The Foreign Law Firms case was listed before the Madras High Court today and after being delayed for several weeks the matter was taken up in Court Hall 2 of the Madras High Court. Advocate A.K. Balaji who represents Association of Indian Lawyers had filed this writ petition, which not only deals with the issue of entry of foreign law firms, but also on the modus operandi currently adopted by these firms to provide legal services in India. Women Lawyers Association (WLA), a registered body, has also joined the writ petition against the entry of foreign law firms.

Senior Advocate for the petitioners, ARL Sundaresan pressed for an injunction against the operation of foreign law firms in India. ARL Sundaresan cited the judgments of the Bombay High Court in the Lawyers Collective case and that of ITAT against Linklaters and Clifford Chance to indicate that the foreign law firms who are already present in India and are violating the Advocates Act. Additional Solicitor General (Chennai), M. Ravindran, who appeared for the Union Government pleaded before the Court that there is already a consultation process that has been initiated by the Government to regulate the entry of foreign law firms. Speaking to Bar & Bench he said, “Two weeks have been granted by the Hon’ble Court which has asked the Bar Council to list out steps that have been taken to regulate the entry of foreign law firms. The Bar Council will have to file their counter now and then the matter will be listed for hearing. The Foreign law firms have also not filed their counter and some of them have not been served notices”.

Ravindran also mentioned that there would be a meeting conducted at the end of this month which would include representatives of the Bar Council of India to regulate the practice of foreign law firms in India. Senior Advocate and Advocate General of Tamil Nadu, PS Raman argued on behalf of the Bar Council and said that Government and the Bar Council would need 8 weeks time to obtain a concrete reply from the Government and the Bar Council on this issue and also mentioned the current stand of the Bar Council of India, which is to oppose the entry of foreign law firms.

The Bench questioned on the already existing practice of law by foreign law firms, although not directly before the courts but by advising on issues relating to corporate laws, arbitration etc. Senior Advocate A.L. Somayaji who appeared on behalf of the American law firms said, “Foreign law firms do not have any offices in India and are not practicing Indian law. A blanket stay on the practice of foreign law firms should not be ordered at this stage since most law firms are yet to receive notices” and therefore requested the Bench to hear the respondent law firms and the Government in detail and only then pass orders.

The Chennai office of Dua Associates is representing 9 US law firms including Wilmer Hale (R-20), Shearman & Sterling (R 21), Davis Polk & Wardwell (R 25), Akin Gump (R 27), Pilsbury Winthrop (R 30) and Covington & Burling (R 33). Dua Associates Partner Senthil is leading the litigation team, which briefed Senior Counsels A.L.Somayaji. Speaking to Bar & Bench, Senthil confirmed that Dua Associates will be representing these 9 law firms who have a common defense in this writ petition. 

The UK Law firms, French Law firm Loyens & Loeff, LPO company Integreon are yet to appear before the Madras High Court.

In the meanwhile the Australian law firms, Freehills and Clayton Utz have entered appearance through their Advocate K.S. Natarajan. Speaking to Bar & Bench, Natarajan said, “The Bench also questioned the petitioners and respondents on whether there is any reciprocal arrangement on the practice of law and also questioned why an injunction should not be given against their practice in India to which our response was to hear us in length and only then pass any such order.

Clifford Chance Partner Stuart Popham’s India visit along with British PM David Cameron was supposed to have brought in a sense of optimism amongst some section of the legal fraternity who were pro-liberalization and the entry of foreign law firms. However, the writ petition and recent protests of SILF President indicate the growing resistance towards these foreign law firms.

The matter has been posted for August 19, 2010.