Theatre lawyers need a thick skin to deal with the controversy generated by West End shows such as ‘Jerry Springer – the opera’ and they may need to tackle anything from contract law to intellectual property rights, reports Grania Langdon-Down

When the storm broke over ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera’, the producers Avalon were caught completely off guard, according to solicitor Grainne Perkins, head of legal and director of corporate affairs.


Now, six months on, she is leading the fight to ensure the show’s UK tour survives after one theatre pulled out from its three-week booking in the run-up to Christmas, which threw out the whole schedule.


The show had been on stage for nearly two years without complaint. It had been reviewed by the religious press. Then came the announcement that the BBC was going to televise it – and all hell, to coin a phrase, broke loose. Christian groups launched furious protests, inspired by the success of the demonstrators who had forced the closure of the Sikh play ‘Bezhti’ at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre a few weeks before.


‘None of us has ever experienced anything like it before,’ says Ms Perkins. ‘We have had to rebook the whole tour, taking in fewer venues. The protests have meant we haven’t been able to find investors, which makes going ahead very risky. However, when we approached the creative team, we found everyone was very determined that if the tour doesn’t happen, it will be for a reason other than [pressure group] Christian Voice. We will decide whether to go ahead later this month, depending on a final decision on funding and investment.’


The protest led to many legal issues. The BBC’s compliance staff questioned her closely ‘to make sure they had ticked all the boxes’. When the original tour arrangements fell apart, she studied the correspondence and considered issues of detrimental reliance ‘because we had moved forward on the basis that we had an agreement in principle and then suddenly we didn’t. But theatres are our business and you can’t afford to bite the hand that feeds you’.


She adds: ‘We also looked at whether or not we could go after Christian Voice for unlawful interference with our contractual arrangements.’ But because it had become such an issue of the right to artistic expression versus the right to protest, the lawyers decided that in any event, a legal action would be too blunt an instrument to deal with the problem.


Ms Perkins says the protests will have a damaging knock-on effect. ‘People want to be brave, but they will think twice about future productions. I also can’t imagine that, if the government goes ahead with its incitement to religious hatred Bill, the BBC would be able to do what it did with the show again. Theatres will also be more cautious because they are the ones that will get attacked. It will mean they will only want to go for safe bets.’


Neil Adleman, head of London firm Harbottle & Lewis’s theatre group, recently attended an industry-wide conference where managers and directors warned that intolerance, religious zealotry and political interference were threatening freedom of speech in the theatre. There are already stirrings about Howard Brenton’s play ‘St Paul’, scheduled for the National Theatre in the autumn.


Mr Adleman says: ‘There was a feeling of defiance and a refusal to be cowed by what happened to those two shows. We are increasingly being called on to advise on these issues. We have been advising the two main trade associations, the Society of London Theatre and the Theatrical Management Association, who are regular clients, on the repercussions for the industry, so theatre managers understand the letter of the law rather than what they are told by people trying to close their shows. We are also advising on the likely implications of the proposed incitement to religious hatred legislation.’


Leading theatre lawyer Barry Shaw, a south London sole practitioner, says the protests over ‘Bezhti’ were ‘preposterous’. He explains: ‘I thought the theatre lacked courage. My personal view is that it should have told the protesters to go to hell.’


David Wills, a consultant at London’s Campbell Hooper, says the theatre world is pretty robust. ‘These spats, if I can use that somewhat trivialising word, blow up from time to time. Then they calm down and the industry carries on until the next cause of offence.’


Michael Rose, now a consultant at City firm Tarlo Lyons after building up his theatre practice over 25 years, agrees: ‘Once you start looking at the content of theatre work as being possibly offensive to a particular group, where do you stop? Virtually everything you put on stage could offend somebody, so you have to take a fairly robust view about it.’


However, while Ms Perkins battles to keep ‘Jerry Springer’ alive, there are signs that the theatrical market is in a good phase, with star names and rave reviews. But the lawyers remain cautious of predicting a resurgence too soon. As Mr Wills says: ‘It remains as difficult as ever to raise money for productions. But if you want to book a theatre in London, you find there isn’t one available when you want it. The theatre is remarkably resilient – it has been “dying” for 200 years.’


