance, my firm, there are many initiatives to improve ethnic diversity, including right at the start. I think sometimes it is sort of interlinked with social mobility and it’s ensuring that we are there even before students go to university, really within the communities, encouraging ethnic minorities to go down the legal route. I think there is an education piece there even before, as I said, people get to university. And even now, we have many systems in place to ensure that the graduates that we recruit are diverse, that the lateral hires we recruit are diverse. But I think there is still a long way to go. Law firms have to work very hard to ensure we’re attracting a diverse set of lawyers.
Aoifinn Devitt: It’s interesting, isn’t it? Because I’ve heard from people in asset management that sometimes even the very factor of these glittering skyscrapers in the city, people all dressed well, nice handbags, nice shoes, that that can be an intimidating factor in itself. You mentioned social mobility, and I was wondering whether the new flexible working helps or hinders that. But then I think that even the backdrop to the flexible working is going to be under scrutiny as well. So it is important, I think, to make sure that we are as inclusive as possible to ensure that nobody feels intimidated, perhaps by not coming from wealth.
Sheena: I agree entirely. In the past, I have worked on initiatives where we as lawyers visit inner-city schools, talk to students at a very young age, and try and, as you say, change that perception and make it something that’s achievable for everyone. And it is a matter of starting at the school level, really, and also at university level.
Aoifinn Devitt: I want to just have a minute or two to discuss your practice area because I studied law myself. I’m a bit of a legal junkie. I love the subject matter of what is worked on day to day. Can you talk a little bit about your area of commercial litigation and arbitration, and what are you seeing that excites you in that area today?
Sheena: It’s interesting that you asked that question. I attended one of my first in-person legal conferences this week, and there was one particular session that really piqued my interest, and that’s very much relevant to being a disputes lawyer in London. And the question was, is London still the leading dispute resolution centre, both arbitration and litigation? And I am quite biased, but historically London has always been seen as one of the premier dispute resolution centres. In particular when it comes to cross-border disputes. In terms of litigation, we used to have one of the very few commercial courts in the world with very experienced, high-calibre judges who are independent and incorruptible. We have procedural rules that are very navigable and an English law system that’s hugely transparent. You’ve got your precedent system which allows for very predictable outcome. And on the arbitration side, a huge pool of hugely experienced arbitrators, what was referred to at the conference as a much-admired Arbitration Act, and again, the sort of invaluable ancillary role of the English courts. But with Brexit, there’s been the growth of English-language commercial courts in various parts of Europe. There’s in France, Germany, and given the increasing costs of litigation arbitration, I think there’s been a big question mark as to whether London can maintain that top spot. And so as a disputes lawyer, it’s going to be hugely interesting over the next sort of 5, 10 years to see whether London can maintain that top spot. As matters currently stand, I was reading a report about the commercial court a month or two ago. I think it seems that it is, but I do think the landscape is changing, and perhaps in 5 years things will be different. But what was really interesting is at the conference there was a keynote address by Sir Geoffrey Vos, who is the Master of the Rolls with responsibility for the civil court justice system here, and he was talking about the use of technology to transform the way in which civil disputes are dealt with here. And he termed it digital justice. And he wasn’t just referring to what we’re all doing now, which is moving to a digital system, digital document disclosure programs, or e-bundles or trial bundles, where, you know, paperless trials. But he was talking about something quite radical, and this is with a view to London retaining its status as a key dispute resolution center. He referred to it as an entirely smart system, and I have to say, it was so radical I couldn’t quite get my head around it, but so super interesting and quite exciting. And he said it would be a smart system that operates online or even on-chain, and what it seeks to do is identify and resolve disputes between parties, all sort of through algorithms. So whilst judges, arbitrators, or experts would still ultimately be responsible for decision-making, sort of routine or interim processes could be resolved by algorithms, with always the parties retaining the right to appeal to a human judge. I think this is, as I said before, quite radical. I can’t quite get my head around it, I have to say, but it’s really exciting. So I think this is sort of two of a number of issues or topics that make the next 5 to 10 years as a disputes lawyer a very exciting time. But the thought of AI being so prevalent in our dispute resolution is quite mind-blowing, frankly, and I’m not quite sure how we will get there. But when you have individuals who lead your justice system who are thinking this way, you can only assume that there will be quite radical change.
