Interview with Nick Cowie, WSP General Counsel, Middle East & Asia

Interviewed by Aarta Alkarimi

---

Could you tell us about your journey to becoming General Counsel for WSP in the Middle East, and what initially attracted you to the legal profession?

What initially attracted me to the legal profession is exactly what has kept me engaged throughout my career: the opportunity to solve complex, interesting problems that have a tangible impact on the world around us.

Construction law sits at the intersection of legal principles, engineering, commerce and public policy. The projects we work on, whether they involve transportation networks, water infrastructure, cities or major industrial developments, are transformative. There is a real sense that the work matters because the decisions made today can shape communities and economies for decades.

My own journey to becoming General Counsel for WSP in the Middle East and Asia was not one that I had planned from the outset. I moved to the Middle East around 12 years ago, initially intending to spend two years in Kuwait working as a claims consultant. Like many people who come to the region, I was drawn in by the scale, ambition and complexity of the projects being delivered here; however, those two years quickly turned into something much longer.

Once I joined WSP, I quickly realised that I had found a business whose values and ambitions aligned closely with my own. Since then, I have been fortunate to take on a series of new and challenging roles, most recently expanding my responsibilities beyond the Middle East to include Asia. The scope and geography may have expanded over time, but the aspect of the role I enjoy most remains unchanged, helping solve complex problems on projects that leave a lasting legacy.

What does a typical day look like for you and which aspects of your role do you find most rewarding?

Honestly, there probably isn’t such a thing as a ‘typical day’ in this role. One of the things I enjoy most about the role is the sheer variety. On any given day, I might be overseeing a major arbitration, negotiating contract terms for an infrastructure project, advising on corporate governance matters, managing regulatory compliance issues or supporting strategic business decisions across multiple jurisdictions.

The scope of an in-house legal function at a business like WSP extends well beyond construction law. We are involved in everything from project pursuit and contract negotiation through to dispute resolution, ethics, employment matters, acquisitions and corporate governance. The breadth of the role means that no two days are ever quite the same.

That unpredictability occasionally leads to some genuinely unusual legal questions. Earlier this year, for example, we found ourselves dealing with the distribution of life insurance proceeds following the death of an employee, requiring us to navigate a complex intersection of insurance law, inheritance law, succession rights and Sharia principles across multiple jurisdictions. It was a sensitive matter that had nothing to do with engineering or construction projects, but demonstrates the range of issues that can find their way onto my desk.

The most rewarding aspect of the role is helping the business make confident decisions. Our role is to help colleagues understand risk, navigate complexity and find a path forward. Whether that involves resolving a dispute, structuring a transaction or enabling a project to proceed, the satisfaction comes from helping translate legal complexity into practical commercial outcomes.

WSP operates across major infrastructure, engineering and construction projects. What are the most significant legal and commercial challenges facing the sector in the Middle East today?

From my perspective, the most significant challenges facing the sector today stem from increasing complexity. The Middle East continues to deliver some of the world’s most ambitious infrastructure and development programmes. The scale of opportunity is extraordinary, but with that comes a more complex contractual, regulatory and commercial environment than many participants have experienced historically.

A trend that many of your readers will recognise is the continued hardening of commercial risk allocation. Across both public and private sector projects, we are seeing increasingly onerous contractual positions being proposed to consultants and contractors. Examples include longer payment cycles, reduced mobilisation support, broader indemnity regimes, greater liability exposure and termination or suspension rights that allow clients to stop projects with little notice and limited recovery of costs. None of these issues are new in isolation, but the cumulative effect can place significant pressure on project economics and the ability of consultants to manage risk appropriately. There is also a risk that overly aggressive risk transfers simply reappear later in the form of claims, disputes and increased delivery costs.

At the same time, the regulatory environment is becoming more sophisticated. Whether the issue is licensing, professional regulation, sanctions compliance, data protection, corporate governance or insurance requirements, organisations operating across multiple jurisdictions are having to navigate an increasingly complex compliance landscape.

