Subscribe for perks & to support LI

Your Interests & Preferences: Personalise your reading

Which best describes your role and/or interests?

I work in a law firm
I work for a company / in-house
I'm a litigator at the bar
I'm a law student
Aspiring law student
Other
Save setting
Or click here to show more preferences...

I am interested in the following types of stories (uncheck to hide from frontpage)

Firms / In-House
Deals
Courts
Legal Education

Always show me: (overrides the above)

Exclusives & Editor's Picks

Website Look & Feel

Light Text on Dark Background

Save preferences


Note: Your preferences will be saved in your browser. You can always change your settings by clicking the Your Preferences button at the top of every page.

Reset preferences to defaults?

Liberalisation in SC: Centre, LCIA feel Indian lawyers would bear brunt offshore if BCI, SC don’t hurry up in welcoming foreign firms

Foreigners in India: Yet again being debated in the Supreme CourtForeigners in India: Yet again being debated in the Supreme Court

Indian lawyers practising abroad would end up bearing the brunt of the Bar Council of India (BCI) potential regulation of foreign law firms under the current regulatory regime, argued London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) counsel Dushyant Dave before the Supreme Court yesterday.

Meanwhile, the Centre told the court that it feared that a delay in legal services liberalisation in India would harm practising privileges of Indian lawyers abroad, reported Live Law.

Senior advocate Dave was rebutting senior counsel CU Singh's argument for the BCI that foreign law firms should be allowed to enter India only under the current regulatory regime.

Dave said: “As Indian lawyers, we take part in international commercial arbitration matters in Singapore, London, Paris etc, without the need of procurement of any permission. If the BCI regulates foreign lawyers in this respect, it would also hurt the interests of Indian lawyers.”

Singh had argued: “The BCI is not averse to practice of law in India by foreign lawyers and firms, but the same must be regulated and fall within the four corners of the Advocates’ Act. Even if such practice is on a temporary basis, it must be subject to our regulatory regime.”

Additional solicitor general Maninder Singh, acting for the central government, submitted that if the BCI doesn't frame rules to expedite the entry of foreign law firms, the central government would take up that mantle, as the government doesn't want Indian lawyers to be denied practice privileges abroad that India is currently denying to foreign law firms domestically.

BCI appeal grounds

CU Singh, appearing for the BCI in its appeal from the Madras HC judgment in AK Balaji Vs BCI said the following:

  • That the BCI considers even fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) advice by foreign lawyers in India and foreign lawyers conducting international arbitration in India, as the “practice of the profession of law”, which should be regulated under the current Advocates Act 1961 and the BCI Rules.
  • That the Bombay HC had already ruled in 2009 in its judgment in Lawyers Collective vs BCI that foreign law firm liaison offices in India were illegal and that the practice of law included both litigious and non-litigious practice.
  • That the Advocates Act 1961 only permits advocates enrolled on state bar council rolls to practice law in India, therefore FIFO of foreign lawyers not enrolled in India, yet being allowed to arbitrate etc. in India, would be in violation of the law.
  • That there is no provision in the law to allow non-enrolled advocates to practise via special permission, except for the purpose of appearing before a court or authority.

ASG Singh submitted that the Centre could not afford any more delay in legal sector liberalisation in India so if the BCI doesn't frame rules to regulate foreign law firms entering India, the centre would do so itself.

The hearing will continue at 3pm today.

Click to show 3 comments
at your own risk
(alt+shift+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.
refresh Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments. Sort chronologically
1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 Pi 11 Jan 18, 15:07
Allow foreign common law qualified solicitors to practise indian law in india if 1) they are qualified to practise in their home jurisdiction, 2) have 3 PQE, and 3) pass AIBE

There should not be any bar for foreign solicitors to practise foreign law in india, it is not really BCI jurisdiction it is mostly income tax and business visa jurisdiction.
Reply Report to LI
2
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 12 Jan 18, 01:36
Shut down the BCI. LI please cover the recent law college accreditation scam. Bot the SC and Mad HC have made scathing remarks.
Reply Report to LI
3
Show?
Like +0 Object -0 Guest 17 Jan 18, 16:49
as an Indian lawyer practicing in UK, I am very concerned.
Reply Report to LI


Latest comments