Aoifinn Devitt: That is fascinating. And it just, it triggered me to think of, we’ve seen cases of bias in human decision-making. You know, when a decision is made, for example, before lunch in a criminal case, that the sentences can be more severe. And so I’m sure the late afternoon doesn’t get the best attention. So this kind of AI could be a way to circumvent some of that, or at least alleviate some of it. And I think all of what you said is a reminder of the importance of not becoming complacent, whether it’s around London as a center of dispute resolution, around not embracing technology, and then regarding our earlier discussion around not embracing diversity and cognitive diversity. And in that, there’s no room for complacency, clearly. So thank you for sharing those very exciting developments. We could dedicate a whole podcast, I think, to the technology point alone. So let’s just move back for a few closing questions to some personal reflections. Were there any high and low points of your career that you can share so far, and anything you learned from them?
Sheena: Sure. The highs, what would I say? I have to say, I think it’s meeting some of the most amazing people, both clients and lawyers alike. Hugely interesting, fun, dynamic, and so many of whom are now my close friends. I think externally there’s a bit of a perception that it’s a bit of a dry industry, but when you’re there, I think it’s fantastic with some very colorful people, amazing people from whom I have learned a lot. So I would say that is certainly one high, and the other is also the successes in terms of case successes. In particular, a few years ago, a really difficult civil fraud claim, we had a huge team We worked side by side with a couple of other law firms. We were representing co-defendants and an amazing team internally, an amazing counsel team, great client, and all of it just came together. And also I was managing the case and we had a huge victory. And I think it’s successes like that that always remain with you and really when I look back over the last few years, a real high in my career. You become so invested as a lawyer in your clients’ cases, and so it becomes very personal, I think. So I would say some of the successful cases and the people really are the highs over the last 20 years. The lows, do you know what I I think? Think it’s the long hours, the sacrifices, And as a parent with young children, my children are a little bit older now, they’re 12 and 10 and so much easier. But when they’re young, the juggling is really very difficult. The guilt when you’re at work, the guilt when you leave. Again, going back to what I was saying before, 13 years ago, you would hope nobody was looking when you snuck out the door because you wanted to get home for bath and bedtime. Now I’m very open about it. Oh, I’m going to my kids’ sports day. I’m going to go and see my children for dinner. I think we can be bold and open and people embrace it and they want you to say that because you’ve set a precedent and people feel it’s okay when they’re in that situation to do it. But I think then it wasn’t quite the same and I was one of the first few to have had children and wrongly, I know. I felt that I should be working and approaching everything in the same way. I worked incredibly hard, I delivered in the same way, but what I really wanted to do, it was do it my way. And so go home, see my children, and find that little bit of balance. But I, I found that hard. And the guilt, I think for any working parent, those are probably the most challenging times when your children are young and you’re You’re still trying to establish yourself in your career and you feel like you’re being pulled in multiple directions. So I think lows possibly, but you learn a lot from those hard times and they shouldn’t define you. Whilst difficult, what I did learn was to be resilient and that has helped me massively to sort of a real ability to pick yourself up when the chips are down and to keep going. And I think that’s something I’ve relied on throughout my career.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, thank you for sharing that. It’s so important that I think you, somebody like you in your position shares that because that’s something that everybody feels, but often there isn’t enough a sense that it’s felt elsewhere too, of sort of solidarity. And I think it’s only through listening to, to others who’ve felt this, who, who’ve come through, worked through it, who’ve learned how to frame it perhaps that we can have a mental model for ourselves. So I’m hugely appreciative for you for raising that. And you mentioned people being among the highs of your career. Do you think a mentor or a sponsor is a key component? Did you have one, for example? Do you try to be one, or do you think it’s possible to have a successful career notwithstanding not having a formal mentor?
