13.10.2016
Sh. Suresh Chandra,
Law Secretary,
Department of Legal Affairs,
Ministry of Law & Justice,
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
Subject: BCI’s Letter Withdrawing from Discussions Regarding the Regulation of
Foreign Law Firms and Its Remarks About the Role of ICCA and The RASICH Group.
Respected Sir,
1.

We are writing to you in light of the recent developments on the 29th of September,
where the BCI formally withdrew their participation from the discussions regarding the
opening up of the Indian Legal sector to foreign lawyers and law firms. As you know, this
has been an important agenda for the present government since it came to power in
2014.

2.

The Hon’ble government of our country has gone on record to state that it believes that
reforms in the sector are important to project India as an investor-friendly country, with
a sound legal framework which supports the ease of doing business. In light of same, the
Bar Council of India (hereafter referred to as ‘BCI”), submitted its draft rules for the entry
of foreign firms – The BCI Rules for Registration & Regulation of Foreign Lawyers ('BCI
Draft’) to the Hon’ble Ministry of Law & Justice (‘MoLJ’) on 5th August 2016.

3.

We are in complete agreement with the intent expressed by the BCI, where it goes on
record to state that:
"Bar Council of India is of the view that opening up of law practice in India to foreign
lawyers in the field of practice of foreign law; diverse international legal issues in nonlitigious matters and in international arbitration cases would go a long way in helping
legal services grow in India to the benefit of lawyers both from India and abroad."
"...the legal fraternity in India is not likely to suffer any disadvantage in case law
practice in India is opened up to foreign lawyers in a well-controlled and regulated
manner on the principle of reciprocity as it would be mutually beneficial for lawyers
from India and abroad..."
"Let us ensure that the opportunity for creating a hub of such legal services in India is
not lost."

4.

However, the substantive portions of the rules which followed, would have had a direct
adverse impact on the functioning of not just Indian law firms but also Indian Advocates.
In our opinion, the intent laid down by the BCI has to be read along with the fact that, if
liberalization is done in a well thought out and responsible manner, it can be beneficial
for every single stakeholder who is a part of the Indian legal system. Indian advocates,
whose interest has to be kept paramount, will benefit from knowledge transfers for

1

 efficiently running their respective practices, an increased awareness of their legal
services as well as direct and supplemental opportunities to increase their revenues as, in
any proposal that is put forth, it must be ensured that the practice and interpretation of
Indian law remains within the purview of Indian Advocates. The advantages mentioned
above will benefit Indian Advocates, irrespective of whether they are practicing
independently or with a law firm, and will also benefit students of the law moving into
the profession.
5.

It is also important to note that the Government of India is working hard to make India
the hub of the global economy by promoting its ‘Make in India’ agenda, as well as
showcasing its intent, through the Niti Ayog, to develop India as the foremost
destination of International Arbitration in the world. Given this extremely forwarding
thinking position of the Government as well as the fact that if done correctly,
liberalization can have a positive impact on the entire legal eco-system in India, we are
of the strong view that the need of the hour is to have more specific discussions on how
to make this work, rather than be in a position where the markets are opened up without
effectively addressing the concerns of the various stakeholders.

6.

Unfortunately, in the meeting on the 29th of September, the MoLJ revealed that the BCI,
through a communication to the MoLJ, withdrew the BCI Draft and asked that the
discussion meetings be cancelled. In the letter through which it has communicated its
withdrawal, it has also made certain remarks about both ICCA and The RASICH Group
and its involvement in the process through an invitation by the Hon’ble Ministry. This has
made it important for us to write to you and clarify our stand.

CORPORATE COUNSELS AS STAKEHOLDERS
7.

At the outset, we would like to place it on record that our intention of participating in
this discussion transcends the various stakeholders of the legal industry and aims at
providing intellectual and meaningful support to the entire liberalization process.

8.

As the Ministry is well aware, the Indian Corporate Counsel Association has been
working extensively for corporate counsels all across India and has been a platform for
meaningful intellectual discussions. It has been recognized by international organizations
as well as the Indian Government as being a bona fide stakeholder, representing an
important part of the legal industry. ICCA has also been recognised globally, and has
been invited to be a part of the Asia Pacific Corporate Counsel Alliance (APCCA) and InHouse Counsel Worldwide (ICW) as the representative of Indian corporate counsels. We
would restrain from speaking more about ICCA as we feel that would divert from the
point we would like to make. Similarly, The RASICH Group, who are the official
consultants to ICCA, have worked as consultants with numerous legal organizations as
well as independent practitioners. They have utilized their understanding of the various
stakeholders to make an independent intellectual assessment of the current environment
and have thereafter assisted in the drafting of our submissions to the MoLJ.

9.

Sir, as you know, the submissions made by us and our involvement in this entire process
has been in accordance with the MoLJ. We take this responsibility and the trust imposed

2

 in us with utmost seriousness and are utilizing all the resources at our disposal to
provide the most meaningful support that we can to this discussion.
10. ICCA and its consultant The RASICH Group represent the corporate counsels of India,
who in turn advise both public and private sector companies - the largest group of
clients that seek advice from lawyers. Accordingly, they are amongst the most important
stakeholders in this discussion, due to their position as drivers of the legal economy and
receivers of the legal services for which this entire discussion is taking place.
11. With the point stated above, as well as the fact that our involvement has been sought by
the Hon’ble Ministry, the most important fact which remains is that, post the
establishment of ICCA's positional and intellectual credibility, they have been actively
participating and have been one of the most active members of the discussion group.
That, in our opinion, should be the criteria for assessing anyone's role in the proceedings
– meaningful contributions.
12. Earlier too, the Government of India has convened such eminent groups when creating
policy for opening up other sectors, and we have great respect for all the stakeholders
that the Government has deemed fit to involve in these discussions, including the BCI,
and are of the opinion that these discussions will be incomplete without the express
involvement of everyone.
13. This letter is an attempt to make our stand clear to all relevant stakeholders as well
as provide a roadmap which may result in a meaningful resolution of the current
logjam.

THE NECESSITY OF GLOBALISING THE INDIAN LEGAL PROFESSION
14. In 2014, world commercial services exports were $ 4.9 trillion which grew at the rate of
5%. World import of commercial services also grew at 5% and reached $ 4.8 trillion
during 2014. Services account for 57 per cent of GDP of India in 2013-14, and is hence of
critical interest in India. In 2013, while India’s share in world merchandise exports was 1.7
per cent, the corresponding share in world commercial services exports was 3.2 per cent.
India’s services exports increased to $151 billion. India’s imports in commercial services
has also grown to US$ 125 billion in 2013 which is 2.8 percent of the total imports of
world trade (US$4340 billion) in commercial services. In 2013 India ranked 6th in services
exporter and 9th in services imports of the world trade in commercial services.
15. Therefore, India clearly has the necessary expertise and capabilities to succeed in selling
its services in rapidly growing international markets. In particular, Indian lawyers, with
their advantage of the English language and the Common Law tradition, should be able
to capitalize on this growing trend of trade in services.
16. We believe that coming out of economic restrictions will greatly increase India’s trade in
services, and exponentially in legal services. At the same time, reasonable restrictions on
the practice of Indian law by foreign firms will protect the interests of Indian Advocates.

