Now onboarding companies
All posts

What companies actually need from legal — and when to buy it

Only 1.7% of UK seed-stage companies have an in-house senior legal function. Most default to law firms at £278–£579 an hour, or to nothing at all. Neither is right. The trigger to scale legal capacity should be data, not founder anxiety.

10 June 2026 · 9 min read

Founders and team gathered around a table in a strategy meeting

There's a question almost every founder gets wrong, and it's costing them tens of thousands of pounds in legal spend they don't need and missing them outcomes they actually do. The question is "when should we hire a lawyer?" — and the framing is the problem. A lawyer is a person on payroll. What you actually need is legal outcomes. Those are different things, and the right answer depends on data your company already produces.

Three numbers anchor this whole conversation.

These numbers describe a market that is structurally mispriced. Almost no early-stage company has a senior lawyer in the building. Almost every early-stage company that needs legal advice pays a top-of-market rate to a firm whose business model is built for organisations a hundred times their size. And the supply side — the senior lawyers who would happily work directly with those companies at a meaningfully lower price point — has been quietly leaving the firm system at a 2:1 ratio for two years. The mismatch is the opportunity.

What companies actually need.

Strip the question back. A company at seed, Series A, or Series B doesn't usually need a lawyer in the abstract. It needs specific outcomes. The honest list, in roughly descending order of frequency for venture-backed UK companies up to about 200 employees:

  • Commercial contracts. Customer agreements, supplier agreements, partnership terms, MSAs. The work that pays the bills.
  • Employment matters. Senior hires, exits, restructuring, the occasional dispute, share-option-related queries that always come up.
  • Fundraising legals. Term-sheet review, SHA/Investment Agreement negotiation, completion mechanics. Concentrated work, intermittent.
  • Data, privacy and compliance. DPAs, sub-processor agreements, GDPR posture, sector-specific compliance for regulated industries.
  • IP and product-related. IP assignments, T&Cs, privacy policies, content licensing for the actual product.
  • Corporate hygiene. Board resolutions, option grants, cap-table cleanups, the unglamorous stuff that compounds into pain if neglected.

None of this is mysterious. What's notable is the shape: roughly 70–80% of an early-stage company's legal spend is recurring commercial and employment work. The fundraising and M&A spikes get the airtime, but the everyday volume is on the boring stuff. That shape matters because it tells you what you actually need from your legal support — consistency on recurring matters, with specialist capacity available for the spikes.

The three options companies actually have.

Most founders model the decision as a binary between "use a law firm" and "hire a GC". It's actually a three-way choice, and the third option — fractional general counsel — is the one most founders haven't seriously priced.

Option one: law firm only.

This is the default. Most early-stage companies pick a firm at incorporation (often through a friendly partner or a free-incorporation programme) and run all legal through them. It works structurally, but the unit economics are punishing as soon as volume picks up.

Under the Master of the Rolls' Guideline Hourly Rates effective from January 2026, the recoverable rates for Grade A solicitors (8+ years post-qualification) are [2]:

These are guideline rates — the figures the courts consider reasonable for cost recovery. Market rates for top commercial firms run above guideline, often considerably. Complex commercial work at top-tier firms is regularly billed at £700–£1,000+ per hour. For a company spending £8,000–£15,000 a month on legal, the firm route burns through budget fast, and you don't typically get continuity — different associates, different partners, different levels of context for each piece of work.

Option two: hire a permanent GC.

The opposite extreme. You bring legal in-house with a salaried general counsel, typically £150,000–£220,000 in 2025–2026 base salary for a Series A/B company, plus equity, benefits, NI, pension, and overhead — fully loaded, you're looking at £180,000–£270,000 a year of legal cost before any external firm spend.

The economics work if (and only if) the volume justifies it. The rough internal heuristic: a permanent GC starts making sense when you have at least one of (a) consistent external legal spend above £15,000–£20,000/month for six months or more, (b) regulatory or compliance complexity that needs constant attention, or (c) a deal pipeline that genuinely fills senior legal time week-to-week. Most companies at seed and Series A don't meet any of those criteria, but hire anyway because it feels grown-up.

The data backs this up. Beauhurst's analysis of UK startup hiring patterns shows that only 1.7% of seed-stage companies have a senior in-house legal function. Even at venture stage, the proportion remains modest. The pattern isn't a market failure — it's the market correctly observing that most early-stage companies don't have the volume to justify a permanent senior hire.

Option three: fractional general counsel.

This is the option that didn't really exist five years ago at the quality level it does now. A senior lawyer — typically with 8–15 years of in-house and firm experience — works with you on a retainer basis, covering the same scope a junior in-house GC would, at a fraction of the cost. Typical UK pricing: £200–£400 per hour, with monthly retainers of £4,000–£8,000 for ongoing scope. The lawyer is shared across two to four companies, which is the model that makes the economics work for both sides.

The trade-off is honest. You don't get the lawyer in the room at every meeting, you don't get the "I'll just walk over to her desk" intimacy of a permanent hire. What you do get: senior judgment on every matter (no junior associates being trained on your dime), continuity on recurring work (same person, every time), and a cost line that's two to three times cheaper than the firm equivalent.

For most companies up to about 80 employees, this is the correct option. The maths is straightforward.

The arithmetic.