Sheena: Do you know, if I’m entirely honest, I haven’t had a mentor in my career. I have worked with amazing people from whom I’ve learned a lot and to whom I’m hugely grateful, but I would not put them into the category of a mentor, I would say. So I lent on a lot of people. That is not to say I’ve not lent on a lot of people. I’ve been guided by people, but I don’t think I had a mentor. But do I think people should have mentors and sponsors? Yeah, absolutely. It makes it so much easier. It really does. I did used to look around and see those individuals with mentors and sponsors and did wish that I had a mentor or sponsor. So I think it’s really important if you can to find yourself a mentor or a sponsor. And I feel very fortunate to be in the position I am in now as a partner and as a leader, and I can provide that mentorship and sponsorship, and I feel very passionate about it. And that is what I wish to achieve at my firm at Eversheds is is to help those who wish to progress and to be there as a champion, as a mentor, as an advisor in any capacity. But I feel very strongly that people should have others that they can rely on. You know, it is a tough industry. It really is. And you need people you can really lean on and trust.
Aoifinn Devitt: And it’s interesting just to get back to some legal terminology. I say my conclusion there is it’s neither a a necessary nor sufficient condition to have a mentor. It is certainly a nice to have, but I think that’s key is that even if you don’t have any, you can still succeed. But it’s wonderful that you’re trying to make that up to the next generation. My last question is regarding any piece of advice you received, any words of wisdom or any creed or motto that you live by?
Sheena: Huh, very good question. I would say take control of your career really early on. And this is something that I didn’t do. I’ve always been confident, but not in sort of shaping and controlling my career in the early days. And I have said this to junior associates who’ve sort of come to me saying, you know, I’m sort of 2 years qualified, feel as if I’m not achieving what I should be achieving. And so, and I’ve always been quite honest, do what I didn’t do. Take control of your career. Speak to people if you feel you’re not getting the opportunities Talk to those individuals who can provide you with opportunities. Always be open, have some transparency, be inquisitive. I think again, at times in my career, I’ve just, I guess, been so busy and on that treadmill that I’ve not really given myself the opportunity to see what other opportunities could be available. Also, take a leap of faith, and it’s something I’ve learned quite recently. So as I— we discussed earlier, I only came to partnership very recently, and I think it took me a bit of time mentally and in believing that I can achieve that. So I’d say take a leap of faith. What’s the worst that can happen?
Aoifinn Devitt: Wonderful. Well, that is a wonderful place to end this. This has been a very well-rounded discussion. I think we often think that for senior people in this profession, it’s either you’re either more of a people person looking your team or subject matter experts, and I think you’ve proven that it’s possible to be both. Your deep concern for your team and desire to nurture them is extremely clear here, as was your passion for the subject matter that you focus on, which is fantastic too. So thank you for coming here and for sharing your insights with us.
Sheena: My pleasure. It’s been a great opportunity. Thank you.
Aoifinn Devitt: I’m Aoifinn Devitt. Thank you for listening to our 50 Faces Focus Series. If you liked what you heard and would like to tune in to hear more inspiring lawyers and their stories, Please subscribe on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. This podcast is for information only and should not be construed as investment or legal advice. All views are personal and should not be attributed to the organizations of the host or any guest.
Aoifinn Devitt: This series is brought to you with the kind support of Evershed Sutherland. As a global top 10 law firm, Evershed Sutherland provides legal services to a global client base. With more than 3,000 lawyers, the firm operates in over 70 offices in more than 30 countries across Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and the United States. The firm recognizes that having diverse talent across its business brings many benefits. It is committed to accessing a wide range of views, perspectives, and thinking in all of its teams, and in this way is building a culture of inclusion where each person feels able to be their true self at work and reach their full potential. Diversity and inclusion is fundamental to the firm’s purpose of helping their clients, their people, and their communities to thrive, and inclusive is one of its 5 values.