3

 REGULATION OF FOREIGN LEGAL PRACTITIONERS
17. The intent of our submissions has always been, and will always be three fold, (1) to
promote the progress of the Indian legal system (2) to protect the interests of Indian
legal practitioners and (3) to be fair and equitable in our treatment of foreign
practitioners, once they are allowed to practice within the jurisdiction of India.
18. While we respect the Advocates Act as well as bodies incorporated as a result of the
Advocates Act, we submit with all due respect that the regulation of foreign practitioners
may not fall under the purview of the Advocates Act or under any body formed under it.
19. In our respectful submission, the regulation of foreign practitioners may not be possible
or practicable through the powers granted by the Advocates Act to the BCI and
therefore may require a separate legislation. The prevalent position has been that the
BCI has been granted the authority to frame rules for the regulation of Indian Advocates,
and Indian Advocates are the only class of persons permitted to practice law in India.
Accordingly, the BCI also has the power to admit foreign lawyers as Advocates allowed
to practice Indian law. However, according to our understanding, Foreign practitioners
should be treated as a separate class of persons and bringing them under the definition
of Advocates shall lead to unwarranted complications, as has also been observed by the
Ministry of External Affairs.
20. Furthermore, the practice of ‘Indian Law’ is categorically with Indian Advocates only and
should continue to remain so. Therefore, our stand is complementary to both the
Advocates Act and the powers of the BCI as granted under the same Act.
21. The clear distinction is: If a foreign lawyer wishes to practice law as an Advocate, he or
she will have to go through the process established by the Act and the BCI. However, the
unequivocal understanding is they will not be allowed to practice as Advocates but as
lawyers barred from practicing certain areas of law, thus not stepping on the areas
reserved for the class of Advocates alone. In our opinion the practice of law as provided
under the Advocates Act can only mean the practice of Indian Law as it would not be
appropriate for it to mean English Law or American Law. However, we leave that for
further discussion. We are also supportive of the views taken by the Society of Indian
Law Firms, to the extent that the vires of any rules formed by the BCI on this subject
matter shall be subject to being set aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
22. Furthermore, in terms of the pending case before the Supreme Court (AK Balaji v GOI),
our submission is that the same is for the purpose of interpreting the law as it stands
currently. It is an established position that the Government would be well within its
powers to amend legislations as per prevailing needs of the Indian economy.
23. In any event, the current process is in line with the judicial pronouncement and the
points made note of therein, the most important argument being the lack of regulation
of foreign lawyers, due to which their practice in India with a free hand needs to be
curtailed. Our suggestions are in sync with this line of thought and provide for
regulations on foreign lawyers, even in the case where they use the fly-in, fly-out

4

 method, where they do not create an establishment or base in the country, but rather
visit as and when assignments require them to.
24. Thus, our submissions till date aim at a reasonable and responsible opening up of the
legal sector in a phased manner, while taking into account the various aspects
surrounding this issue and the interest of all the Indian stakeholders, particularly Indian
advocates.
25. Furthermore, on the question of our suggestions usurping the power to regulate of the
BCI and State Bar Councils, we would like to humbly submit that our bill provides for a
separate regulator, of which the Chairman of the BCI would be an integral part. As
mentioned earlier, the Advocates Act does not cover foreign practitioners unless they
want to practice Indian Law, and the Madras High Court has held that aspects such as
Arbitration are governed by other national and international jurisprudence. Accordingly,
though there may not be an obligation to include the BCI in the body that regulates
foreign lawyer, we feel it is imperative that the State Bar Councils (SBCs) and BCI play a
role in the same.
26. Thus clearly, our submissions are not directed at or against the BCI, SBCs or independent
practitioners that make up the membership of the SBCs. On the contrary, we are
proposing a way forward in which the BCI will be involved in every step and the interests
of the independent litigating Indian lawyer will be fully protected. In fact, we believe that
this will give Indian Advocates an opportunity to greatly increase their work prospects,
imbibe global best practices while at the same time greatly improve their commercial
standing.
27. Accordingly, our submission is that we need to continue the dialogue and the
impediments that are being spoken about are not impediments at all, but rather pointers
around which further discussion must be structured until viable solutions are found.

STAND ON STAKEHOLDERS
28. Furthermore, in order to ensure that there are no misrepresentations made on our
behalf, we would like to briefly clarify our stand vis-a-vis the various relevant
stakeholders.
I.

Citizens of India – Any input that we provide to the committee will always give
paramount importance to the interests of the citizens of India. There should not be a
situation where Indian citizens do not have the option of seeking advice from
lawyers who are free from any link with a foreign entity. At the same time, they must
not be deprived of advice from foreign practitioners in the event that such
practitioners may be more suited to giving such advice.
II. Independent Indian Practitioners – Their right to practice as Indian Advocates
must continue to remain paramount. Litigation services not just in courts, but also all
other judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, including tribunals, must be limited to Indian
Advocates. This would include tribunals such as the ITAT where non-lawyers may
also appear; even there, foreign lawyers should be restricted from practice as that
5

 involves a direct interpretation of Indian law, whether substantive or procedural.
Therefore, it is abundantly clear, that our stand impacts independent practitioners
positively by increasing their sources of revenue, client base, engagement
opportunities, and knowledge, amongst other things.
III. Indian Law Firms – Indian law firms have excellent, capable lawyers and do not
need protectionist treatment, however in the spirit of equality they should be
brought up to an equal level in terms of the regulations governing them. The
benefits enjoyed by foreign lawyers must also be shared with Indian law firms to the
extent possible, while preserving the values according to which the profession works.
The clear aspects that can very easily be altered include, but may not be limited to
the following, whereafter other reforms can happen in due course: (1) Creation of
brand building guidelines, (2) LLP structures to be allowed, (3) Assistance in receiving
finance assistance from banks.
IV. Bar Council of India / State Bar Councils – Should maintain their jurisdiction over
Indian Advocates.
V. Indian Corporate Counsels – Corporate counsels should be able to assist their
corporations in procuring cost effective quality legal advice that is apt for the
different needs of the corporation. As consumers of legal services and qualified
Indian lawyers, their role in this discussion must be appreciated and given due credit.
VI. Students – Should receive additional opportunities for placements, and also receive
quality training through global experts. Since they will be entering a very different
legal industry, they should have a system of CLE to step into as fresh law graduates.
VII. India Inc. – They should not find the lack of a liberalized legal sector to be a
hindrance in their global plans, instead, they should have the opportunity to receive
quality advice from all across the globe, without having to pay a premium and go
through a long drawn-out process.

POINTS FOR DELIBERATION
29. In our submission to the MoLJ, we have identified various ‘Key Concepts’ that are
relevant for this discussion. We have also mentioned the manner in which they had been
covered by the erstwhile BCI rules and thereafter have given our observations on how
the same should be tackled. Our aim is to help streamline the various topics of
discussion in a brief and concise manner and also help prioritize the points of discussion.
30. The Bill that we have drafted also addresses all these points and we are more than happy
to receive inputs on improving the draft, to ensure that the GOI and other stakeholders
have an all-encompassing and effective document to deliberate upon. Accordingly, a
copy of our Bill accompanies this communication.
31. In our opinion, the following issues must be tackled.
I. Reciprocity (As covered in Section 6(A) and 12 of the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
As per the BCI Draft, the BCI has sought to be the sole body responsible for ensuring
reciprocity. The matter of reciprocity comes under various ministries of the Government
of India and cannot be the sole responsibility of the BCI. It includes aspects of Foreign
6

 Policy, Trade and Commerce, Services Promotion, GATS, etc. which require Ministeriallevel decision making.
II. Reciprocity in terms of Foreign Law Firms having offices in multiple jurisdictions
(Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
The BCI Draft does not make note of instances where foreign law firms have multiple
offices across jurisdictions. Compulsory registration of all Foreign Practitioners working
with Foreign Law Firms is essential to ensure that Foreign Law Firms with offices in
multiple jurisdictions can only depute Foreign Practitioners from countries that stand the
test of reciprocity. In the absence of expressly covering this scenario it would be very
difficult to administer and require reciprocity from each and every country in which the
Foreign Law Firm operates.
III. Phased entry (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
This is one of the most critical aspects for ensuring that Indian Legal Practitioners can
prepare for changes that will directly impact their work and livelihood. As per the BCI
Draft, foreign law firms may have 100% ownership over their practices in India and
employ Indian Advocates from the day of their entry itself. However, our approach has
been to allow a phase-wise increase in ownership (0%-49% over 5 years), as has been the
approach of the government for allowing FDI in other sectors.
IV. Restriction on practice of Indian Law (As covered in Section 8 of the withdrawn
BCI draft rules)
It is our categoric stand that the practice and interpretation of Indian law must only be
done by Indian Advocates. Therefore, any advice or representation made on Indian law
must come from the pen of an Advocate enrolled with the Bar. While restrictions have
been imposed by the BCI Draft, however, there does not seem to be any clarity vis-à-vis
practice by Indian Advocates working with foreign firms. Moreover, what constitutes
non-litigious matters need to be defined to remove all doubts as to what is permitted
and what is restricted.
V. Restriction on 100% ownership (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
The current BCI Draft allows for 100% ownership by foreign law firms of their
practice/firm in India. Allowing for 100% ownership, as has been done under section 9 of
the BCI Draft, will not just have a ‘Big 4 Accountancy Firm’ effect on existing Indian
practitioners, but also on the ability of Indian citizens and the Government to procure
quality unbiased advice on international matters. 100% ownership may also have a
negative impact on the Indian Corporate Sector due to an unavoidable increase in legal
fees.
VI. Process for promulgating the changes in the law (As covered in the Preliminary
Note of the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
The regulation of foreign practitioners may not be possible through the powers granted
by the Advocates Act to the BCI and therefore may require a separate legislation. As
mentioned above, foreign practitioners should be treated as a separate class of persons,
as bringing them under the definition of Advocates shall lead to unwarranted
complications. Furthermore, the practice of ‘Indian Law’ categorically remains only with

