law firm's with little alternative". "In dispute resolution firms like ours", Smith said "a law firm where we do the lion`s share of advocacy in house, the new paradigm will gain traction, but we will always use Queens Counsel and Senior Counsel in the most challenging of matters, because the skill sets of preeminent and senior counsel cannot be readily duplicated within the law firm's paradigm. However even when we are inclined to brief Silk, they will be "juniored" by our senior lawyers and partners". Smith also commented that "Clients have recently shown increasing disillusionment towards the 'traditional tripled layered pyramid' of instructing solicitor, junior counsel and senior counsel". He said that Clients complain that it`s one lawyer too many. And whether we like it or not we have to cut our cloth to meet their requirements. Smith concluded by saying that "with our law firm, our senior lawyers perform the dual role of instructing and junioring for senior counsel, this in Stephen Smith`s view removes one cost layer, which could be anywhere between $1500 and $3000 a day.