Sheena: Take control of your career. Speak to people if you feel you’re not getting the opportunities. Talk to those individuals who can provide you with opportunities. Always be open, Have some transparency, be inquisitive, take a leap of faith. What’s the worst that can happen?
Aoifinn Devitt: I’m Aoifinn Devitt, and welcome to this 50 Faces focus series, which showcases the richness and diversity of inspiring people in the law. I’m joined today by Sheena Bhattiv, who is a partner at Eversheds Sutherland in their London office, with a practice area focused on complex commercial, business, and insolvency and restructuring disputes. Both litigation and arbitration, often with a cross-border element. Welcome, Sheena. Thanks for joining me today.
Sheena: Oh, thanks very much.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, let’s start by talking about your background. Where were you born and what was your path into law?
Sheena: I grew up in an Indian family in North London. My parents came to this country, I think, in the mid-’60s. They both grew up in Nairobi, Kenya, where there was and remains a large Indian community. Both came from very modest backgrounds, large families whose fathers weren’t professional. But I think when my dad came to this country, he came to study initially. He came here because he really wanted to better himself and provide a future for his family. And I’m afraid I did grow up in a very stereotypical Indian family where there was very much an expectation that I would go into a profession. But what’s amazing is I have a brother, and given the sort of generation, my father’s generation and my mother’s generation and their cultural background, they never saw a difference between my brother and I. It was very much gender parity. You know, you would do well, they would provide the foundation, and you would join a profession. So when I was studying for what we call A-levels in this country, I did lots of research as to what I may wish to do. I had a cousin who was a lawyer. I spoke to her, I spoke to people that were lawyers, and I thought that I would study law at university and then just see how things would go. I sort of fell into that track quite easily. But what was quite interesting, I, I went to law school, I then joined Freshfields as a trainee lawyer. I stayed there for 5 years after I qualified, but in my sort of late 20s, early 30s, I started questioning whether law was what I really wanted to do. And something else that I had always been interested in was medicine. And I did consider at that point whether I ought to requalify as a doctor. For various reasons, I didn’t. And knowing how happy I have been in my career, I’m very glad I didn’t. It’s interesting, you sort of stop in your tracks at some points in your career and think, am I doing the right thing? But I know I am.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, that’s so interesting. I was going to ask you about surprising turns, but clearly you averted a surprising turn. But I’d really love to dig into that because that time period you mentioned, the ’20s and ’30s, really are the critical points when many women leave the workforce. It’s often coinciding with, with family obligations. And what do you think it was for you that made you stay? And I know that you’ve taken maternity leave through your career. Can you talk a little bit about how it was coming back from that and why you decided ultimately to stay in the workforce?
Sheena: I set out to be a partner. I think in those days— I say those days, it wasn’t that long ago, but I think people’s outlooks have changed now— but in those days, I set out to be a partner, and I spent some time thinking when I should have my children, but just decided to have them at the right time. I took my first maternity leave in 2009, and I have to say both my maternity leaves probably did impact on my progress. And I can explain, you know, I made partner many, many years later and didn’t follow the usual trajectory. So when I went on maternity leave, I’d been working at the firm I was at for a number of years, not my current firm. I was regarded very highly. I had developed great relationships. I really liked the people I worked with and they liked me. I was very much in the running for partnership, but I have to say, albeit it was only now 13 years ago or so, I think mindsets were really different. Notwithstanding these great relationships, they knew me, I knew them. I think when I went on maternity leave and I did take 10 months off, and I think that’s commonplace in the UK, it was very much sort of out of sight, out of mind. And this was not deliberate. There was no malice intended, nothing like that. I think it was mindsets at the time and just human nature. So when I came back, I really felt as if I had lost time. And I had to build those relationships again and prove myself again. And then I had my second maternity leave and I felt the same again. And also when you’re not there, structures within your team change, people come in, people leave. So I did feel I came back having sort of lost those years and having to prove myself again. And when I came back, I guess after my second maternity leave, My husband then was in the army, he was traveling a lot. I was therefore working in a demanding industry, a demanding role with two young children. My firm then merged with another firm and there was a period of adjustment for the firm, bringing two firms together, two teams together. And with all of that in mind, I didn’t feel I sort of had what I’d say the sort of mental bandwidth to go for partnership. And I think at that stage, given where my firm was at, partnership probably wasn’t possible at that stage. So I took an Of Counsel role and decided to take a temporary step back from what I really wanted to do, wanted to achieve, which was partnership. You know, it wasn’t easy, and I often felt that I was selling myself short, but equally it was the right thing to do at the right time. And then, that is not to say I worked any differently. I worked extremely hard But it was a few years later, I felt that the circumstances were right, that the timings in my personal life were right, and I decided to take a leap of faith and seek that promotion. And so I didn’t follow the usual trajectory. I know people think that’s what you should still be doing, but I continued to work at the same pace, doing the same hours, but I took that sort of partnerships step back. I joined Evershed Sutherland in September last year as a partner, and I look at other partners who may be a lot younger than me, but I’ve had a different journey. I’ve learned a lot, I’ve experienced a lot. So I come into this role with a lot of experience behind me.