A particularly interesting trend we are seeing is the emergence of large multidisciplinary procurements, particularly within the public sector. Clients are increasingly seeking a single lead consultant to deliver a broad range of services that extend well beyond traditional engineering and project management disciplines, including legal, financial, strategic and transaction advisory services. While this approach can provide clients with a more integrated delivery model, it also creates important questions around regulatory compliance, professional licensing, liability allocation and insurance coverage. Organisations need to think very carefully about which risks they are truly equipped to manage, and which sit more appropriately with specialist advisers.

Ultimately, the industry’s challenge is not simply delivering larger or more complex projects. It is ensuring that contractual frameworks, risk allocation and regulatory compliance structures evolve at the same pace as the scale and ambition of these projects.

How do you balance your role as legal adviser and risk manager with the need to support innovation, growth and commercial decision-making?

One of the most important lessons I have learned in-house is that legal teams create the most value when they are viewed as business partners rather than gatekeepers. It is critical that an in-house legal function doesn’t merely act as the ‘department of no’. The real question is not whether something can be done, but how it can be done in a way that appropriately manages risk while still allowing the business to move forward.

My role is to help colleagues understand the legal, commercial and regulatory implications of a decision so that they can make informed choices. Sometimes that means recommending a particular course of action. Sometimes it means identifying safeguards or alternative structures that achieve the same commercial outcome with a more acceptable risk profile. And occasionally it means advising that a particular risk is simply too great to justify the potential reward. But even in those circumstances, I believe the legal team’s role is to help find solutions rather than simply identify problems.

That mindset is particularly important in a business like WSP, where we operate in a rapidly evolving environment. Our clients are pursuing increasingly ambitious projects, entering new sectors and adopting new technologies. If the legal function is seen only as a control mechanism, it can quickly become a bottleneck. If it is seen as a trusted adviser that understands the commercial objectives of the business, it can help enable innovation and growth while still protecting the organisation.

Ultimately, I don’t see legal advice and commercial decision-making as competing objectives. The most effective legal teams understand the business well enough to support growth, while ensuring that risks are identified, understood and managed appropriately. The goal is not to eliminate risk altogether, but to help the business take intelligent and commercially informed risks.

At what stage of a project should the legal team become involved and how can early legal involvement help prevent disputes?

Legal teams should ideally be involved throughout the entire project lifecycle, not simply at contract award or when a dispute arises. Traditionally, legal involvement has often been concentrated around contract negotiation. While that remains important, some of the most valuable contributions that legal teams can make occur after the contract has been signed. In my experience, the legal function creates the greatest value when it operates as an ongoing business partner.

Early involvement allows legal teams to help to identify and allocate risk appropriately from the outset; ensure that contractual obligations are understood by delivery teams; and establish governance frameworks that reduce the likelihood of issues developing into disputes. Many disputes have their roots in decisions made long before the first formal claim is submitted.

Equally important is continued involvement during project delivery. At WSP, the legal team regularly supports projects in a project counsel capacity, participates in project risk review sessions, advises on change management and entitlement issues, and becomes involved at the earliest signs of emerging disputes. By addressing issues while positions remain flexible and commercial relationships remain intact, there is often a far greater opportunity to achieve a pragmatic resolution.

Ultimately, legal teams should not be judged by the number of disputes they win. A better metric (albeit harder to track) is the number of disputes that never arise in the first place thanks to early legal intervention.

When selecting external counsel, what qualities distinguish a trusted adviser from someone who is simply providing legal advice?

While technical ability is, of course, an important quality in external counsel, the factors that make a firm a genuinely trusted adviser extend far beyond its technical expertise.

First and foremost, they need to understand our business and our industry. An adviser who understands how an engineering consultancy operates, how major construction projects are delivered and the commercial realities faced by project teams will invariably provide more valuable advice than someone who approaches every issue as a purely legal exercise.

The second quality is pragmatism. Business leaders are not looking for a lengthy memorandum analysing every conceivable legal risk. They want clear, actionable advice that helps them make informed decisions. The best advisers can explain the legal position succinctly, identify the material risks and recommend a practical path forward.

I also place a high value on commercial judgement. A trusted adviser understands that the objective is not to eliminate risk altogether. Instead, the objective is to understand risk, manage it appropriately and make informed decisions. The lawyers I value most are those who can distinguish between theoretical risks and genuinely material risks.

