Milbank ‘refines’ HK India team with Clearys corporate hire

image
image
Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy has hired India group lawyer Sanjeet Malik as an of counsel in its Hong Kong office from Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton where he was an associate.

Malik (pictured) would help coordinate Milbank’s India practice and work on corporate, private equity and restructuring transactions, the firm said in a press release.

Milbank’s Washington-based India practice head Glenn S. Gerstell commented in the press release: “We have seen an increased amount of work coming out of India. Since foreign law firms are not authorized to have an office there, we needed to build our resources nearby to meet the demands of our clients – whether companies located in India or strategic or financial investors outside of the country.”

He added that the Malik’s joining Hong Kong would help “refine our focus on India”.

Malik, who is not qualified in India but speaks Hindi, completed his US law degree from Cornell Law School in 2001.

Comments

Russell Peter 29 Apr 2011, 08:42
+1 -0
With all due regards to Sanjeet, it is somewhat condescending of Milbank to hire an Indian origin person to take care of needs of Indian clients and foreign clients looking to invest in India, even though the person concerned is neither an Indian qualified lawyer nor having studied law in India!

I am curious why some US firms think that they need a 'desi' face to relate to India practice and their so called 'India gorups'?

anywyas all th best to Sanjeet
Anonymous guest 29 Apr 2011, 11:17
+1 -0
[quote]I am curious why some US firms think that they need a 'desi' face to relate to India practice and their so called 'India gorups'?[/quote]

@1, I think the deal clincher was that he could speak hindi!!! dekh lakh lakh pardesi lawyer aint nobody like a desi lawyer!! completely in agreement with your view
kianganz 29 Apr 2011, 14:01
+1 -1
Thought I would briefly chime in / explain further - Mr Malik has apparently been focusing on India work for some time, also at Clearys...

If a firang can head an India practice - which many do - surely someone with an Indian background, an NRI or PIO can do so too and perhaps even has a cultural advantage?
Russell Peter 29 Apr 2011, 15:25
+0 -0
Kian - your thinking is the prevalent thinking amongst the western lawyers (which you have called firangs), at least those that i know off. They too think that a brown face will somehow please desi clients or impress the western companies by showing the diversity that the western firms have. They probably did not find an Indian qualified fit for leading theri India practice.

Nothing wrong with that, each business is free to do whatever it wants to take to further their businesses. I was told that in ealry days, the western fimrs had hired Chinese faces to deal with China work (inbound and outbound) notwithstanding that these chinese faces knew less about China than the whites who had been based in Hong Kong for a very long time. Indeed lack of English language capabilities and unfamiliarity with common law were real hindrances to finding suitable real chinese lawyers in those days.

What i do not understand is how come India is treated as a jurisdiction which can be headed by a person who neither has studied nor worked in India?

I can understand if what these firms was only targetting Indian clients doing US or UK law work, but they clearly want to represent their international clients doing Indian legal work and want this practice to be headed by a person who has neither studied nor worked nor qualified in India.

My apologies to Sanjeet and clarification that this post is not in anyways meant to be personal comment on Mr. mallick, who I do not know at all. It is meant to be a response on the prevailing market trend and Kian's comment.
kianganz 29 Apr 2011, 15:49
+0 -0
Good point Russell, but I do disagree somewhat.

I tended to find that to get into an India practice area or any other regional specifics usually comes about through either of the following.

1. Someone has an experience of working in the country, laws, clients, etc.
2. Someone has an interest in a jurisdiction (irrespective of personal connection) and lobbies to get more work there and builds up a practice. If you share a language or ancestry with that country, your interest may be greater.
3. Sheer accident, a lawyer ends up with clients who happen to come from India or elsewhere and soon develops a regional 'practice', or
4. You get shunted in front of foreign clients because of your own nationality or language skills, desi or otherwise. This can then result in 1, 2 or 3 happening gradually.

If you speak the language of a country (even if like in Indian business you can get by in English) or share some culture or anything in common with a client (be that a love of cricket or having gone to the same college or your kids going to the same school), the firm may consider pushing you out to the client rather than someone else.

If you are in the right place at the right time and continue to be interested and to build that business, after some years you may end up as a head of that regional practice and whether you have practised in India or not becomes moot.

(more unique to India, however, this is ignoring the point that potentially a PIO/NRI may be able to move to India one day to qualify here and practice - something out of bounds for pretty much every non-desi face under current regulations surely...)

Again, the points I make bear no relation necessarily to Mr Malik's circumstances...