Aoifinn Devitt: So interesting what you mentioned about what you felt on returning from maternity leave and the need to rebuild those networks. Now that paternity leave is becoming more and more accepted, more the norm, perhaps not to the same degree as maternity leave is, is it common But do you think that men experience the same adjustments when they return? Or is it that women are the kind of other other because they already have the issue of being perhaps underrepresented? Does maternity leave set them back in a different way?
Sheena: It’s really interesting you ask that question. I was talking to somebody in my team only yesterday, a male associate with children, and I think women have their own very distinct issues. For a lot of women still, I think they’re the primary child carer. They will be the ones getting home and looking after the children, relieving their childcare individuals. But I think for many men, the issues are the same. I think it is a difficult profession to be in as a parent. It’s hugely demanding. The hours are long. That work-life balance is so difficult to achieve. And therefore, I do think that both women and men are facing some of the same issues. And I was talking to this associate yesterday about the possibility of partnership. He is fantastic. His career progression— I mean, he should be a partner. And his response was, I’m not certain if that’s what I want. I don’t know, will it give me work-life balance? How am I going to achieve all of that? Know, You I find the hours and the competing demands hard as it is. So I don’t think it’s necessarily just a gender issue, although it is, I still maintain, harder for women. And I think the statistics show that.
Aoifinn Devitt: And just in terms of the work-life balance, which is so key now that we have more flexibility built in as a norm, more of a hybrid working existence. And I think you described how you approach your team, you nurture your team. How do you think we can try to get this right? Maybe. In the next 5 to 10 years as a profession?
Sheena: I think flexibility is going to be hugely important. I maintain that the pandemic has propelled the legal profession, in particular in the UK, forward by 5 or 10 years. But for the pandemic, this flexibility, achieving more work-life balance, I just don’t think we would have been there. But flexibility is so key, and what is fantastic about Evershed Sutherland, and quite unique I think, is that it really is trailblazing when it comes to flexibility. So there are partners who work 4 days a week or take a Friday afternoon off to pick up their children, or stop at 3, pick up their children, and then log on again. There are partners who do that, there are associates who do that, there are associates who are up for promotion that do that. For me, that is really unique, and it’s giving people the opportunity to still work at the levels that they do, provide client excellence, continue their careers in this industry, but give them the opportunity to have their family life. And what I’m also finding is that, and in particular after the pandemic, that clients are so amenable to this. And I see more transparency. So again, I was, and I, this conversation comes at a time when I’ve been having these sorts of conversations internally But we were discussing as a team being very open with your clients. If they set a deadline to get them something, we’re not talking about court deadlines, these are internal deadlines, and you know that that’s going to be your non-working day, for instance, the ability to be open with clients, say, look, is it possible if this isn’t a fixed deadline, I get it to you the next day because tomorrow is my non-working day. I have to say, this is really unusual. I have not come from a background where people have done this, but I’m in admiration for those that do it. At my firm, and I think this is the way forward. It’s a way of retaining talent. We have a lot of senior female associates who can really see partnership as the next step in circumstances where they have more of a work-life balance.