Mr Adleman is currently basking in the successful birth of the musical ‘Billy Elliot’, having advised on the stage adaptation from its inception in 2001. He has also been advising on the forthcoming ‘Guys and Dolls’ production starring Ewan McGregor. Other clients include Really Useful Theatres, the West End’s largest theatre owner, Donmar Warehouse, the Theatre Royal Stratford East and the producers of the Queen musical ‘We Will Rock You’.


He and an assistant work full-time for theatre clients, while there are seven or eight other lawyers across the firm in different disciplines to whom they can turn for specialist advice. ‘It is a funny discipline, calling on everything from solid intellectual property law in dealing with the copyright issues that go with the rights in a show, through to an understanding of financial services legislation to structure investment arrangements. There is also pure contract law. And on top of that, you need to know what is customary within the industry.


‘With “Billy Elliot”, we initially helped with strategic advice because it was the first time [production company] Working Title had ventured from film to theatre. The first, key deals to get in place were with Lee Hall, who wrote the lyrics and script, and with Elton John for the music. Then we moved on to production arrangements and how the show would be financed. We then sorted out the rest of the arrangements, including those with the theatre, the director, designer and choreographer.’


He adds: ‘While it has nothing to do with the quality of your legal advice, it is very satisfying to have worked on something from start to finish that turns out to be such a big hit.’


Another key aspect of the lawyer’s role is the international franchising of productions. Mr Rose, who writes the ‘Legal Eagle’ column for The Stage newspaper, says pioneers like his client Cameron Mackintosh franchised their musicals around the world, with local producers told how to reproduce a copycat production in their own territory, which requires ‘quite complex forms of licensing agreements’.


For David Franks, a partner and head of the theatre group with London firm The Simkins Partnership, half his time is spent on theatre and half on music. Clients include the Really Useful Group and English National Opera. ‘There are four-and-a-bit of us who do some theatre work. It has never been a big enough industry to sustain many people full-time, but it is a nice world to work in because your work is appreciated by your clients – even if they can’t always pay for it.


‘The theatre has always worked in its own little world in terms of contracts and relationships between unions and talent. Really Useful broke the mould and, because they were so successful so soon, they were able to dictate their own kind of deals, aided by my inexperience of how things were done traditionally at the time.


‘There are now more producers making the big successful musicals, so they have tended to go back to more traditional forms of contracts for the engagement of talent and the acquisition of rights. At one time, the Really Usefuls of this world were able to require writers to assign rights to them. It has now gone back to the traditional way where writers retain rights and simply grant licenses.’


Mr Wills is closely involved with the new ‘Lord of the Rings’ musical, which opens first in Canada and then London, and is working on new projects for theatrical director Trevor Nunn. ‘I like the immediacy of theatre work – you are involved in a project and, nine months on, you see it on stage. As I tell cabbies, it certainly beats conveyancing.’


He would like to see the government give meaningful tax breaks to people who invest in the theatre. ‘But I can’t see it happening. It would be roundly condemned by the redtops as “slush for luvvies”.’


Theatre work is an intimate industry for the handful of specialists working in private practice. When Mr Rose retired from Tarlo Lyons’ partnership last year, he says there was ‘nobody who had the desire or will to take it over’ and so the firm decided to let it go.


However, lawyers working in-house in the theatre and arts world can feel isolated. This prompted barrister Menna McGregor, company secretary of the National Theatre, and solicitor Caroline Barnett, general counsel for the Royal Shakespeare Company, to set up the Arts Law Forum, which holds informal training sessions.


While a keen interest in the theatre itself is a prerequisite to being a good theatre lawyer, it seems that none of the leading legal lights has ambitions to tread the board.


Lawrence Harrison, whose firm Harrison Curtis became fellow London practice Russell-Cooke’s new entertainment and media department last month, is clear where he draws the line: ‘What I am interested in is the business of theatre and putting on shows. In many ways, my motivations and interests aren’t that dissimilar to a producer. However, I didn’t go into this as a frustrated actor but as an engaged lawyer.’


Mr Shaw agrees: ‘I like to see the sweat, which you don’t get on films. But acting ambitions? Good Lord, no. I have never been star-struck. Lots of people think because you dabble in this sort of world, you are a part of it. You are an important little cog on the side – but you are not part of it.’


Grania Langdon-Down is a freelance journalist