Formula for successShell's in-house team is pumping out work on global projects.

Jeremy Fleming meets the lawyersIf you have the right office on the top floors of the Shell Centre on the South Bank - home of Shell's legal department - you enjoy a great view down through the London Eye onto the River Thames.So, given the key role of the legal department at this giant oil company, it comes as no surprise to find that the head of its international legal group, Pieter Folmer, has been given a room with a very good view.A Dutch-qualified lawyer.

Mr Folmer worked on the new Dutch civil code in 1965 before doing post-graduate work in Canada.

In 1974, he moved to London where he took up an in-house position with Canadian nickel company INCO, where he worked until 1977, when he moved to Shell.He worked on and off in London for the next 18 years, becoming director in 1997, after a two-year stint as secretary to the London board of directors.

Mr Folmer says his early drafting experience in the Netherlands and his corporate experience at INCO set up his career at Shell.'We at Shell can't stand complicated advice,' he says, adding: 'You need to be able to get to the bottom of a legal issue within three minutes here.'The in-house departments in London and The Hague are broadly split between upstream work - anything involving exploration for oil up to the moment that the oil emerges from the well- and downstream work, which covers distribution and sale of oil.

Working for an Anglo-Dutch company with an in-house legal department of 80 lawyers in London and The Hague, Mr Folmer might be expected to have problems with differing approaches to legal work taken by Dutch and British qualified lawyers.

He says: 'The department is far more than simply Anglo-Dutch.

Our lawyers represent about 13 different nationalities.

Over a couple of years working here, any differences of approach tend to iron themselves out.'Mr Folmer says that since he started his career at Shell, 'things haven't changed that much' in the activities of the legal department.

He explains: 'We have always been a global company, but unlike many other large in-house groups, we are far more capable of dealing with matters in-house.

We hardly ever pass things over lock, stock and barrel to external lawyers.

We only do so in two circumstances: where the matter is too complex for us to handle it here, or where we simply would not be adding value to the company by dealing in-house.'Mr Folmer says he uses 'all the top London firms' but confirms Shell's traditional relationship with Slaughter and May.Solicitor Richard Wiseman, Shell UK's general counsel, also emphasises the company's non-reliance on external lawyers.

He is one of only two lawyers at Shell who do not have law degrees - he qualified after five-year articles with former central London solicitors' firm Macroll Turner Garrett, joining Shell two years after qualification, in 1974.

Mr Wiseman says that working at Shell involves projects that may last for 25 years on the one hand, and on the other, issues that flare up out of nowhere.A good example of this, he says, came last autumn when protesters blockaded the company's tankers outside the Stanlow oil refinery in Cheshire during the fuel crisis.He says: 'Although the protest seemed to be under control, I discussed the issue with management, as I always do.

I considered the possibility of obtaining an injunction to remove the protesters.

I retained external solicitors.

There was no clear entitlement to an injunction.

It was a long shot and I thought it highly unlikely that it would be appropriate.' Nonetheless Mr Wiseman's precaution shows the contingency thinking required for a lawyer at Shell.

Mr Wiseman's role in the drama did not stop there.

After co-operation with the government, 'I was involved in a spectrum of legal advice relating to the interpretation of the Energy Act [1976], and the issue of contractual liability arising from obligations to our clients'.This led to involvement in aftermath discussions with interested parties on how to deal with any further crises.

Mr Wiseman says such crises are good for a lawyers' education.

He says that during the crisis, a wide range of Shell's in-house capability was deployed: regulatory lawyers looked at the Energy Act; property lawyers looked at the issue of who owned the road outside the plant; employment lawyers examined the position of the lorry drivers; and data protection lawyers examined the use of closed-circuit television and other issues.

All this was done in-house.Helping this team approach is one thing many of the lawyers at Shell have in common - an international background.Julienne Barron - an Australian solicitor who qualified in 1996 - recently joined Shell after a stint in Indonesia at the Jakarta associated office of Melbourne firm Arthur Robinson.With a commercial and mergers and acquisitions (M&A) background, Ms Barron was attracted to the firm chiefly for its international reach, and the fact the the firm has 'large resources for investment in interesting projects'.Ms Barron comments: 'I can spend time liaising with Shell lawyers in Chile, Argentina, Singapore, and all over Europe.

It's a great network to call on.' The international nature of the work makes it 'of economic and political interest', she adds.Other advantages of working in-house at Shell are 'more accountability' than in private practice, and 'a bird's-eye view of what is happening all over the corporation'.

Ms Barron confirms that this is not a nine-to-five role, but she reckons the hours compare favourably to some City practices.Currently working on globale-business for Shell, Ms Barron is looking at a series of Web-based products and has been liaising with colleagues around the world.

One project - a business-to-consumer Web site - is 'in an area you wouldn't expect of an oil company', she says mysteriously.

Another lawyer who reflects the diversity of work in such a large company is Canadian-trained lawyer Robert Henderson (pictured far right on the main picture, opposite page), who moved to London eight years ago .

Mr Henderson is also an M&A lawyer - he recently acted on the $900 million coal divestment deal to Anglo American.

During his stint, he has travelled with Shell to 45 different countries, and been to several more than once.But in addition to M&A work, Mr Henderson works on Shell's sponsorship and marketing with Ferrari.

Late last year, he renegotiated another five-year sponsorship deal with Ferrari after the Italian maker won both the driver's and constructor's Formula One championships.Donny Ching's background and work spread illustrate the global feel of the Shell in-house team.

Of Malay origin, Mr Ching qualified as an English barrister before requalifying as an Australian solicitor.

He joined Shell Australia in 1988.

In 1992, he was seconded to Hong Kong, and last year was seconded back to London to concentrate on gas and chemicals work.It is not surprising that someone with Mr Ching's experience spends much time dealing with the challenging task of bidding for deals in India and China.

Mr Ching explains that one of Shell's strengths is that, 'unlike most other Western companies, we've been in China for 100 years, and we have a great tradition in India, we are well-prepared for the cultural understanding required to be successful in these jurisdictions'.

Mr Folmer says the turnover is low among Shell's lawyers.

But this is not something the bigger companies can take for granted.

'We have just emerged from a broad salary review for which we co-operated with BP, among ten other blue-chip companies, and five top law firms.

We have approved salary rises following on from this.

We need to keep abreast of the legal market.'From their top floor, top-drawer practice, Shell lawyers must be conscious of being near the peak of in-house teams.

But if it is any consolation to others, Mr Wiseman says they do not have time to look at the view from their windows.