Aoifinn Devitt: So this podcast focuses on minority voices, and from your vantage point, you said you grew up in an Indian family. How well do you think the legal profession is doing in terms of diversifying its base by ethnicity as well as by gender?
Sheena: I think it has a long way to go. I can only speak for, I guess, solicitors rather than barristers because that is the area I work in, but there is a long way to go. The statistics show that only 20% of all lawyers are Black, Asian, or from a minority ethnic group. There are, for instance, my firm, there are many initiatives to improve ethnic diversity, including right at the start. I think sometimes it is sort of interlinked with social mobility and it’s ensuring that we are there even before students go to university, really within the communities, encouraging ethnic minorities to go down the legal route. I think there is an education piece there even before, as I said, people get to university. And even now, we have many systems in place to ensure that the graduates that we recruit are diverse, that the lateral hires we recruit are diverse. But I think there is still a long way to go. Law firms have to work very hard to ensure we’re attracting a diverse set of lawyers.
Aoifinn Devitt: It’s interesting, isn’t it? Because I’ve heard from people in asset management that sometimes even the very factor of these glittering skyscrapers in the city, people all dressed well, nice handbags, nice shoes, that that can be an intimidating factor in itself. You mentioned social mobility, and I was wondering whether the new flexible working helps or hinders that. But then I think that even the backdrop to the flexible working is going to be under scrutiny as well. So it is important, I think, to make sure that we are as inclusive as possible to ensure that nobody feels intimidated, perhaps by not coming from wealth.
Sheena: I agree entirely. In the past, I have worked on initiatives where we as lawyers visit inner-city schools, talk to students at a very young age, and try and, as you say, change that perception and make it something that’s achievable for everyone. And it is a matter of starting at the school level, really, and also at university level.
Aoifinn Devitt: I want to just have a minute or two to discuss your practice area because I studied law myself. I’m a bit of a legal junkie. I love the subject matter of what is worked on day to day. Can you talk a little bit about your area of commercial litigation and arbitration, and what are you seeing that excites you in that area today?
Sheena: It’s interesting that you asked that question. I attended one of my first in-person legal conferences this week, and there was one particular session that really piqued my interest, and that’s very much relevant to being a disputes lawyer in London. And the question was, is London still the leading dispute resolution centre, both arbitration and litigation? And I am quite biased, but historically London has always been seen as one of the premier dispute resolution centres. In particular when it comes to cross-border disputes. In terms of litigation, we used to have one of the very few commercial courts in the world with very experienced, high-calibre judges who are independent and incorruptible. We have procedural rules that are very navigable and an English law system that’s hugely transparent. You’ve got your precedent system which allows for very predictable outcome. And on the arbitration side, a huge pool of hugely experienced arbitrators, what was referred to at the conference as a much-admired Arbitration Act, and again, the sort of invaluable ancillary role of the English courts. But with Brexit, there’s been the growth of English-language commercial courts in various parts of Europe. There’s in France, Germany, and given the increasing costs of litigation arbitration, I think there’s been a big question mark as to whether London can maintain that top spot. And so as a disputes lawyer, it’s going to be hugely interesting over the next sort of 5, 10 years to see whether London can maintain that top spot. As matters currently stand, I was reading a report about the commercial court a month or two ago. I think it seems that it is, but I do think the landscape is changing, and perhaps in 5 years things will be different. But what was really interesting is at the conference there was a keynote address by Sir Geoffrey Vos, who is the Master of the Rolls with responsibility for the civil court justice system here, and he was talking about the use of technology to transform the way in which civil disputes are dealt with here. And he termed it digital justice. And he wasn’t just referring to what we’re all doing now, which is moving to a digital system, digital document disclosure programs, or e-bundles or trial bundles, where, you know, paperless trials. But he was talking about something quite radical, and this is with a view to London retaining its status as a key dispute resolution center. He referred to it as an entirely smart system, and I have to say, it was so radical I couldn’t quite get my head around it, but so super interesting and quite exciting. And he said it would be a smart system that operates online or even on-chain, and what it seeks to do is identify and resolve disputes between parties, all sort of through algorithms. So whilst judges, arbitrators, or experts would still ultimately be responsible for decision-making, sort of routine or interim processes could be resolved by algorithms, with always the parties retaining the right to appeal to a human judge. I think this is, as I said before, quite radical. I can’t quite get my head around it, I have to say, but it’s really exciting. So I think this is sort of two of a number of issues or topics that make the next 5 to 10 years as a disputes lawyer a very exciting time. But the thought of AI being so prevalent in our dispute resolution is quite mind-blowing, frankly, and I’m not quite sure how we will get there. But when you have individuals who lead your justice system who are thinking this way, you can only assume that there will be quite radical change.