7

 Indian Advocates. Therefore, regulating foreign lawyers through a separate regulatory
body would be complementary to both the Advocates Act and the powers of the BCI as
granted under the same Act.
VII. Dedicated Regulatory Board (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
As this issue is concerned both with the regulation of foreign nationals as well as dealing
with the governments of different countries on different issues, including reciprocity,
cross-border liability, work permits etc., it should require the involvement of the
Government through identified Ministries and not just the BCI, as is suggested in section
12 of the BCI Draft.
VIII.
Dedicated Secretariat (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
It is critical to have a professionally managed secretariat or facilitation centre to assist the
regulatory body in ensuring compliance with the various regulations as well as to ensure
that all the responsibilities of the regulatory body are undertaken in a timely and efficient
manner.
IX. Regulating Fly-in Fly-out (Deregulated under 3 (1) in the withdrawn BCI draft
rules)
The BCI Draft deregulates fly-in fly-out, which makes it very difficult for Indian citizens to
seek redressal and pinpoint liability. Fly-in Fly-out must also be regulated in some
manner to ensure protection for our citizens from professional negligence of firms
operating through that route.
X. Separate regulation for foreign lawyers and foreign law firms (Unaddressed in
the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
Given the current dynamics of the legal profession and differences in the mode of
practice between independent lawyers and law firms, it is very important to provide for
separate regulations for both categories. The BCI Draft currently only provides for a
separate fee structure.
XI. Registration documentation (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
Some of the documentation required under the BCI Draft is either such that can be
procured for each country separately and some is such which will require the
government to set up a dedicated committee to provide the same. This is also a reason
to create a separate regulatory board which combines experts from the BCI, other
relevant bodies and the Government. This will allow for more efficient functioning and
reduce duplicity of work.
XII. Post-entry disclosure mechanism (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft
rules)
Given the sensitivity of legal services, it is important to consistently regulate foreign
lawyers. This would include periodic disclosures by them (financial and otherwise), aimed
at ensuring that they are keeping within the prescribed boundaries.
XIII.
Registration and renewal fee (Addressed in Sections 4(1), 6(D) of the
withdrawn BCI draft rules)

8

 The BCI Draft elaborates on the fee payable for registration and renewals. The basis of
arriving at this fee has not been made clear. Accordingly, it may be more appropriate for
the fee to be set by the separate regulatory body after duly assessing the various factors
that are essential for this purpose. These would include the costs of setting up and
running the regulatory body, amongst other factors.
XIV.
Professional liability (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
Given the jurisdictional issues that can arise based on a foreign national conducting
business on Indian soil, it is prudent to pre-empt a method for ensuring the execution of
any fines and penalties imposed upon foreign practitioners by requiring them to submit
details of their professional liability insurance.
XV. Separate obligations and code of conduct for Indian Advocates and Foreign
lawyers (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
This is important as the nature of work of foreign lawyers is different than that of Indian
Advocates and thus requires a revised code of conduct and obligations. While, in
principle most of the code will be similar, not amending the same will lead to difficulties
in applying it on foreign lawyers.
XVI.
No adverse restrictions on Indian Advocates (Unclear in the withdrawn
BCI draft rules)
The BCI Draft, by section 9 (ii), may be seeking to impose a restriction on Indian
Advocates working with foreign law firms in India from practicing Indian Law. Such a
restriction would be difficult to uphold in court. If that is not the intention of the BCI
Draft, then it gives Foreign Law Firms unrestricted rights in India, which will inevitably be
highly detrimental to the existing practices of Indian lawyers and firms.
XVII.
Restriction on MDPs (Allowed only for Foreign Law Firms under Section
2(iii) in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
Foreign Multi-Disciplinary Practices (MDPs) should be expressly disallowed till the time
Indian lawyers are not given similar permissions. Even when such a move takes place,
some time should first be granted to Indian lawyers to adjust, before foreign MDPs are
allowed to set up. The result of the BCI Draft will be that E&Y Legal and others global
MDPs will now be able to operate in India, which would negatively affect Indian firms and
lawyers.
XVIII.
Restriction on non-lawyer investments (Allowed only for Foreign Law
Firms under Section 2(iii) in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
The BCI Draft permits companies to come under the definition of a foreign lawyer,
without making an exception for non-lawyer investments. This must be categorically
disallowed till the time Indian lawyers are not given similar permissions.
XIX.
Clarification on LLP structure (Allowed only for Foreign Law Firms under
Section 2(iii) in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
The BCI Draft allows foreign law firms that are LLPs to operate in India. Furthermore, 9 (iv)
of the BCI Draft will mandatorily require an LLP structure as foreign nationals cannot

9

 enter into partnerships under the Partnership Act. Accordingly, Indian lawyers must also
be permitted to form LLPs with other Indian Advocates.
XX. Advertising guidelines (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
This is an aspect that must mandatorily be dealt with, especially given the fact that we
live in a digital age, where the permissions that a foreign firm has with respect to
advertising transcends boundaries. Indian Lawyers will be at a major disadvantage
without similar permissions, though reasonable limitations (such as TV & newspaper ads)
can be imposed.
XXI.
Promotion of CLE (Unaddressed in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
It is imperative to promote the development of Indian lawyers. Knowledge transfer
should have to be one of the key requirements of a successful liberalization process. This
will greatly benefit not just practicing lawyers but also law students who are just entering
the profession.
XXII.
Clarification for Arbitrations (Unclear in the withdrawn BCI draft rules)
Currently, the BCI Draft is unclear as to the extent of representation that a Foreign lawyer
may provide in an International Arbitration situated in India. It should be made clear that
the foreign lawyers may represent their clients in international arbitrations only during
and post the initiation of the arbitration proceedings. This would pre-empt opening up
contract advisory/review/diligence and other similar services which may use the existence
of an international arbitration clause in a contract to offer the services mentioned above.
Clarity is also needed vis-à-vis the interpretation of Indian Law in an International
Arbitration.

FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION
32. We would request that a committee be formed with representative members of all the
various stakeholders and the said committee meet on a weekly basis for a minimum of
3-4 hours on each day to try and prepare a status report of the issues where there is
consensus and places where there are differing opinions.
33. It is important to ensure that these meetings are structured and the agenda is circulated
at the end of each meeting in advance for the next meeting.
34. Our suggestion would be that the meetings can be divided in the following manner:
Meeting Number
Meeting 1

Meeting 2

Issues to be discussed
Reciprocity and its connotations; especially in terms of law firms with
offices in multiple jurisdictions and employing people from multiple
nations.
Need for separate regulatory body; separate regulations for law firms and
independent practitioners; process for promulgating the changes in the
law (including additional amendments to be made, if any, to eg. The
Advocates’ Act).