Finally, trusted advisers develop a genuine understanding of their client’s objectives and are willing to challenge constructively when necessary. The strongest relationships are built on trust, credibility and a shared focus on achieving the right outcome rather than simply delivering legal analysis.

What leadership principles guide you when managing and developing an in-house legal team across different jurisdictions and cultures?

Leading a legal team across multiple jurisdictions requires a balance between consistency and local empowerment.

The first principle that guides me is trust.
I am fortunate to work with talented lawyers across the Middle East and Asia, and I strongly believe that people perform best when they are given ownership and accountability rather than being managed too closely. My role is not to make every decision myself but to create an environment where good decisions can be made in a timely manner at the appropriate level.

The second principle is consistency. While the legal and cultural environments may differ significantly between jurisdictions, our clients should experience the same quality of legal support wherever they engage with us. That requires clear governance, shared standards, common ways of working and a strong focus on knowledge sharing across the team. As our legal function continues to grow, we have invested heavily in creating more consistent training, processes and support structures across regions.

The third principle is development. One of the most important responsibilities of any leader is creating opportunities for others to grow. Like any other bright, driven people, our talented lawyers are motivated by interesting work, increasing responsibility and clear career pathways. I spend a significant amount of time thinking about how we can expose people to new challenges, broaden their experience and help them develop into future leaders.

Ultimately, I want to build a team that is technically excellent, commercially minded and trusted by the business. The lawyers who create the greatest value are those who understand the wider commercial context and are able to translate legal complexity into practical advice.

Which experience, mentor or professional challenge has had the greatest influence on the way you work today?

I have been fortunate throughout my career to work with and learn from a number of exceptional lawyers and business leaders. If there is one person who has had the greatest influence on the way I work today, it would be my manager, Karen Sewell, WSP’s Chief Counsel International. One of the most valuable lessons I have learned from Karen is that the role of an in-house lawyer extends far beyond providing legal advice. Karen has consistently demonstrated that the most impactful in-house lawyers are those who combine strong legal judgement with genuine commercial understanding and an ability to build trusted relationships across the business.

More broadly, I have been fortunate to have mentors who have encouraged me to take on challenges that initially felt beyond my comfort zone. Looking back on my career, the periods of greatest professional growth have almost always come from being presented with an unfamiliar problem and being trusted to work through it. Whether that was moving to the Middle East, transitioning from private practice and claims consulting into an in-house role, or more recently expanding my responsibilities across both the Middle East and Asia, the common theme has been learning through experience.

If there is one principle that has stayed with me, it is that good lawyers should aim to be problem solvers rather than legal commentators. Clients and colleagues rarely come to us because they want a lecture on the law. They come to us because they have a challenge that needs solving. The lawyers I admire most, and the mentors who have influenced me most, have all shared that mindset.

Outside your professional life, what interests, routines or activities help you maintain perspective and recharge?

Outside work, I spend a lot of time pursuing interests that are about continuous improvement and lifelong learning. One of those is combat sports, particularly Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and boxing. Both provide a welcome contrast to the day-to-day challenges of a legal career. They demand complete focus in the moment, which makes them an excellent way to switch off from work, recharge and relieve stress, albeit at the occasional cost of a few bruises. They also reinforce lessons that translate surprisingly well into professional life: discipline, resilience, humility and the importance of staying calm under pressure.

I am also studying Mandarin Chinese, which has been a long-standing interest of mine. I had the opportunity to live in Beijing as a child, and that experience sparked a fascination with Chinese language and culture that has stayed with me ever since. While I am still very much a student of the language, I enjoy the challenge. Learning Mandarin reminds me what it feels like to be outside your comfort zone and to make incremental progress through consistent effort.

What might colleagues who know you only as WSP’s General Counsel be surprised to learn about you?

Building on my previous answer, it may surprise some colleagues to learn that their relatively mild-mannered General Counsel spends a significant amount of his spare time being choked, arm-locked and punched in a controlled environment.

Training in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and boxing is perhaps not what people expect from someone whose day job involves contracts, governance and risk management. But to me, the contrast is part of the appeal. Both require focus, discipline and the ability to remain calm under pressure, skills that are just as valuable at the negotiation table as they are in a gym.