Aoifinn Devitt: That is fascinating. And it just, it triggered me to think of, we’ve seen cases of bias in human decision-making. You know, when a decision is made, for example, before lunch in a criminal case, that the sentences can be more severe. And so I’m sure the late afternoon doesn’t get the best attention. So this kind of AI could be a way to circumvent some of that, or at least alleviate some of it. And I think all of what you said is a reminder of the importance of not becoming complacent, whether it’s around London as a center of dispute resolution, around not embracing technology, and then regarding our earlier discussion around not embracing diversity and cognitive diversity. And in that, there’s no room for complacency, clearly. So thank you for sharing those very exciting developments. We could dedicate a whole podcast, I think, to the technology point alone. So let’s just move back for a few closing questions to some personal reflections. Were there any high and low points of your career that you can share so far, and anything you learned from them?
Sheena: Sure. The highs, what would I say? I have to say, I think it’s meeting some of the most amazing people, both clients and lawyers alike. Hugely interesting, fun, dynamic, and so many of whom are now my close friends. I think externally there’s a bit of a perception that it’s a bit of a dry industry, but when you’re there, I think it’s fantastic with some very colorful people, amazing people from whom I have learned a lot. So I would say that is certainly one high, and the other is also the successes in terms of case successes. In particular, a few years ago, a really difficult civil fraud claim, we had a huge team We worked side by side with a couple of other law firms. We were representing co-defendants and an amazing team internally, an amazing counsel team, great client, and all of it just came together. And also I was managing the case and we had a huge victory. And I think it’s successes like that that always remain with you and really when I look back over the last few years, a real high in my career. You become so invested as a lawyer in your clients’ cases, and so it becomes very personal, I think. So I would say some of the successful cases and the people really are the highs over the last 20 years. The lows, do you know what I I think? Think it’s the long hours, the sacrifices, And as a parent with young children, my children are a little bit older now, they’re 12 and 10 and so much easier. But when they’re young, the juggling is really very difficult. The guilt when you’re at work, the guilt when you leave. Again, going back to what I was saying before, 13 years ago, you would hope nobody was looking when you snuck out the door because you wanted to get home for bath and bedtime. Now I’m very open about it. Oh, I’m going to my kids’ sports day. I’m going to go and see my children for dinner. I think we can be bold and open and people embrace it and they want you to say that because you’ve set a precedent and people feel it’s okay when they’re in that situation to do it. But I think then it wasn’t quite the same and I was one of the first few to have had children and wrongly, I know. I felt that I should be working and approaching everything in the same way. I worked incredibly hard, I delivered in the same way, but what I really wanted to do, it was do it my way. And so go home, see my children, and find that little bit of balance. But I, I found that hard. And the guilt, I think for any working parent, those are probably the most challenging times when your children are young and you’re You’re still trying to establish yourself in your career and you feel like you’re being pulled in multiple directions. So I think lows possibly, but you learn a lot from those hard times and they shouldn’t define you. Whilst difficult, what I did learn was to be resilient and that has helped me massively to sort of a real ability to pick yourself up when the chips are down and to keep going. And I think that’s something I’ve relied on throughout my career.