10

 Meeting 3
Meeting 4

Meeting 5
Meeting 6
Meeting 7
Meeting 8

Phased entry, need to regulate fly-in, fly-out, restriction on 100%
ownership
Defining ‘Indian Law’ and who can advise on it, limits on practice by
foreign lawyers while ensuring there are no adverse restrictions on Indian
Advocates, Clarification for Arbitrations
Working & composition of dedicated Regulatory Board, need for
dedicated Secretariat, Registration documentation, Post-entry Disclosure
mechanism, calculation of registration and renewal fees
Need for separate obligations and code of conduct, for professional
liability insurance and for CLE training targets
Restriction on MDPs, Restriction on non-lawyer investments
Clarification on LLP structure, brand building guidelines, non-availability
of finance

35. We are aware that the BCI has formed various committees for the purpose of suggesting
amendments to the Advocates Act, in furtherance of the directions issued by the Law
Commission of India. We are of the humble opinion that the regulation of foreign
lawyers is an issue that requires deliberation by all the stakeholders that the Hon’ble
Ministry has involved in this process and therefore, it is requested that the Ministry may
kindly advise the BCI and the other stakeholders of a collaborative and meaningful
approach towards these discussions.
36. We hope that this letter clarifies our stand on the issue. We feel that each and every
stakeholder should participate in the policy making process, and we request the Ministry
to lead the way and ensure that the final policy includes the views of as many citizens of
this country as possible.
With warm regards,

Ashok Sharma
Founder President
ICCA

Bhargav Bhuyan
Secretary General
ICCA

Ramit Singh
Founder
The RASICH Group

Enclosed: Foreign Legal Practitioners (Regulation of Practice) Bill, 2016

11

 Foreign Legal Practitioners
(Regulation of Practice) Bill,
2016

Presented by:

Drafted by:

Drafted on 16th May, 2016   Revised on 18th July, 2016

This document is a work in progress document for discussion purposes only.

 INTRODUCTION
The entry of foreign lawyers into the Indian legal sector is set to become a reality, under the aegis and
guidance of the Ministry of Law & Justice and the Ministry of Commerce. With a multitude of opinions
on the manner of their entry, this Bill has been drafted with a view to encourage a healthy discussion
on the strategy to be followed.
Please note that all footnotes in this draft have been added in order to assist the reader in
understanding the reasoning behind the provisions of the Bill and are not meant to be a part of the
official draft.
During the reading of this Bill, what should be kept in mind is that our purpose is not unilateral, but
threefold: 1) to promote the progress of the Indian legal system 2) to protect the interests of Indian
legal practitioners and 3) to be fair and equitable in our treatment of foreign practitioners, once they
are allowed to practice within the jurisdiction of India.
This Bill has been drafted by The RASICH Group under the watchful and experienced guidance of the
Indian Corporate Counsel Association (ICCA), and having taken into account the discussions held with
a number of practicing Advocates, practitioners within law firms and in-house counsels. We have also
held discussions with foreign lawyers on the matter, in order to better understand their considerations
and requirements.
This Bill also keeps in mind that the regulation of foreign practitioners may not be possible through
the powers granted by the Advocates Act to the Bar Council of India (BCI) and therefore shall require
a separate legislation. It is the prevalent position that the BCI has been granted the authority to frame
rules for the regulation of Advocates, and Advocates are the only class of persons permitted to
practice law in India. Accordingly, the BCI also has the power to admit foreign lawyers as Advocates.
However, Foreign practitioners, as defined in this Bill, should be treated as a separate class of persons
as bringing them under the definition of Advocates shall lead to unwarranted complications.
Furthermore, the practice of ‘Indian Law’ categorically remains with Advocates. Therefore, this Bill is
complimentary to both the Advocates Act and the powers of the BCI as granted under the same Act.
In the event the stakeholders are of the opinion that a separate regulatory body needs to be formed
to replace or restructure the BCI, the salient features of the Bill shall remain the same, however certain
chapters may require modifications.
We look forward to receiving your comments and suggestions on the Bill.

1

 Foreign Legal Practitioners (Regulation of Practice) Bill, 2016
PREAMBLE
An Act to regulate the practice of law by foreign-qualified legal practitioners within the territory of
India, in collaboration with Advocates.
Be it enacted by the Parliament in the sixty sixth year of the Republic of India as follows:

CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARY
1. Short title, extent and commencement. – (1) This Act may be called the Foreign Practitioners
Act, 2016.
(2) It extends to the whole of India, except the State of Jammu & Kashmir.
(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the
Official Gazette, appoint.
Provided that the Central Government shall appoint such date within six months from the date
on which the Foreign Practitioners Act, 2016 receives the assent of the President.1
2. Application of the Act. – (1) The provisions of this Act shall apply to qualified legal professionals
registered to practice in jurisdictions of countries with which India has entered into reciprocal
arrangements of trade in legal services or in countries in whose jurisdiction Indian legal
practitioners are permitted to practice law within the parameters set by such foreign jurisdictions.2
(2) The foreign qualified legal professionals of countries in whose jurisdiction Indian practitioners
are permitted to practice law is mentioned in Schedule 1.
(3) The Central Government from time to time may notify the countries with whom they have
entered into reciprocal arrangements, in terms of sub-section (1) of this section and the foreign
qualified legal professionals of only those countries shall be permitted to practice law in India.
(4) The countries notified by the Central Government under sub-section (3) of this section would
become part of Schedule 1 to this Act by virtue of said notification.
3. Definitions – in this Act, unless the context otherwise requires –
(1) the definitions provided in the Advocates Act, 1961 shall be applicable.
(2) ‘Foreign national’ shall mean any person who is not a citizen of India.
(3) ‘Foreign lawyer’ shall mean a lawyer who is only qualified to practice law in a jurisdiction or
jurisdictions other than India, irrespective of their nationality.3

Such a provision will allow the Act to come into force at the earliest.
This shall apply to existing nations where Indian nationals are permitted to practice law and where Indian law
firms have already established offices, such as Singapore, Dubai, Japan, parts of the US, the UK, etc.
3
This provision would also apply to Indian citizens who have qualified to practice in a foreign jurisdiction,
however do not have Indian legal qualification.
1
2

2

 (4) 'Foreign Practitioner’ subject to the provisions of this Act, shall mean a Foreign Qualified
Independent Legal Practitioner or; any foreign lawyer as part of a Foreign Law Firm registered to
practice in India.
(5) ‘Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner’ shall mean a foreign lawyer, who is
registered to practice law in India under the provisions of this Act, and is not a part of a Foreign
Law Firm.
(6) ‘Foreign Law Firm’ shall mean a law firm operating outside the jurisdiction of India, either by
virtue of having common partners, a financial link, or commonality in the name used to carry on
the practice of law in that jurisdiction.
(7) ‘Foreign Law Firm Established in India’ shall mean a limited liability partnership firm registered
under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 20084,5, and thereafter registered to practice law within
the territory of India, in accordance with this Act.6
Provided, the Partners of such a partnership firm shall necessarily be Advocate(s) registered under
the Advocates Act and foreign lawyer(s).
(8) ‘Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board’ shall mean a board constituted under this Act.
(9) ‘Fly-In, Fly-Out’ means when a foreign lawyer performs legal functions within the territory of
India, without establishing a permanent place of business within the territory of India, to the extent
permitted under this Act.

CHAPTER II
FOREIGN PRACTITIONERS’ REGISTRATION BOARD
4. Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board. – There shall be a Foreign Practitioners’ Registration
Board which shall consist of 5 members, namely:
(1) A Retired Judge of the Supreme Court, who shall be appointed by the Ministry for Law &
Justice, who shall be the Chairperson of the Board;
(2) The Chairman of the Bar Council of India or his nominee, provided in case of nominee, he has
been an Advocate practicing within the territory of India for not less than twenty-five years in the
Supreme Court of India and/or one or more High Courts;
(3) An officer of the Indian Legal Services who is or has been a Secretary/ Additional Secretary in
the Ministry of Law & Justice, as designated to the Board by the Central Government;
(4) An officer not below the rank of Additional Secretary, retired/serving in the Ministry of
Commerce, as designated to the Board by the Central Government;
(5) The President of the Supreme Court Bar Association or his nominee, provided that he has
been an Advocate practicing within the territory of India for not less than twenty-five years in the
Supreme Court.

