汉坤律师事务所张亚兴律师近日登上2024 ALB China 十五佳诉讼律师榜单，他分享了深耕争议解决领域十多年的感悟和思考，并介绍了商事争议解决领域的最新变化和发展。
ALB：您在争议解决领域有着十多年的丰富工作经历与成就。请与我们介绍一下选择成为诉讼律师的“初心”，以及这么多年来对这一行业、对自身成长的心得感悟？
张亚兴律师，汉坤律师事务所合伙人：在决定读法律专业之前，本想读医学，当一名医生，机缘巧合才进入法律专业。从业时间越久，越感觉两者在很多地方都是相同的，比如，都是受人之托处理他人最头疼的问题、任何执业的失误最终都是由委托人承担后果。两个行业对从业人员的职业道德和专业能力都要求极高。某种意义上讲，诉讼律师也是在以特殊的方式“治病救人”，只不过我们治的是“心病”。不负信任、凭借自己的专业技能和职业操守为委托人“医治心病”就是我选择成为诉讼律师的“初心”。
在执业过程中，难免要面对各种情况、权衡各种利弊、抉择各种取舍，站在每个十字路口选择方向的时候，都不能忘记“初心”。坚守“初心”就一定能作出正确的选择，只要一直保持在正确的方向上前行，剩下的都交给时间就好。
ALB：在您执业和专注的商事争议解决领域，有哪些发展趋势？
张律师：在医疗行业，根据医护人员擅长的领域，会设立不同的科室，有针对性地为患者解决病患。甚至不乏集中于特定领域的专科医院，针对某一特定病症在内部进行更精细的划分，以求在特定领域追求专业度的极致。
在法律服务行业，这样的趋势也日趋明显。过往，大家普遍使用“诉讼”和“非诉”来区分律师的执业大方向，商事争议解决被归类于最典型的“诉讼”领域。时至今日，显然已经不能简单用这样粗线条的标准来划分律师的执业路径了。各个执业赛道在不断细分，客户对细分领域的专业性要求在不断提高。因此，即使是专精于商事争议解决的“诉讼”律师，也将面临在诸多赛道中进行选择并深耕。
除了传统意义上的合同纠纷、公司纠纷等典型商事案件，专业化细分要求更为明确的案件在不断涌现。如同不存在精通“诉讼”和“非诉”全领域的全才律师一样，在商事争议解决这个板块，也同样不存在精通所有案件类型的全才型诉讼律师。因此，未来的趋势很可能会对律师的专业性提出更高要求，必须能够在一两个细分赛道立足，才能不被客户不断提高的专业性要求所淘汰。
当然，专精于某个高度细分领域的同时，客户也会期待律师对其他赛道的法律问题最起码有常识性的认知，而不是除了细分赛道，对其他法律问题一无所知。毕竟在复杂案件处理过程中，需要多维度地思考和评估案件风险、寻求综合性的解决方案。高度集中的细分赛道专业化能力固然重要，但其中可能伴随过于狭窄的思路和视角也需要警惕和避免。这就如同在医疗服务领域，不能“头痛医头脚痛医脚”是一个道理。
总之，未来的发展趋势必定是高质量客户寻求高水平律师，而高水平律师既需要在细分领域有所建树，又需要适当具备其他赛道的知识储备，可谓对商事争议解决律师的要求会越来越高。
ALB：未来，您将如何不断提升自己，保持行业优势？
张律师：对于诉讼律师而言，执业经验尤为宝贵，即便看起来极为相似的案件，在不同的审判机构，也会有不同的体验；面对不同的对手方，也会有不同的收获。提升自己的最好方法就是持续不断地在一线工作，不断汲取第一手经验。
Deep-diving into specialized fields, expanding repertoire of knowledge and staying true to the mission--Interview with Zhang Yaxing, Partner of Han Kun Law Offices
Zhang Yaxing, Partner of Han Kun Law Offices, was listed among the 2024 ALB China Top 15 Litigators. A veteran in the dispute resolution field for more than 10 years, he shared his thoughts on his practices and introduced the latest changes and developments in commercial dispute resolution.
ALB: You have over a decade of experience in the field of dispute resolution and have made many achievements. Could you share with us what made you choose to become a litigator in the first place, as well as your insights into this profession over the years?
Zhang Yaxing, Partner of Han Kun Law Offices: Before I decided to read law, I wanted to study medicine and become a doctor. I majored in law by chance. However, the longer I have been practicing law, the more I see that the two professions share many similarities. Both lawyers and doctors are entrusted by others to solve their most tricky problems, and any mistakes in practice are ultimately borne by clients. Both the legal and the medical professions impose extremely high requirements on the professional ethics and competency of practitioners. Litigators are also "treating illnesses and saving lives" in a special way, the only difference being that we are treating "illnesses of the mind". Living up to the trust placed in me by clients and leveraging my professional skills and ethics to solve clients’ problems is why I chose to become a litigator.
Over the course of practice, one will inevitably face a variety of situations where one has to weigh pros and cons and make various trade-offs. When deciding on which way to go at every crossroad, one must never forget the "original aspiration". If we firmly hold onto to our "original aspiration ", we will be able to make the right choices. All we need to do is to keep moving in the right direction and leave the rest to time.
ALB: What are some of the development trends in your specialization of commercial dispute resolution?
Zhang: In the medical profession, different departments will be set up according to the fields in which medical practitioners are good at to provide targeted treatment for patients. Some specialized hospitals will have even more detailed divisions for a specific illness to maximize specialization in a particular field.
This trend is becoming increasingly apparent in the legal services industry. In the past, people tended to divide a lawyer’s practice based on the broad categories of "litigation" and "non-litigation", and commercial dispute resolution was classified as the most typical type of "litigation". Today, it is obvious that we can no longer use such broad-brush standards to divide the practice focuses of lawyers. Each practice area is constantly being subdivided, and clients have higher requirements on the expertise required for each subdivided field. Therefore, even litigators specializing in commercial dispute resolution need to choose and dive deep into their specialization among many subdivided fields.
In addition to typical commercial cases such as contract disputes and corporate disputes, cases subject to clearer requirements on specialized expertise are constantly emerging. Just like there is no all-round lawyer who is proficient in all "litigation" and "non-litigation" matters, there is also no all-round litigator who is proficient in all types of cases. Going forward, it is likely that higher demands will be placed on the professional expertise of lawyers such that lawyers must be able to gain a foothold in one or two subdivided fields so as not to be made redundant by clients’ ever-increasing requirements.
Certainly, clients also expect lawyers who specialize in a certain highly subdivided field to have at least a common sense of legal issues in other fields, instead of knowing nothing other than his or her specialization. After all, when handling complex cases, lawyers need to think about and assess risks in multiple dimensions and seek comprehensive solutions. While it is important to develop professional capabilities in a subdivided field, lawyers should be alert to and try to avoid overly narrow ideas and perspectives that may accompany such specialization.
In short, the future trend will certainly be one where high-quality clients turn to highly competent lawyers who must not only have made achievements in their specialized fields but also have appropriate knowledge about other fields. The requirements for commercial dispute resolution lawyers will only become higher and higher.
ALB: Going forward, how do you plan to continuously upgrade yourself to remain professionally competitive?
Zhang: For litigators, practice experience is particularly valuable. Even for cases that appear very similar, litigators will have different experiences with different trial institutions, and will gain different insights when facing different opponents. The best way to upgrade oneself is to continuously work in the front line and learn from first-hand experience.