Aoifinn Devitt: Well, thank you for sharing that. It’s so important that I think you, somebody like you in your position shares that because that’s something that everybody feels, but often there isn’t enough a sense that it’s felt elsewhere too, of sort of solidarity. And I think it’s only through listening to, to others who’ve felt this, who, who’ve come through, worked through it, who’ve learned how to frame it perhaps that we can have a mental model for ourselves. So I’m hugely appreciative for you for raising that. And you mentioned people being among the highs of your career. Do you think a mentor or a sponsor is a key component? Did you have one, for example? Do you try to be one, or do you think it’s possible to have a successful career notwithstanding not having a formal mentor?
Sheena: Do you know, if I’m entirely honest, I haven’t had a mentor in my career. I have worked with amazing people from whom I’ve learned a lot and to whom I’m hugely grateful, but I would not put them into the category of a mentor, I would say. So I lent on a lot of people. That is not to say I’ve not lent on a lot of people. I’ve been guided by people, but I don’t think I had a mentor. But do I think people should have mentors and sponsors? Yeah, absolutely. It makes it so much easier. It really does. I did used to look around and see those individuals with mentors and sponsors and did wish that I had a mentor or sponsor. So I think it’s really important if you can to find yourself a mentor or a sponsor. And I feel very fortunate to be in the position I am in now as a partner and as a leader, and I can provide that mentorship and sponsorship, and I feel very passionate about it. And that is what I wish to achieve at my firm at Eversheds is is to help those who wish to progress and to be there as a champion, as a mentor, as an advisor in any capacity. But I feel very strongly that people should have others that they can rely on. You know, it is a tough industry. It really is. And you need people you can really lean on and trust.
Aoifinn Devitt: And it’s interesting just to get back to some legal terminology. I say my conclusion there is it’s neither a a necessary nor sufficient condition to have a mentor. It is certainly a nice to have, but I think that’s key is that even if you don’t have any, you can still succeed. But it’s wonderful that you’re trying to make that up to the next generation. My last question is regarding any piece of advice you received, any words of wisdom or any creed or motto that you live by?
Sheena: Huh, very good question. I would say take control of your career really early on. And this is something that I didn’t do. I’ve always been confident, but not in sort of shaping and controlling my career in the early days. And I have said this to junior associates who’ve sort of come to me saying, you know, I’m sort of 2 years qualified, feel as if I’m not achieving what I should be achieving. And so, and I’ve always been quite honest, do what I didn’t do. Take control of your career. Speak to people if you feel you’re not getting the opportunities Talk to those individuals who can provide you with opportunities. Always be open, have some transparency, be inquisitive. I think again, at times in my career, I’ve just, I guess, been so busy and on that treadmill that I’ve not really given myself the opportunity to see what other opportunities could be available. Also, take a leap of faith, and it’s something I’ve learned quite recently. So as I— we discussed earlier, I only came to partnership very recently, and I think it took me a bit of time mentally and in believing that I can achieve that. So I’d say take a leap of faith. What’s the worst that can happen?
Aoifinn Devitt: Wonderful. Well, that is a wonderful place to end this. This has been a very well-rounded discussion. I think we often think that for senior people in this profession, it’s either you’re either more of a people person looking your team or subject matter experts, and I think you’ve proven that it’s possible to be both. Your deep concern for your team and desire to nurture them is extremely clear here, as was your passion for the subject matter that you focus on, which is fantastic too. So thank you for coming here and for sharing your insights with us.
Sheena: My pleasure. It’s been a great opportunity. Thank you.
Aoifinn Devitt: I’m Aoifinn Devitt. Thank you for listening to our 50 Faces Focus Series. If you liked what you heard and would like to tune in to hear more inspiring lawyers and their stories, Please subscribe on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. This podcast is for information only and should not be construed as investment or legal advice. All views are personal and should not be attributed to the organizations of the host or any guest.