This is critical for ensuring that any partnership formed with a foreign national has to mandatorily submit its
statement of accounts as well as equity structure on an annual basis and thus is a pre-requisite for ensuring
that any such firm remains within the purview of this Act. Accordingly, a clarification must also be issued to
allow Indian law firms to function as LLPs.
5
There shall be no additional restrictions placed upon the name under which the LLP may operate, and it may
utilise the name being used by the Foreign Law Firm in other jurisdictions in which it operates. This permission
is critical for Foreign Law Firms to be interested in working in India through this route, and is also a means for
differentiating between their operations and those of Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Professionals.
6
The relevant provision of the BCI rules shall have to be changed in order to allow Advocates to enter into
partnerships with Foreign Practitioners.
4

3

 5. Tenure of the Board Members.
(1) Tenure of the Chairperson. – The Chairperson appointed under section 4 shall have a tenure of
2 years and shall be eligible for reappointment once.
(2) Tenure of the President of The BCI or his nominee. – The tenure of the President of the BCI
shall coincide with his tenure as the President of the BCI, and in the case of his nominee, for a
period of 2 years and the nominee shall be eligible for reappointment.
(3) Tenure of the President of The SCBA or his nominee. – The tenure of the President of the SCBA
shall coincide with his tenure as the President of the SCBA; and in the case of his nominee, for a
period of 2 years and the nominee shall be eligible for reappointment.
(4) Tenure of Officers designated by the Central Government. – The tenure of the Officers
designated to the Board by the Central Government shall coincide with their tenure in their
respective Ministries; and in the case of retired Officers for a period of 2 years and they shall be
eligible for reappointment once.
6. Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board, to be a body corporate. – The Foreign
Practitioners’ Registration Board shall be a body corporate with its head office at New Delhi and
having perpetual succession and a common seal with the power to acquire, hold and dispose of
property, both movable and immovable and contract and shall by the said name, sue or be sued.
7. Functions and Powers of the Registration Board. – The Foreign Practitioners’ Registration
Board shall have the following powers, which shall be read with the corresponding provisions of
this Act.
(1) To register Foreign Practitioners, who have sought registration by way of submitting the
requisite form provided in Schedule 2 to this Act.
(2) To register Foreign Law Firms, who have sought registration by way of submitting the
requisite form provided in Schedule 2 to this Act.
(3) To regulate Foreign Practitioners and Foreign Law Firms registered under this Act.
(4) To ensure that Foreign Practitioners registered under this Act shall at all times comply with
the standards of ethics as mentioned in Schedule 3 to this Act.
(5) The Board from time to time, may recommend to the Central Government, which shall on
such recommendation amend, alter, or add to Schedule 3 by way of a notification in the
official gazette.
(6) To ensure that no Foreign Lawyer who is not registered by the Board, may practice law
within the territory of India and in violation of the provisions of the Act.
(7) The Board may impose a fine not exceeding INR one crore against any Foreign Lawyer in
violation of the Act, after giving due opportunity to the Foreign Lawyer to make a
representation before the Board.
(8) To ensure that Foreign Practitioners and Foreign Law Firms comply with the disclosure
norms as provided in the registration form given in Schedule 2 to this Act.
(9) To ensure that Foreign Practitioners comply with the extent of practice of law as provided
in this Act.
(10) The Board shall be empowered to revoke the registration of a Foreign Practitioner or
Foreign Law Firm, in the event of contravention of any provision of this Act or the rules
made thereunder, after giving due opportunity to the Foreign Practitioner or Foreign Law
Firm to make a representation before the Board.
(11) To undertake disciplinary action against any Foreign Practitioner registered with the Board
for a violation of any statutory or ethical obligation, after giving due opportunity to the

4

 Foreign Practitioner to make a representation before the Board.
(12) To renew the licence of all registered Foreign Practitioners and Foreign Law Firms annually,
subject to the fulfilment of the various requirements laid out in this Act.
(13) The Board shall from time to time notify the fee payable by Foreign Practitioners and
Foreign Law Firms for registrations and renewals affected under this Act.
(14) The Board may form rules for the formation of a secretariat, which shall assist the Board in
the implementation of the provisions of this Act.

CHAPTER III
EXTENT OF PRACTICE OF LAW BY FOREIGN PRACTITIONERS
8. Practice of Law by a Foreign Practitioner. - Foreign Practitioners shall be permitted to practice
law in the territory of India, through an established and registered place of business within the
territorial limits of India, subject to the limitations mentioned in this Act and shall comply with
the standards of professional ethics as mentioned in Schedule 3 to this Act.
9. Limitation on Practice of Law by Foreign Practitioner. - A foreign national who has not
fulfilled the qualification criteria listed under the Advocates Act, 1961 shall not be permitted to
practice law in any manner before any Court of Judicature, Tribunal or dispute resolution body
created by or under any act passed by the Parliament or State legislature; including, but not
limited to the Supreme Court of India, the High Courts of the various states, trial courts, tribunals
at district, state or national levels, as well as any judicial/quasi-judicial authority which, as a part
of its governing rules and regulations permits only Advocates to appear before it.7

CHAPTER IV
FOREIGN LAW FIRMS AND FOREIGN LAW FIRMS ESTABLISHED IN INDIA8
10. Registration of Foreign Law Firm. - A Foreign Law Firm shall not be permitted to operate in India
unless it has registered itself with the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board9 and has
subsequently renewed its registration annually as provided under this Act10.
11. Restriction on Foreign Practitioners working with a Foreign Law Firm. - Foreign Practitioners
working with a Foreign Law Firm registered in accordance with this Chapter shall not be permitted
to practice law unless they have been registered with the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration

The purpose of inserting such a clause expressly is to remove all doubts vis-à-vis the practice before courts
by foreign nationals.
8
The present regulatory environment does not provide for regulations for Indian Law Firms. Accordingly, we
need to be careful in articulating the rationale behind regulating Foreign Law Firms, without bringing Indian
Law Firms under regulation. Alternatively, a green signal is required to prepare a regulation for Indian Law
Firms as well.
9
This requirement of registration, irrespective of the Foreign Law Firm having a place of business, will facilitate
the regulation of any advice given by them on Indian soil and at the same time will ensure that only firms
which have invested their time and effort into understanding the Indian market are permitted to enter into a
Partnership for the creation of a permanent place of business.
10
This requirement of renewal is important to ensure that Foreign Practitioners are adhering to the restrictions
placed upon them by this Act, especially with respect to ownership rules.
7

5

 Board.11 12
12. Date of Commencement of Foreign Law Firm. - For the purposes of this Act, the date on which
the registration process is complete and the Foreign Law Firm receives a certificate, allowing it to
practice in India, shall be the ‘Date of Commencement’.
13. Conditions on Practice by Foreign Law Firms. - A Foreign Law Firm registered under this Act
shall comply with the following conditions:
(1) No profits from any Foreign Law Firm shall be remitted, either directly or indirectly, to any
person who is not a lawyer or Advocate.13
(2) A Foreign Law Firm, for the first two years from the Date of Commencement:
a) shall not be allowed to set up an office within the territory of India.14
b) may work in conjunction with an Advocate or a firm of Advocates, in so far as they are
not in violation of any provision of this Act or the spirit in which they have been
enacted.15
c) Subject to the provisions of this Act, may by ‘fly-in, fly-out’ after registration under this
Act and
i.
provide legal advice on the law of the jurisdiction in which they have qualified
and hold a license to practice in; or
ii.
represent its clients in international arbitration during and post the initiation of
the arbitration proceedings16; or
iii.
represent its clients in conciliation and mediation; or
iv.
provide legal advice on public and private international law.
(3) A Foreign Law Firm, upon the completion of 2 years from the Date of Commencement:17
a) may operate as a Foreign Law Firm Established in India, where it holds not more than

This is critical for allocating liability as various provisions of law may impact extending liability from the
erring individuals to the firm as a whole.
12
Compulsory registration for all Foreign Practitioners working with Foreign Law Firms is essential to ensure
that Foreign Law Firms with offices in multiple jurisdictions can only depute Foreign Practitioners from
countries that stand the test of reciprocity. In the absence of such a requirement it would very difficult to
administer and require reciprocity from each and every country in which the Foreign Law Firm operates.
13
This is to preclude law firms which run multidisciplinary practices or which have investments by non-lawyers
from operating in India, as the same is not permitted for Indian law firms either. This restriction may be relaxed
in the event Indian law firms are granted permission to seek investments from non-lawyers and/or run as
multidisciplinary practices.
14
At the time of promulgation of this Act, this restriction is critical to allow Indian law firms the time to
position themselves in preparation for the entry of Foreign Practitioners in India. Thereafter, it is important to
regulate the entry based on the experience and expertise a Foreign Practitioner gains in terms of India-related
work, to be in the best position to advise Indian citizens.
15
It is clear that nothing in this Act shall take away the power of the BCI to regulate Advocates irrespective of
their mode of association with Foreign Law Firms as mentioned in this section and in subsequent sections.
16
This is to pre-empt opening up contract advisory/review/diligence and other similar services which may use
the existence of an international arbitration clause in a contract to offer the services mentioned in this
footnote.
17
This is not mandatory and the firms may continue to function as they did in phase I without entering into a
Partnership.
11

6

 26% equity along with an Indian Advocate(s)18 who has been practicing law in India for a
minimum period of 5 years19.
b) shall set up a registered office within the territory of India upon commencement of
operations as a Foreign Law Firms Established in India.
c) shall not restrict Indian Advocates associated with the firm from the practice of law as
permitted under the Advocates Act.20
(4) A Foreign Law Firm Established in India, upon the completion of three years from entering
into a limited liability partnership:
a) may hold not more than 49% equity along with an Indian Advocate(s) or a firm of
Advocates who have been practicing law in India for a minimum period of 5 years.21
b) may provide advisory, transactional and contractual services to both Indian and foreign
clients. Provided, any advice given with respect to Indian law, shall only be given by an
Advocate.

