Australia's Top 25 Law Firms in 2005 - What The BRW Rankings Reveal.
WhEN BRW Set The Benchmark For Australia’s Legal Industry
When I started my consulting business, there was a weekly magazine in Australia called BRW (Business Review Weekly). Each year it published lists of this country’s top accounting and law firms complete with revenue per partner and profit ranges.
Those lists shaped the way firms compared performance, talent, and ambition. They were as eagerly awaited as the Australian Financial Review’s Top 50 is today.
This snapshot, from 29 September 2005, shows the Top 25 Legal Partnerships in Australia at the time captures a profession in transition wth a mix of established partnerships, emerging independents, and the early signs of globalisation.
(Image: BRW “Mallesons Top Again”, 29 Sept 2005)
What’s Changed and What Hasn’t
Two decades on and many of those names are still familiar, though quite a few have re-badged, merged, or globalised.
Mallesons Stephen Jaques is now King & Wood Mallesons
Freehills is now Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer
Blake Dawson Waldron merged into Ashurst
Phillips Fox was absorbed by DLA Piper
Deacons then Henry Davis York became Norton Rose Fulbright
Abbott Tout, Home Wilkinson Lowry, and Ebsworth & Ebsworth coalesced into HWL Ebsworth
Thomson Playford transformed into Thomson Geer
Middletons became K&L Gates
Looking back, the 2005 list tells us more than who earned what. It reminds us how cyclical this profession is: growth, succession, leadership and reinvention on repeat.
Back then, HWL was considered an ‘upstart’ taking on “one of Sydney’s largest and oldest mid-tier firms, Abbott Tout.”
From BRW to The AFR - The Rankings That Define An Era
Fast-forward to July 2025, and The Australian Financial Review’s six-monthly Top 50 Law Firms now sets the benchmark (subscription required): https://www.afr.com/companies/professional-services/explore-the-law-partnership-survey-results-for-the-first-half-of-2025-20250626-p5maic
It’s a different era but with the same fascination with size and growth. Since BRW’s 2005 list was published, Incorporated Legal Practice structures were introduced, publicly listed entities emerged and new firms, with different business models, have rapidly ascended the ranks.
The story mirrors the broader pattern across professional services: scale, specialisation, and strategic mergers redefining what it means to be ‘Top Tier’.
A table comparing BRW’s Top 25 Law Firms in Australia in 2005 and The AFR’s Top 25 in 2025 is provided in this PDF.
FREQUENTLY Asked Questions
Q: What was the largest Australian law firm in 2005?
A: BRW ranked Mallesons Stephen Jaques first, with estimated revenue of $445 million.
Q: Which of the Top 25 in 2005 firms still exist under the same name?
A: Arnold Bloch Liebler, Baker McKenzie, Minter Ellison, Clayton Utz, Corrs Chambers Westgarth, Gadens, Gilbert + Tobin, Holding Redlich, Hunt & Hunt, Maddocks, McCullough Robertson, Piper Alderman, and Sparke Helmore.
Q: Which of the Firms in 2005’s Top 25 no longer exist?
A: Abbott Tout, Deacons, Henry Davis York, Middletons and Phillips Fox were consumed by larger firms while Dibbs Abbott Stillman dissolved in 2008.
Q: What happened to BRW magazine?
A: Business Review Weekly ceased its print version in November 2013. Its legacy of professional-services benchmarking lives on through the AFR and other outlets.
Sue-Ella is the Principal of Prodonovich Advisory, a business dedicated to helping professional services practices sharpen their business development practices.
She works with Law Firms, Accounting Firms and Business Advisors that focus on client relationships, and with individuals who want personal, intelligent support.
She assists legal and accounting firms with their Leadership and Professional Development Programs, Client Engagement programs, and advice on BD.
She facilitates public workshops on Business Skills For Lawyers
And she helps individuals through her BD45 service www.bd45.com.au
First published October 2025. Data from BRW, 29 September 2005.
©Prodonovich Advisory. Please respect our copyright and the effort that went into producing the original material in this article. This article, and any portion of it, may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author.