First reported Reliance deal for K Law in $450m Sibur JV with Linklaters

K Law and Linklaters have advised Reliance Industries on its Rs 22bn ($450m) joint venture with Russian petro company Sibur, which was advised by Khaitan & Co and Herbert Smith, as Legally India had reported on 28 February.

This is understood to be the first time that Reliance has instructed K Law on a corporate transactional matter, although the firm has worked with the conglomerate in other advisory areas previously.

The K Law team was led by partner Praveen Raju, assisted by corporate senior associate Sankar Narayan Swamy and intellectual property (IP) senior associate Priti Deshpande, and associates Aparnaa Bhalotia and Sharmila Nair, according to a statement from K Law.

Linklaters advised Reliance on non-Indian law aspects of the transaction.

As reported in February, Khaitan & Co corporate partner Aakash Choubey and executive director Daksha Baxi acted for Sibur on Indian Law while Herbert Smith partner Nicholas Moore acted on foreign law.

K Law opened an office in Delhi in 2010 after starting as Krishnamurthy and Co in Bangalore in 1999, growing to over 60 lawyers.

Billionaire Mukesh Ambani-owned Reliance – India’s second largest public company by turnover - has in the past most commonly instructed AZB & Partners, as well as Amarchand Mangaldas, J Sagar Associates (JSA), Khaitan & Co and others on its corporate transactions.

Comments

Unconnected lawyer 14 Mar 2012, 05:10
+30 -0
A great deal in more ways than one! Partner Praveen Raju's brother Naveen Raju happens to be senior inhouse lawyer at Reliance Industries. If your elder brother can't send some business your way, then wot?
Observer 14 Mar 2012, 05:24
+1 -1
No wonder KLaw got this !!
Z 14 Mar 2012, 12:57
+1 -0
And you are implying that you NEVER took any work coming from a relative/ friend... Can't understand your holier than thou attitude!

[quote name="Unconnected lawyer"]A great deal in more ways than one! Partner Praveen Raju's brother Naveen Raju happens to be senior inhouse lawyer at Reliance Industries. If your elder brother can't send some business your way, then wot?[/quote]
[quote name="Unconnected lawyer"]A great deal in more ways than one! Partner Praveen Raju's brother Naveen Raju happens to be senior inhouse lawyer at Reliance Industries. If your elder brother can't send some business your way, then wot?[/quote]
In House Counsel 10 Apr 2012, 07:08
+0 -0
[quote name="Unconnected lawyer"]A great deal in more ways than one! Partner Praveen Raju's brother Naveen Raju happens to be senior inhouse lawyer at Reliance Industries. If your elder brother can't send some business your way, then wot?[/quote]

If every Indian lawyer stopped taking work from family and friends, soon there would be no law firms or lawyers. You're naive if you think that the Amarchands, AZBs and Trilegals of the world have not been benefitted by any family connections whatsoever.

Unless of course you have a vendetta against KLaw.
Bombay Lawyer 11 Apr 2012, 20:12
+4 -0
Quite amusing, yes....In House Counsel is definitely a good lawyer to potray the process of stating facts as vendetta!! Good but not good enough though.
1.1.2 14 Mar 2012, 10:11
+3 -0
# unconnected/ Observer-not cool at all, people. You guys just come across as petty people trying to point flaws in and pull down people doing well for themselves. Just congratulate them for the deal and call it a day. What is the need of unnecessary, spiteful observations. who knows how they got the deal? why speculate? BTW in case your next comment is just questions as to whether i work with Reliance or KLAW or am in any way connected to the matter or people involved- answer is "no". Am just someone who thinks that the fraternity is getting a bit too bitchy(for lack of polite words).