CHAPTER V
FOREIGN QUALIFIED INDEPENDENT LEGAL PRACTITIONER22
14. Registration of Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioners. - Foreign Qualified
Independent Legal Practitioners shall not practice in India without being registered with the
Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board and subsequently renewing their registration annually
as provided under this Act.
15. Date of Commencement for Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioners. - For the
purposes of this Act, the date on which the registration process is complete and the Foreign
Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner receives a certificate, allowing him to practice in India,
shall be the ‘Date of Commencement’.23

This would also include a firm of Advocates. Accordingly, a firm of Indian Advocates should be permitted to
convert into an LLP in the capacity of their firm and not just as individuals as is already provided for under the
LLP Act, 2008.
19
This is because most Foreign Law Firms who work in India already have India-qualified lawyers on their India
Desks. This will preclude them from opening their India offices with their existing employees/Partners. It will
help us further ensure that any advice being given to the citizens of India comes from Advocates who have
practiced law in India.
20
This is important as we are not allowing 100% ownership by Foreign Practitioners and a restriction on Indian
qualified legal practitioners from appearing before the courts may not be a valid restriction.
21
While some Foreign Law Firms have expressed reservations about the adverse effects of not holding a
majority stake in a firm, the fact remains that India is one of the biggest economies in the world, our legal
industry has a very high growth trajectory, and Foreign Law Firms already have high volumes of work coming
to them from the Indian market. Considering these facts, we are confident that Firms which are serious about
setting up in India will find these terms acceptable.
22
It is critical to regulate them separately, as this mode will also allow Indian law firms who are in a position of
strength to work with Foreign Practitioners without having to change their trade name. Other reasons for a
separate chapter can be seen from the notes to this chapter.
23
This requirement of registration, irrespective of the FQILP having a place of business will facilitate the
regulation of any advice given by them on Indian soil and at the same time will ensure that only foreign
practitioners who have invested their time and effort into understanding the Indian market are permitted to
enter into Partnership for the creation of a permanent place of business.
18

7

 16. Conditions on Practice by Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioners. - A Foreign
Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner registered under this Act shall comply with the
following conditions:
(1) No profit earned by a Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioners shall be remitted,
either directly or indirectly, to any person who is not a lawyer or Advocate.
(2) No Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner shall be employed or retained on a fulltime basis with a Foreign Law Firm.24
(3) A Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner, for the first two years from the Date of
Commencement:
a) Shall not be allowed to set up an office within the territory of India.
b) Shall not employ or retain any foreign lawyer or Advocate on a permanent basis, within
the territory of India.
c) Shall not enter into any arrangement with an Indian law firm or Indian lawyers, which
may be construed as a partnership in contravention of this Chapter or Chapter IV.
d) Shall register with the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board and practice under the
name mentioned in his/her Passport.25
e) May be engaged by an Advocate or a firm of Advocates, to the extent that it is not in
contravention of any provision of this Act.26
f) May engage with corporations as their dedicated counsel on matters that they are
permitted to advice on under this Act.27
g) Subject to the provisions of this Act, may by ‘fly-in, fly-out’ after registration under this
Act:
i.
provide legal advice on the law of the jurisdiction in which he has qualified and
holds a license to practice in; or
ii.
represent its clients in international arbitration during and post the initiation of
the arbitration proceedings; or
iii.
represent its clients in conciliation and mediation; or
iv.
provide legal advice on public and private international law;
(4) A Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner, upon the completion of 2 years from the
Date of Commencement:
a) may become a partner in a limited liability partnership, where he shall not hold more
than 26% equity, along with an Indian Advocate(s) or a firm of Advocates who has been
practicing law in India for a minimum period of 5 years.
Provided, the partnership firm mentioned in this subsection shall not operate under the
name or trade name of any Foreign Law Firm.
Explanation: Where more than one Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner who
has completed more than 2 years, but not more than 5 years from their Date of
This is to preclude Foreign Law Firms from sending individuals as their representatives to India, and thus
owning 100% of their practices.
25
This is to further ensure that Foreign Law Firms do not misuse this route to set up their practices.
26
This shall include any exclusive or non-exclusive working arrangements, inclusion in firm profiles, and
announcements of the same. This will also allow Indian Law Firms to compete on an equal footing with
Foreign Law Firms by engaging Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioners.
27
This is important as some companies have employed foreign General Counsels in India and their practice
must also be regulated. Accordingly, Advocates working with corporations on a full time basis should also be
permitted to retain their Bar registration/license upon providing an undertaking that they shall not represent
any client other than the corporation that they are engaged with, and its related entities.
24

8

 Commencement, is a partner in a limited liability partnership firm with an Indian
Advocate(s) or a firm of Advocates, their combined equity share shall not exceed 26%.
b) The limited liability partnership firm as mentioned in the aforementioned sub-section of
this section may set up a registered office within the territory of India.
(5) A Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner, upon completion of three years from
entering into a limited liability partnership:
a) may enter into, or extend an existing partnership, where the Foreign Qualified
Independent Legal Practitioner shall not hold more than 49% equity along with an Indian
Advocate(s) or a firm of Advocates who have been practicing law in India for a minimum
period of 5 years.
Explanation: Where more than one Foreign Qualified Independent Legal Practitioner is a
partner in a limited liability partnership firm with an Indian Advocate(s) or a firm of
Advocates, their combined equity share shall not exceed 49%.
b) may provide advisory, transactional and contractual services to both Indian and foreign
clients. Provided, any advice given with respect to Indian law, shall only be given by an
Advocate.

CHAPTER VI
MISCELLANEOUS
17. Power of the Central Government to make rules: The Central Government may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act, including
but not limited to revising the equity share permitted to be held by Foreign Practitioners under
this Act. Provided that such notification is not issued within 5 years from the promulgation of
this Act.
(1) Without any prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, the Foreign Practitioner’s
Registration Board shall retain the power to make regulations for foreign lawyers
operating in India.
18. Act not in derogation of any other Law: The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and
not in derogation of, any other law for the time being in force.

9

 SCHEDULE 1
LIST OF COUNTRIES WITH WHICH INDIA HAS IMPLICIT OR EXPLICIT RECIPROCITY
To be notified by the Central Government

10

 SCHEDULE 228
REGISTRATION FORM 1: FOR FOREIGN PRACTITIONERS
Part 1: Details of Legal Practitioner
a) Mr./Ms./Other:
b) Full name as stated on passport:
c) Date of birth:
d) Passport number:
e) Nationality:
f)

Bar/ Law Association registration number(s):

g) Jurisdiction(s) qualified to practice in:
h) Jurisdictions(s) actively practising in:
i)

Number of active years practicing:

Part 2: Contact Details:
a) Correspondence address:
b) Telephone number:
c) Fax number:
d) Email:
Part 3: To Be Filled in, in Case of Renewal of Registration Only:
a) Do you hold equity in any registered limited liability partnership?
b) If yes, please provide copies of its annual accounts, as well as the equity structure of such LLP.
c) Mention the Date of Commencement of your practice in India.
d) Have you committed any acts which would be considered to be in contravention of the
provisions of this Act or Schedule 3 of the same?
Part 4: Practice Details:
a) Proposed areas of practice within permitted practice areas:
b) Do you intend to work as a part of a Foreign Law Firm or an Independent Legal Practitioner?
c) If you intend to work with a Foreign Law Firm, please mention the name and registration details
of the same.
d) If you intend to work as Independent Legal Practitioner, do you intend to have an association
with any Indian lawyer/ law firm?
e) If yes, please provide details of the same.
Part 5: Details of Indemnity Insurance Policy:
a) Do you have a subsisting professional indemnity insurance policy that is valid in India?
Details requested for in these forms, as well as their order, may change according to the changes made to
the Act.
28

11

 b) If yes, provide the details below.
c) If yes, provide the sum insured.
(Copy of insurance policy to be provided).
Part 6: Details of Disciplinary Proceedings
a) Please provide details of all disciplinary, criminal or civil proceedings which you have been
subject to in the last 5 years, including but not limited to proceedings that have or may lead to
disciplinary action or any restriction placed upon you in any jurisdiction (if any).
(Copy of relevant document(s) to be provided).

