The approach
Five principles on which the work on every case rests.
The system before the individual case
Before the law there was mathematics. My education at a mathematics high school created a habit that has stayed with me in every subsequent role: to look for the model behind the individual case. This does not reduce human and business relationships to a formula. It means tracing the variables, the dependencies, the constraints and the possible scenarios.
In any structure the question is not only who holds what percentage, but who makes the decisions, what happens in the event of disagreement, how everything changes upon inheritance, and where the risk is concentrated.
I do not seek only the right answer under present conditions. I seek a solution that holds even when the conditions change.
Law as an instrument
Law is a necessary part of a resilient structure, but it is rarely its ultimate goal. An owner does not seek a contract for the contract’s sake, but predictability, control over risk, and the assurance that what has been created can be passed on.
That is why the legal document is the final material expression of a system that has already been understood and ordered. If one starts straight with the clauses, one skips the questions that determine whether they can work at all.
The document is not the beginning of the solution. It is its final material expression.
From the business side
My experience is not only that of an external legal adviser. The role of managing director changes one’s perspective: a decision is no longer judged only by its legal correctness. It must be feasible, financially intelligible, mindful of deadlines, acceptable to the bank and achievable for the team. The managing director answers not only for the advice, but for the result.
To see the problem through the eyes of the business means understanding not only what is legally possible, but what can actually be carried out.
The complex question as a project
In 2008 I completed the trainings “Art of Project Management” and “Art of Change Management” (Business Management Consultants / Consulteam, lecturer Murat Özbilen). They gave a framework to something that became a permanent part of my approach: managing a complex legal matter as a project. As chief legal counsel I applied legal project management to transactions, reorganisations and complex tasks involving many teams and external specialists.
Legal competence alone is not enough. What is needed is a clear objective, scope, roles, deadlines, dependencies and a way to track them: context → map → architecture → plan → coordination → execution → resilience.
A complex solution is not exhausted by the correct legal construction. It must be organised so that all participants carry it out in the right order.
Learning as a professional principle
Experience is valuable, but it carries a risk: over time one’s own decisions begin to seem obvious merely because they are familiar. That is why continued learning is not an add-on to practice, but a way of testing it.
Scholarly work demands a different discipline: a precise question, comparison between legal systems, testing of arguments. The same holds beyond scholarship: new models, international mobility and technology require the framework to be renewed continually.
Experience gives answers. Learning checks whether they are still true.