So congrats KLAW. Happy to see new people doing good deals.
xyz 14 Mar 2012, 13:39
+9 -0
While I can understand the "holier than thou" comment to an extent, the immediately aforesaid comment reeks of hypocrisy....there are many well deserving newcomers in the field and the work of a particular division of the company going to the brother of the person who heads the legal team of the very concerned division is too much of a coincidence to be true...so of course there is ample reason for speculation and it is grossly incorrect to say faternity is bitchy talking about this as the projected coincidence is too much to be accepted on the face of it.
xyz 14 Mar 2012, 13:55
+16 -0
When the "newcomer" bagging the deal is only the brother of the person who is directly and indirectly in a position to land the deal in his brother's lap, speculation is natural and justified and caling the faternity bitchy for the same is unfair...if the faternity is bitchy, one can easily shut them up by getting similar deals on merit from an unrelated party...till then criticism is natural when there are 100 other deserving newcomers without the "brother" in Reliance.
hmmm 15 Mar 2012, 04:39
+3 -0
couldnt have agreed more!
xyz 14 Mar 2012, 17:21
+15 -0
isn't klaw an IP firm?
ABC 15 Mar 2012, 07:18
+0 -1
K Law is a full service law firm. Here, take a peek: http://www.hg.org/attorney/K-and-K-Law-Firm/68245

The main partner in Bangalore - Nikhil Krishnamurthy is an IP lawyer who was a partner at Anand & Anand

Legally India has reported extensively about K Law in the past. Here please see: http://www.legallyindia.com/201008261231/Law-firms/krishnamurthy-starts-in-delhi-shifts-gear-in-mumbai-bangalore-chennai
DEF 15 Mar 2012, 08:33
+14 -0
two coverages (on firm expansion and not on deals) = extensive coverage and I thought I was bragging about my being Mr. World with my single photo on page 3 :-) having said that, nothing against the firm personally...just that one should potray facts as they are.
ABC 15 Mar 2012, 13:03
+0 -0
Legally India, do you report all deals as provided?

[quote name="DEF"]two coverages (on firm expansion and not on deals) = extensive coverage and I thought I was bragging about my being Mr. World with my single photo on page 3 :-) having said that, nothing against the firm personally...just that one should potray facts as they are.[/quote]
kianganz 15 Mar 2012, 13:19
+0 -0
Hi ABC - no, not all deals, we generally take a call on whether something is interesting enough or exclusive before reporting it by itself.

Otherwise, we often cover it in our deals in brief section.

Best regards
Kian
DEF 15 Mar 2012, 13:46
+11 -0
Incorrect to say that what I meant was all deals are covered by Legally India. My observation was on the point "Legally India has reported extensively about K Law in the past". The extensive coverage referred to at the provided link was not exactly on any deals :-)
Solicitor 15 Mar 2012, 09:02
+2 -0
I have read only the first few comments which mentioned Pravin getting the mandate on account of his brother being in reliance.

I do not see anything wrong in this. The larger corporate law firms have a knack for advertising themselves to get clients - I have been in one of the largest corporate law firm and they actually had the daughter of the T_T_ group working thereat.

The female partner over there, once she was made aware of the daughter, met the girl's father and shared the firm profile and all, only to make the group the client.

If a large law firm can do this, why can't Pravin.

I have known Pravin when he was in Crawford Bayley. He is a humble and a smart person. If anyone should be give assistance to climb up the ladder, I would prefer it to be him, rather than sarcastic, back stabbing and gossip mongers, at the helm of larger firms.

My two cents
MNOPQRS 15 Mar 2012, 09:40
+11 -0
The only party who is entitled to feel aggrieved, if at all, is Reliance Industries. Being a listed company, they should be handing out contracts only after getting a few quotes and to the firm with the best track record.

Solicitor, you are right when you say this is a common practice, especially for the big firms. That doesn't make it right though.
Delhi Lawyer 15 Mar 2012, 10:58
+0 -0
The question is if Reliance is bothered about these as long as they get quality work ? I can understand the frustration of other equally talented people, but these things are quite common in practice. Knowing an in-house lawyer can get you a deal almost anywhere in the world
Bombay Lawyer 15 Mar 2012, 13:34
+11 -0
Who decides whether the work is quality work? the brother and his pals who are making the work available to him in the first place? this is exactly why Reliance should be concerned...hope this clarifies that it is not just a matter of "the frustration of other equally talented people" and not just related to the practice. Though personally I am very sure that there must not have been any concerns at all related to the work quality however, why at all encourage this trend which is totally not in conformity with the best practices followed by most well established companies. If the crusade is really against the "big bad law firms" or a question of promoting young talent or new faces, there is a world beyond one's relatives too.
Also,@ Delhi Lawyer...a partner can get work anywhere in the world if they know an inhouse counsel, but when the partner is a very close relative as in this case credibility and accountability both can be questioned and not just by those from within the faternity.
Delhi Lawyer 21 Mar 2012, 12:06
+0 -0
Reliance being a non-PSU has every right to choose its legal advisors without giving any justification to anybody. With regard to best practices followed by established companies, do big laws follow the best practices while hiring lawyers all billing clients ?
Bombay Lawyer 22 Mar 2012, 10:13
+11 -0
It may be a non-PSU but it is still a public company rem????
Bombay Lawyer 22 Mar 2012, 10:29
+11 -0
Also, its is not a matter of being non-PSU or PSU really, prove ur worth as a lawyer without association by standing on your own for sometime without a prop and everybody shuts up...simple
In House Counsel 10 Apr 2012, 07:04
+6 -0
[quote name="Bombay Lawyer"]Also, its is not a matter of being non-PSU or PSU really, prove ur worth as a lawyer without association by standing on your own for sometime without a prop and everybody shuts up...simple[/quote]

