As clients increasingly demand cross-border expertise from their lawye rs, what does the future hold for international networks of law firms? Should they remain alliances of independent firms or will the pressure for global branding and quality control turn them into courtships before mergers?UK law firms are among the prime movers in the gamut of international relationships -- from 'best friends' and formal networks to full-blooded mergers.

London law firm Wedlake Bell has taken significant steps towards merger with the 20 medium-sized European law firms which make up the ten-year-old Trans European Law Firms Alliance (TELFA).

Earlier this summer, the Commercial Law Affiliates (CLA) announced closer liaison between its 15 European members, who promised a 'seamless alliance' while remaining independent.For John Heller, senior partner of the newly-merged, 185-partner Hammond Suddards Edge, the opportunity to join CLA Europe 15 months ago was too good to miss.

With 1,250 lawyers in 15 law firms in 14 European countries, the alliance is the 12th largest legal service provider in Europe on total lawyer numbers, as well as being part of a worldwide network of 200 firms, encompassing 6,000 lawyers in 70 countries.'CLA offers a referral network in the USA but the main drive for us is Europe,' explains Mr Heller.

'It was a good way of creating a much better and quicker and more effective operation for clients in the UK who would see we had the facilities to serve their needs in Europe.'We have formed a European board, which meets every two months, appointed a European administrator based in Belgium, and we have instructed corporate designers Ogilvy & Mather to investigate common branding.'Although merging had not been discussed, Mr Heller comments: 'You can never rule anything out.

All I would say is everything we have tried to do -- such as setting up a corporate finance group -- involves getting ourselves closer and closer with CLA members so we are more effective as far as clients are concerned.' He said, for example, some firms of accountants had formed a network each with a common brand name, though they still shared their profits nationally.

Mr Heller says: 'It may be we might go down that route.

But we have achieved a lot over the last year -- if you rush things, people fall by the wayside.'Mr Heller says the alliance was not exclusive.

'We have some clients who say "I'm happy to use your firm in France, but I have a favoured firm in Germany" -- it is not for me to dictate who they use.'However, a less formal, 'best friends' policy would not suit Hammonds.

'Slaughter and May goes for the "best friends" option.

But it is one of the top firms in the country.

It wouldn't suit us because our market position isn't as strong as theirs and we need a much closer relationship.'For Nigel Knowles, managing partner of 265-partner DLA and chief executive of the firm's international association, DLA & Partners (D&P), the intention is to move towards being an integrated European/Asian law firm, probably in three to five years.

'The decision for that will be taken when it is so compellingly obvious, when we have achieved so much together, that merger is the sensible thing to do,' he explains.

'D&P got under way a year ago after we realised we had to offer a European capability if we wanted to keep clients.

"Best friends" aren't sufficiently convincing for clients, start-ups take too long and immediate mergers are too risky.'At this stage, with associations in Belgium, Holland, Italy, France, Spain and Asia, the emphasis is on Europe.

Mr Knowles says: 'We might look at Australia but we will only tackle t he US when we have cracked Europe.'If you are happy with fourth-division work, then you don't need international links.

If you want to operate at the top end of life, you cannot ignore Europe.

But you can only do what we are doing if it is client-led and market-driven.'Mr Knowles has little time for huge affiliations such as Lex Mundi, with 143 associated law firms worldwide.

He believes it is a 'complete waste of time', and adds: 'It has no specific objectives and is a very loose referral club that is going nowhere.'For Andrew Baker, head of corporate finance at the 32-partner London law firm Wedlake Bell and president of TELFA, some firms join networks more for image than from necessity.

'We were among the first to set up a network like this because we have always had a large international client base,' he explains.

'But these days firms our size are members of one group or another.

Certainly for some it is more to do with image and is probably not particularly important currently in turnover terms, but I am sure that will grow.'TELFA, which now encompasses 700 lawyers, has its headquarters in Brussels, an integrated cross-border corporate finance team, which enables clients to be billed centrally with the benefits shared among the firms involved, with similar e-business and employment law teams to follow.

It has a member firm in every EU jurisdiction except Finland, with additional members in Norway, Turkey, Switzerland, Cyprus and Liechtenstein.

Mr Baker says any decision to merge would be client-led.

'The time comes when collectively the members of a network or alliance have a sufficient number of important clients in common to have to provide a more co-ordinated service.

At that stage, you have to recognise that fact and provide a service from one cost base.'In the medium term, he predicts there will be more cross-border mergers.

'It is the way the world is going.

What we are doing is taking it on a sector-by-sector approach and when we see how that goes, then we will make a decision.'While quality control was essential, Mr Baker says branding is a big issue.

'It is quite easy when you are someone like Freshfields or Linklaters -- there is no question what the brand will be.

But it is not so easy for a group of medium-sized law firms, none of whom have European-wide recognition.However, Jonathan Davey, a member of Addleshaw Booth & Co's international committee, said his firm researched the issue last year and found clients were happy with their 'best friends' relationships and were not pressing for mergers, partnerships or even formal alliances.

'We asked a number of our major clients what they expected of us and also what our fee earners perceived the clients wanted,' says Mr Davey.

'What came out surprised me to an extent.

Our larger clients were saying we have our own lawyers abroad, whom we trust, and what we want to know is that you will work effectively with them rather than pushing your own links.

Smaller clients were saying we don't mind whether or not a firm abroad is branded with your logo -- what we want to know is that you can recommend the best people to do the job and work well together.'Mr Davey stresses that Addleshaw's 'best friends' policy still involves a lot of work tracking transactions and assessing what clients thought of the other firm's work.'What we are doing isn't a lazy alternative to having our own alliance,' he says.

'Ultimately we want to be able to sit across the table from a client and say, without flinching, we know these people and they will do a good job for you.

We have to w ork harder than Clifford Chance to convince people we have that international string to our bow but we do.'