I went on a negotiation call sometime back with counterparty counsel. This discussion was happening after one round of document review. Opposite counsel had made many changes without providing any rationale and so a request was made through comments to ask them to substantiate with reasons for their changes. When the lawyer got on call they started shouting and made situation acrimonial from the very beginning and this made me quite uncomfortable. As their changes were not supported with any rationale, I tried asking them reasons for their changes. They replied in a snarky and very angry manner. I remained composed and didn't respond in the same manner as them but still continued providing rebuttals for their reasons. I thought this to be correct approach since I would require to understand their perspective and since we were on call, it seemed like a good opportunity to reduce back and forth on comments. Rhe opposite counsel did not take nicely to my counter arguments and started shouting. I told them I will like to move on to next point since we are not able to conclude. The meeting did not lead anywhere. Soon after the meeting, the opposite lawyer contacted my client and told them they don't wish to negotiate against me. Please my senior industry colleagues, guide me as to where I went wrong and how could I avoid this situation in future?

Aree bhai, don't bend this much have an aggressive but diplomatic approach to these things. Don't grt threatened by hearing them shouting and screaming just ask the rationale or law behind the change suggested. If they start shouting or doing anything other than answering your question, categorically say "We will not be able to accept this change unless there is a clear reason" and move to next point.

These tactics are quite often especially when you are a junior and the opposite counsel is senior to you. Happened with me when I was an A1 and opposite counsel was their practice head. I didn't budge and later didn't accept the changes as well. However, I reported this immediately to my partner that this has happened on the call. He asked me if I shouted back, I said no and then he said "Don't worry, I will take care of it".

OP here - I hear you and that's the approach I took however, unlike my opposite counsel I do not work at a law firm. The opposite counsel was trying to use their other clients who had agreed on similar terms and trying to cut short negotiation relying on those instances but couldn't outrightlty say that since they can't disclose other clients infront of current client. They scheduled a call without sending comments and just started shouting when I tried digging deeper into their proposals and pointed out adverse effect on my employer due to such proposals. Now, I am new to the organisation and do not have much face with my internal client. Please advise if I went wrong somewhere.

OP here - I do not work at a law firm. The business head incharge of matter called me and told me that opposite counsel has told their client that do not wish to negotiate any further. He heard me and then just said he cannot say who is telling the truth. I told him that he will need to listen to just 5 minutes of call recording to understand who behaved in what manner. He told me that he will not say anything bad to my line manager and simply asked me to schedule another call. This is a new organisation for me and I am proceeding with caution. This is why I did not try to explain any further.