Hear hear! Reliance should always appoint AZB only on all their deals, because with AZB, its a purely professional relationship with no family ti...umm, what's that? Zia's husband is Neeta Ambani's cousin? Erm...no no, these family ties don't count. Its only when small law firms get bigger deals that we should question the nepotism.

Muppet.
Bombay Lawyer 11 Apr 2012, 20:05
+4 -0
Hahaha....seems had hit the right cord with the last comment...nobody is talking abt appointing only AZB!! wake up... there are plenty of other firms too in the market ... if u so ardently hate the big ones there are some very solid not yet AZB big ones too (oops! sry but those are minus the relation of crse)

And Come up with a better and convincing argument please next time.
The Small Firm Lawyer 19 Mar 2012, 05:59
+6 -0
Lordy!! What a s***storm a story like this creates...I can see the big firm angst and the self perpetrated righteousness of the big law firms all the way through. So, only a big firm can guarantee "quality" work. Really??? So nepotism only works for smaller firms, forget about the fact that Uday Kotak and Cyril are childhood buddies as a result of which AMSS does a fair amount of Kotak work and now that Paridhi is apparently getting married to Gautam Adani's son, will that also be lumped in with the same set of comments when AMSS does Adani work? Of course not, that is the prerogative of the big firms.

Its sad that there is so much envy around against the smaller firms. Maybe the smaller firm services Reliance better and maybe Reliance is smart enough to choose its advisors (shock, awe at this, huh?). Of course, no one seems to remember that if there is anybody that protects their interests, its got to be be this group.

Well done Pravin and KLaw, since there is a presumption that Reliance goofed up by going to KLaw or only because the Rajus are brothers etc. Fight the fight and take on the bigger firms. We shall indeed overcome!!
AMSS AHMEDABAD 23 May 2012, 14:29
+2 -0
Amarchand opened an entire office at Ahmedabad with a partner...forget about just doing substantial quantum of work for Adani.
Not so big firm lawyer 19 Mar 2012, 15:51
+16 -0
Just because AMSS may do Adani's work and nobody may not comment on that does not make this necessarily right. Smart choice? while there are many others capable enough from not so big firms? Who are u kidding? Envy? Yeah right...that one did get some laugh allright.
jk 23 Mar 2012, 07:33
+14 -3
Warning to all fresh law graduates: Do not be misled by articles reporting big deals and join K Law...it is a firm with ridiculous policies and inhuman seniors. Hard work is not appreciated there and there is NO CONCEPT of any bonus. People are not allowed to leave the office for lunch (!!!) or leave the office before 8 PM even if there is no work whatsoever and substantial portions of salaries are cut for not complying with these petty requirements. These are all verified facts, and if K Law people believe that I am lying, they are free to contradict me here.
I personally know at least 3 people who have left K Law and told me these horror stories and I continue to hear them from my friends still struggling on in there as they search for jobs. Their job applications to other firms are rejected with comments like "why would you start your career with K Law". So make sure you dont make the same mistake. Better to join a PSU or any other law firm paying a similar low salary (30-35 k i believe) with more humane people.
LM 29 Mar 2012, 16:33
+10 -1
I agree with jk....its true...i knw sumone who has left klaw...its a crappy place...