India's Supreme Court has issued an interim order restricting foreign law firms from pursuing any non-litigious work in the country. It has also directed
the RBI not to permit any foreign law firm to set up a liaison office in India says a report in The Telegraph India
The report goes on to say......
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1120705/jsp/frontpage/story_15693394.jsp#.T_XHeo7dKZY
The order means that foreign law firms and foreign lawyers can no longer carry out pre-litigation functions such as drafting petitions and advising clients. Litigation ? actual court work ? was already out of bounds for them.
As of now, such firms are left with advisory roles on ?foreign? law and international arbitration proceedings, which are not as numerous yet as other functions.
The Supreme Court issued an interim order but did not stay a Madras High Court verdict against which the apex court was moved by the Bar Council of India (BCI).
The high court had allowed foreign firms or lawyers to fly in and out to advise clients on ?foreign? law and also take part in international arbitration proceedings involving an Indian company and a foreign entity.
The high court had said BPO (business process outsourcing) units, which provide a wide range of customised and integrated services and functions such as word processing, secretarial support, transcription, proof-reading and travel support, do not come under the advocates act or the bar council rules. But the court had added that the BPOs could not go against the act, which means they cannot ?practise? Indian law.
Hearing the appeal against the recent Madras High Court judgment, the Supreme Court today clarified that foreign law firms or foreign lawyers could not in any way ?practise? Indian law, whether litigation or non-litigation work.
The two-judge bench of Justices R.M. Lodha and Anil R. Dave issued notices to 31 foreign firms, BPOs and LPOs (legal process outsourcing), returnable in 10 weeks.
Lalit Bhasin, the president of the Society of Indian Law Firms, said that ?business will not be affected?. Most foreign firms were either operating surreptitiously or were using the fa?ade of Indian firms, he added.
The bar council, the apex regulatory body on professional standards and ethics in law, has said only those foreign lawyers who fulfil its eligibility criteria should be permitted to work in India, though the government is not averse to opening up the sector.
The BCI insists that any recognition to foreign lawyers should be done only on a reciprocal basis. Indian lawyers need to undergo local courses or pass tests in countries such as the US and the UK.
The council contended that Madras High Court should not have dealt with the issue when Bombay High Court had already settled the matter. In an earlier case, Bombay High Court had ruled that foreign lawyers and firms shouldn?t undertake even non-litigation work unless they were enrolled with the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act, 1961.
Bombay High Court had also held that the RBI was not justified in granting permission to foreign firms to open up liaison offices in India under Fera (the foreign exchange regulation act of 1973 that has been replaced by Fema).