Take a typical Series A SaaS company doing roughly £12,000/month in external legal spend split across customer contracts, employment matters and standard commercial work. Here's what the three options actually cost over twelve months, with comparable scope:

That's not a marginal difference. For most Series A and pre-Series A companies, the fractional option is half the cost of the firm route and roughly a third the cost of a permanent hire — while delivering broadly equivalent outcomes for the everyday work that dominates the volume.

When the equation changes.

The fractional model is right for most early-stage companies. It stops being right at a specific point, and that point is identifiable from data your company is already producing.

Three signals that mean it's time to move from fractional to permanent:

Signal one — volume. When your monthly legal spend (internal time spent on legal matters by ops/people leads, plus external invoices) consistently exceeds £15,000–£20,000 a month for six months or more, the unit economics start favouring an in-house hire. Track this in a spreadsheet from day one. Don't guess.

Signal two — concentration. When 60%+ of your monthly legal volume is in two or three recurring categories — typically customer contracts and employment — that's the signal that you'd benefit from someone with cumulative context. A permanent GC who knows every prior contract and every employee situation makes faster, better decisions than even an excellent fractional who has to context-switch in.

Signal three — origination pattern. When the same parts of the business are originating the same kinds of legal requests over and over (e.g. your sales team consistently needs MSA negotiation support, your people team consistently needs employment input), that volume is self-evident in the routing data of any modern legal ops platform. When two or three internal teams are each generating multiple requests per week, you have the volume of an internal hire.

Note what these signals share: they're all measurable. None of them require founder intuition about "feeling ready" for a GC. Scale legal capacity by data. The companies that get this right run their legal function the same way they run their go-to-market — instrumented, with thresholds, with a clear next-trigger.

What data looks like.

If you only take one thing from this piece, take this: start tracking legal data from your first month of operations. The categories matter less than the discipline of capturing them. As a starting structure:

  • Source — which team originated each legal request.
  • Category — commercial contract, employment, fundraising, IP, compliance, M&A, other.
  • Effort — rough hours spent (yours, your ops team's, external counsel's).
  • Cost — external invoice value where applicable; internal time at a reasonable hourly cost.
  • Outcome — closed/active/blocked/lost.

A spreadsheet works. A more sophisticated tool works better. The point is that six months in, you have a data picture of your legal function. That picture tells you exactly when the equation shifts — and if you're working with a good fractional GC, they'll be tracking it for you and surfacing the inflection.

This is the gap Correm is built to close. We provide the fractional general counsel, the matching to find the right lawyer for your sector and stage, and the data layer that shows you where your legal work is actually coming from. Most companies discover their internal picture is meaningfully different from what they assumed — and that informs every legal decision after.

What this changes.

The implication of all this is unromantic but real: founders should stop modelling legal as a "headcount we'll get to eventually" problem and start modelling it as an outcomes problem with a measurable threshold. The threshold isn't far away — most companies hit it somewhere between Series A and Series B. But "hit it eventually" is not the same as "hit it now." Until the data says you've hit it, fractional is the right answer.

This also reframes what early-stage companies should look for. Don't look for a lawyer. Look for outcomes — and the supply chain that delivers them at the lowest sustainable cost. For most UK early-stage companies in 2026, that supply chain is a senior fractional GC routed through a platform that has done the work of finding them, qualifying them, equipping them with infrastructure, and routing the right matter to the right person at the right time.

The 2:1 ratio of senior lawyers leaving traditional firms for platform firms over the last two years is the supply side telling you this market is real. The 1.7% in-house headcount number is the demand side telling you the old answer was never working well. The fractional model sits between the two, and for the next few years it will be the right answer for almost every venture-backed UK company under a hundred employees.

Buy outcomes. Track the data. Scale when the numbers tell you to. That's the discipline.

Frequently asked.

When should a UK startup hire its first in-house lawyer?

Most UK startups should hire their first in-house lawyer when they meet two conditions simultaneously: monthly external legal spend exceeds £15,000–£20,000 consistently for at least six months, and the work is dominated by recurring matters (commercial contracts, employment, compliance) rather than one-off events. Before that point, a fractional general counsel produces better outcomes for less money. Beauhurst data shows that only 1.7% of UK seed-stage companies have an in-house senior legal function.

How much do UK law firms charge per hour in 2026?

Under the Master of the Rolls Guideline Hourly Rates effective January 2026, Grade A solicitors with 8+ years of post-qualification experience charge guideline rates of £579 per hour for commercial and corporate work in Central London (London 1), £422 per hour for other Central London work, and £278 per hour in regional hubs like Manchester. Market rates for top commercial firms often run above these guidelines, with complex commercial work commonly billed at £700–£1,000+ per hour. The guideline rates were uplifted by 2.28% from 2025 to reflect inflation.

What does a fractional general counsel cost compared to a law firm?

Fractional general counsels in the UK typically charge £200–£400 per hour, compared to £278–£579+ per hour for Grade A solicitors at law firms under the 2026 Guideline Hourly Rates. For ongoing fractional general counsel support, retainers range from £4,000 to £8,000 per month for predictable scope. The same volume of work at a Central London commercial firm typically costs 2–3 times more.

Scale legal capacity by data, not by anxiety. Track three things: monthly legal spend (internal time + external invoices), distribution of legal work by category (contracts, employment, compliance, M&A), and where requests are originating in the business. When recurring categories dominate spend and the same questions are coming from the same parts of the business repeatedly, that's a signal to bring capacity in-house. Until that pattern is clear, fractional support produces better outcomes.

Sources