UNDERTAKING FOR FOREIGN PRACTITIONER REGISTRATION

I, ____________________________________________ (name), with passport number ___________________________
hereby state that I am eligible to be registered as a Foreign Practitioner under the provisions of the
Foreign Legal Practitioners’ Act, 2016 and the rules made thereunder.
I undertake the responsibility to act in accordance with all the rules and regulations mentioned
under the Foreign Legal Practitioners’ Act, 2016 as well as any rules prescribed by the Foreign
Practitioners’ Registration Board under the powers granted to them under such Act.
I hereby declare that all information as well as any documents furnished by me as a part of my
registration with the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge.

______________________________
Name:
Date:
Place:

12

 DOCUMENT CHECKLIST FOR FOREIGN PRACTITIONER REGISTRATION
No.

Document

1.

Application Form

2.
3.

Passport
Bar License(s)

4.

Professional Indemnity
Insurance Policy
Disciplinary matters

5.

Description

Check

Section A
Section B: Undertaking
Copy of passport of applicant
Copy of bar licence(s) of jurisdiction(s) qualified
to practice in
Copy of the professional indemnity insurance
referred to in item 2(a) of application form
Additional attachment with details of any
proceedings against the practitioner (as
mentioned under Part 6)

13

 REGISTRATION FORM 2: FOR FOREIGN LAW FIRMS
Part 1: Details of Foreign Law Firm
a) Name of Foreign Law Firm:
b) Organisation Structure: Sole proprietorship/ Partnership/ Other:
c) Correspondence address of firm:
d) Telephone number:
e) Fax number:
f)

Email:

g) Website:
h) Jurisdictions the firm practices in:
i.

With manned offices:

ii.

With liaison/correspondent offices:

Part 2: Details of Indemnity Insurance Policy
a) Does the firm have a subsisting professional indemnity insurance policy that is valid in India?
b) If yes, provide the details below.
c) If yes, provide the sum insured.
(Copy of insurance policy to be provided).
Part 3: Details of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Foreign Law Firm:
a) Please provide details of all disciplinary, criminal or civil proceedings which the Firm or any of its
Partners have been subject to in the last 5 years, including but not limited to proceedings that
have or may lead to disciplinary action or any restriction placed upon you in any jurisdiction (if
any). ______________
(Copy of relevant document(s) to be provided).
Part 4: Information on Foreign Law Firm:
a) Proposed areas of practice within permitted practice areas:
b) Details of all lawyers registered or to be registered to practice in India with the Foreign Law Firm:
No.

Name of
Lawyer

Designation Qualified
Bar/Law Association
Jurisdictions & Registration
Number

Contact
Address &
Phone Number

Date of
Commencement

c) Do you have or intend to have joint operations with any Indian law firm(s)?
d) If yes, disclose their details (Name and Contact Details):

14

 Part 5: Applicant on Behalf of Foreign Law Firm:
(The applicant must be a Foreign Practitioner registered under this Act and shall be responsible for
ensuring that all obligations and duties provided for in the Foreign Legal Practitioners’ Act are
complied with).
a) Mr./Ms/Other:
b) Full name as stated on passport:
c) Date of birth:
d) Passport number:
e) Nationality:
f)

Bar/ Law Association registration number(s):

g) Designation – Sole proprietor/ Managing Partner/ Partner/ Others:
h) Date of Commencement:
i)

Correspondence address:

j)

Telephone number:

k) Fax number:
l)

Email:

Part 6: Details Relevant for Renewal of Registration:
a) Date of Commencement of Foreign Law Firm.
b) Have you entered into a limited liability partnership with an Advocate or firm of Advocates?
c) If yes, please mention the date of registration of such LLP.
d) Has the share of equity attributable to the Foreign Law Firm through its Partners increased or
decreased?
e) Please provide copies of the annual accounts, as well as the equity structure of such LLP.
f)

Has the firm or any of its members committed any acts which would be considered to be in
contravention of the provisions of this Act or Schedule 3 of the same?

Part 7: Particulars of the LLP (if applicable):
a) Name:
b) Address:
c) Telephone number:
d) Fax number:
e) Email:

15

 UNDERTAKING FOR A FOREIGN LAW FIRM REGISTRATION

I, ____________________________________________ (name), with passport number ___________________________
hereby state that the Law Firm ________________________ is eligible to be registered as a Foreign Law
Firm under the provisions of the Foreign Legal Practitioners’ Act, 2016 and the rules made
thereunder.
I, on behalf of the firm, undertake the responsibility to act in accordance with all the rules and
regulations mentioned under the Foreign Legal Practitioners’ Act, 2016 as well as any rules
prescribed by the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board under the powers granted to them under
such Act.
I hereby declare that all information as well as any documents furnished as a part of the registration
with the Foreign Practitioners’ Registration Board is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.

______________________________
Name:
Date:
Place:

16

 DOCUMENT CHECKLIST
No.

Document

1.

Application Form

2.

Passport

3.
4.

Professional Indemnity
Insurance Policy
Disciplinary matters

5.

Foreign Lawyer(s) details

Description

Check

Section A
Section B: Undertaking
Copy of passport of applicant on behalf of the
Foreign Law Firm
Copy of the professional indemnity insurance
referred to in item 2(a) of application form
Additional attachment with details of any
disciplinary proceedings against the firm
Additional attachments providing details of all
foreign lawyers to be practicing in India,
including copies of their Foreign Practitioner
Registration Forms as well as all documents
attached therewith.

17

 SCHEDULE III
RULES REGARDING REGULATION AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
1. All Foreign Practitioners are obligated to maintain the strictest code of ethics in accordance with
common law jurisprudence as well the requirement of the regulatory authority of each nation
that is represented in any Partnership that they may be a part of.
2. For the sake of clarification, the following Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette, the
spirit of which are similar to those given in Chapter 2, Part 6 of the Bar Council of India Rules,
shall be applicable to Foreign Practitioners in terms of their conduct either directly or through
Foreign Law Firms.
(1) A Foreign Practitioner shall, at all times, comport himself in a manner befitting his/her status
as a privileged member of the community, bearing in mind that what may be lawful and
moral for a person who is not a member of the legal profession, or for a member of the legal
profession in his non-professional capacity may still be improper for a legal practitioner.
Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing obligation, a Foreign Practitioner shall
fearlessly uphold the interests of his/her client and in his/her conduct conform to the rules
hereinafter mentioned both in letter and in spirit. The rules hereinafter mentioned contain
canons of conduct and etiquette adopted as general guides; yet the specific mention thereof
shall not be construed as a denial of the existence of others equally imperative though not
specifically mentioned.
(2) Duty to the Court
a) A Foreign Practitioner may not make representations in a court of law either directly
or by way of briefing a competent Advocate.29
(3) Duty to the Client
a) A Foreign Practitioner shall on all occasions ensure that the Client is made aware of
the fact that he is not an Advocate.30
b) A Foreign Practitioner shall not ordinarily withdraw from engagements, once
accepted, without sufficient cause and unless reasonable and sufficient notice is given
to the client. Upon his withdrawal from a matter, he shall refund such part of the fee
as has not been earned.
c) A Foreign Practitioner should not act or advise on a matter or deal if the same is subjudice in a Court of law, in which he has reason to believe that he will be a witness,
and if being engaged in a matter, it becomes apparent that he is a witness on a
material question of fact, he should not continue to act or advise on such matter if he
can retire without jeopardising his client’s interests.
d) A Foreign Practitioner shall at the commencement of his engagement and during the
continuance thereof, make all such full and frank disclosure to his client relating to his
connection with the parties and any interest in or about the controversy as are likely
to affect his client’s judgement in either engaging him or continuing the
engagement.
e) It shall be the duty of a Foreign Practitioner to fearlessly uphold the interests of his
client by all fair and honourable means without regard to any unpleasant
This is to preclude not just arguing in court but also attending court by way of a briefing counsel.
to Indian citizens from any misrepresentation as to the extent of advice that can be provided
to them.
29

30 This is to ensure protection

18

 consequences to himself or any other.
f) A Foreign Practitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, commit a breach of the
obligations imposed by Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act.
g) A Foreign Practitioner shall not, at any time, be a party to fomenting of litigation.
h) A Foreign Practitioner shall not act on the instructions of any person other than his
client or his authorised agent.
i) A Foreign Practitioner shall not stipulate for a fee contingent on the results of a
matter or deal, or agree to share the proceeds thereof.
j) A Foreign Practitioner shall not buy or traffic in or stipulate for or agree to receive
any share or interest in any actionable claim. Nothing in this rule shall apply to stock,
shares and debentures of government securities, or to any instruments which are, for
the time being, by law or custom, negotiable or to any mercantile document of title
to goods.
k) A Foreign Practitioner shall not adjust fee payable to him by his client against his own
personal liability to the client, which liability does not arise in the course of his
retainer as a legal practitioner.
l) A Foreign Practitioner shall not do anything whereby he abuses or takes advantage of
the confidence reposed in him by his client
m) A Foreign Practitioner should keep accounts of the client’s money entrusted to him,
and the accounts should show the amounts received from the client or on his behalf,
the expenses incurred for him and the debits made on account of fees with
respective dates and all other necessary particulars. Where any amount is received or
given to him on behalf of his client, the fact of such receipt must be intimated to the
client, as early as possible.
n) After the termination of the matter/deal, the Foreign Practitioner shall be at liberty to
appropriate towards the settled fee due to him, any sum remaining unexpended out
of the amount paid or sent to him for expenses or any amount that has come into his
hands in that matter.
o) A copy of the client’s account shall be furnished to him on demand provided the
necessary copying charge is paid.
p) A Foreign Practitioner shall not enter into arrangements whereby funds in his hands
are converted into loans.
q) A Foreign Practitioner shall not lend money to his client for the purpose of any action
or legal proceedings in which he is engaged by such client.
r) A Foreign Practitioner who has at any time, advised in connection with a matter, or
acted for a party in any capacity, shall not act for or advise the opposite party in the
same or related matter.
(4) Duty to Opponent
a) A Foreign Practitioner shall not in any way communicate or negotiate upon the
subject matter of controversy with any party represented by an Advocate except
through that Advocate.
b) A Foreign Practitioner shall do his best to carry out all legitimate promises made to
the opposite party even though not reduced to writing or enforceable under the rules
of the Court.
(5) Duty to Colleagues
a) A Foreign Practitioner shall not solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly,

19

 except in the manner enumerated hereunder:31
i. By way of a website, which may contain information about the practice, its
members, contact details, latest information regarding recent representations,
recent developments and other knowledge centric material, provided that
access to such information is preceded with a disclaimer that acknowledges
that such information is not for the purpose of soliciting work and that each
visitor may use his/her prudence for engaging with a lawyer for his/her needs.
Accordingly, none of the permitted content should make soliciting statements
enticing a visitor to engage with the said legal practitioner either directly or
through his/her law firm.
ii. By way of authoring articles, contributing to news stories in the print,
electronic and digital media in so far as the same is in furtherance of his/her
expertise in law or otherwise, which may not directly come under the purview
of solicitation.
iii. By way of preparing and sharing with people known to the Foreign
Practitioner, statements of experience and other print collateral in accordance
with the permitted content under sub-clause (i) above.
iv. By way of lending his/her name to the organization of any event where the
legal profession or its offshoots are being discussed for monetary or other
consideration.
v. By way of providing the requisite information to electronic and print media
for allowing them to either list him/her as an expert, or to be able to review
his/her expertize as long as the same is only as a statement of fact and not
solicitation and should therefore not in any way or form express the fee that
he may or does charge for his services.
vi. By way of contributing fact- or knowledge-based inputs and advertisements
to digital and print media in so far as the same is informational in nature and
not as a form of direct or provocative solicitation.
vii. By way of displaying his sign-board or name-plate or stationery, with relevant
factual information, without the use of any superlatives that may denote an
untrue or exaggerated connotation to any position or qualification held by
him.
b) A Foreign Practitioner shall not permit his professional services or his name to be
used in aid of, or to make possible, the unauthorised practice of law by any law
agency.
(6) Duty of imparting training32
a) It is improper for a Foreign Practitioner to demand or accept fees or any premium
from any person as a consideration for imparting training in law.
b) An FQILP shall have the duty to impart training in law through holding workshops,
seminars and the like, for a minimum of 12 hours per annum.
c) Similarly, a Foreign Law Firm shall have the duty to impart training in law through
holding workshops, seminars and the like, for a cumulative minimum of 60 hours per
annum.
A similarly worded provision must also be allowed in the Bar Council of India Rules to permit an Advocate to
showcase his expertise without soliciting clients.
32
This will promote and assist the raising the standards of legal practice in India and should be bolstered by
provisions for continuing legal education for Indian practitioners.
31

20

 (7) Restriction on other Employments
a) A Foreign Practitioner shall not personally engage in any business or be a sleeping
partner in a firm doing business.
b) A Foreign Practitioner may be the Director or Chairman of the Board of Directors of
a Company with or without any ordinary sitting fee, provided none of his duties are
of an executive character. A Foreign Practitioner shall not be a Managing Director or
Secretary of any Company.
c) A Foreign Practitioner shall not be a full-time salaried employee of any person,
government, firm, corporation or concern, except for the purpose of working in a
legal role in the same within the limitations provided in this Act.
d) A Foreign Practitioner may edit legal text books at a salary, do press-vetting for
newspapers, coach pupils for legal examinations, set and examine question papers;
and subject to the rules of advertising and full-time employment, engage in
broadcasting, journalism, lecturing and teaching subjects, both legal and non-legal.
e) Nothing in these rules shall prevent a Foreign Practitioner from accepting, after
obtaining the consent of the Registration Board, part-time employment provided that
in the opinion of the Board, the nature of the employment does not conflict with his
professional work and is not inconsistent with the dignity of the profession. This rule
shall be subject to such directives, if any, as may be issued by the Bar Council of India
from time to time.
(8) Duty towards the Board
a) A Foreign Practitioner who holds equity in a limited liability partnership, registered
under the LLP Act, 2008 shall ensure the submission of copies of the annual accounts,
as well as the equity structure of such LLP to the Board for the maintenance of its
records.33
b) A Foreign Practitioner shall submit all such information as is required of him under
Schedule 2 and any other additional information that may be required by the
Registration Board for the purpose of renewal of his registration and that of the
Foreign Law Firm.
c) A Foreign Practitioner shall undertake Professional Indemnity Insurance, as stated in
Schedule 2, in order to fulfil criteria of registering with the Board, and shall submit
the details of such insurance to the Board for the maintenance of its records.
d) A Foreign Practitioner shall make the Board aware of wrongdoings that he has
knowingly or unknowingly committed or has observed to have been committed by
any other legal practitioner, in contravention of the standards and codes of ethics
applicable to them.
e) Foreign Practitioners shall convey to the Board details of the mandatory trainings
they are to impart annually.

This is to ensure that all Foreign Practitioners/Foreign Law Firms fulfil their fiscal responsibilities as
mandated under this Act and other laws as applicable within the jurisdiction of India.
33

21

 

INDIAN CORPORATE
COUNSEL ASSOCIATION

 

NOTES:

 

 

Foreign Legal Practitioners (Regulation of Practice) Bill, 2016

 

 

Presented by: Drafted by:

I A ll? AS I 
FUUD
INDIAN CORPORATE

COUNSEL ASSOCIATION