Bar Council of India

Vs. A.K. Balaji and

Ors
 The issue involved in this batch of matters is whether
foreign law firms/lawyers are permitted to practice in
India. Reference needs to be made to two leading matters.
Civil Appeal Nos.7875-79 of 2015 have been filed by the
Bar Council of India against the Judgment of Madras
High Court dated 21st February, 2012 in A.K. Balaji
versus The Government of India1.
 Civil Appeal No.8028 of 2015 has been filed by Global
Indian Lawyers against the judgment of Bombay High
Court dated 16th December, 2009 in Lawyers Collective
versus Bar Council of India.
 MHC JUDGEMENT
 (i) Foreign law firms or foreign lawyers cannot practice the
profession of law in India either on the litigation or non-
litigation side, unless they fulfil the requirement of the
Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules.
 (ii) However, there is no bar either in the Act or the Rules for
the foreign law firms or foreign lawyers to visit India for a
temporary period on a "fly in and fly out" basis, for the
purpose of giving legal advise to their clients in India
regarding foreign law or their own system of law and on
diverse international legal issues.
 (iii) Moreover, having regard to the aim and object of the
International Commercial Arbitration introduced in the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996, foreign lawyers cannot be debarred to
come to India and conduct arbitration proceedings in respect of
disputes arising out of a contract relating to international
commercial arbitration.

 (iv) The B.P.O. Companies providing wide range of customised and

integrated services and functions to its customers like word-
processing, secretarial support, transcription services, proof-reading
services, travel desk support services, etc. do not come within the
purview of the Advocates Act, 1961 or the Bar Council of India
Rules. However, in the event of any complaint made against these
B.P.O. Companies violating the provisions of the Act, the Bar
Council of India may take appropriate action against such erring
companies
 BOMBAY HC
 the RBI was not justified in granting permission to the
foreign law firms to open liaison offices in India under
Section 29 of the 1973 Act.
 We further hold that the expressions ' to practise the
profession of law' in Section 29 of the 1961 Act is wide
enough to cover the persons practising in litigious matters
as well as persons practising in non litigious matters and,
therefore, to practise in non litigious matters in India, the
respondent Nos. 12 to 14 were bound to follow the
provisions contained in the 1961 Act. The petition is
disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs
 PLEADINGS
 To practice law in India, a person has to be Indian citizen and
should possess degree in law from a recognized University in
India.
 Nationals of other countries could be admitted as advocates in
India only if citizens of India are permitted to practice in such
other countries.
 Foreign degree of law from a University outside India
requires recognition by the Bar Council of India. The Indian
advocates are not allowed to practice in U.K., U.S.A.,
Australia and other foreign nations except on fulfilling
onerous restrictions like qualifying tests, 4 experience, work
permit.
 Foreign lawyers cannot be allowed to practice in India
without reciprocity.
 SECTION 29
 Advocates to be the only recognised class of
personsentitled to practise law.—Subject to the
provisions of this Act and any rules made
thereunder, there shall, as from the appointed day,
be only one class of persons entitled to practise the
profession of law, namely, advocates.
 However, under the guise of LPOs (Legal Process
Outsourcing), conducting seminars and arbitrations,
foreign lawyers are visiting India on Visitor Visa and
practicing illegally. They also violate tax and
immigration laws.
 They have also opened their offices in India for
practice in the fields of mergers, take-overs,
acquisitions, amalgamations, etc. Disciplinary
jurisdiction of the Bar Council extends only to
advocates enrolled under the Act.
 GOVERNMENT OF
INDIA
 Bar Council of India, which has been established under
the Advocates Act, 1961, regulates the advocates who are
on the "Rolls", but law firms as such are not required to
register themselves before any statutory authority, nor do
they require any permission to engage in nonlitigation
practice.
 Exploiting this loophole, many accountancy and
management firms are employing law graduates who are
rendering legal services, which is contrary to the
provisions of the Advocates Act. It is stated that the
Government of India along with the Bar Council of India
is considering this issue and is trying to formulate a
regulatory framework in this regard.
 foreign law firms are not allowed to take part in negotiations,
settling up documents and arbitrations in India, it will have a
counterproductive effect on the aim of the government to make
India a hub of International Arbitration.
 In this connection, it is stated that many arbitrations with
Indian Judges and Lawyers as Arbitrators are held outside
India, where both foreign and Indian Law Firms advise their
clients.
 If foreign law firms are denied entry to deal 6 with arbitrations
in India, then India will lose many of the arbitrations to
Singapore, Paris and London. It will be contrary to the declared
policy of the government and against the national interest.
 PLEADING BY
FOREIGN FIRMS
 There is no bar to a company carrying on
consultancy/support services in the field of protection
and management of intellectual, business and industrial
proprietary rights, carrying out market service and
market research, publication of reports, journals etc.
 A person not appearing before Courts or Tribunals and
not giving legal advice cannot be said to be practice of
law.

 The ninth respondent stated that it was a part of group of

companies and not a law firm and was duly registered
under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The tenth
respondent, another foreign law firm, submitted that
there is no violation of law in giving advice on foreign
law.
 In England, foreign lawyers are free to advice on their
own system of law without nationality requirement or
qualification of England.
 The eleventh respondent is an American law firm and
submitted that it advises clients on international legal
issues from different countries.
 Indian clients are given advice through Indian lawyers
and law firms which are enrolled with the Bar Council.
 There is no discrimination in U.S. against Indian citizens
practicing law. Indian lawyers travel to US on temporary
basis for consultation on Indian law issues.
 FINDINGS
 The High Court upheld the plea of the foreign law
firms to the effect that there was no bar to such firms
taking part in negotiations, settling of documents
and conducting arbitrations in India.
 There was no bar to carrying on
consultancy/support services in the field of
protection and management of intellectual, business
and industrial proprietary rights, carrying out
market survey and research, publication of reports,
journals etc. without rendering any legal advice
 The High Court upheld the plea of the foreign law
firms to the effect that there was no bar to such firms
taking part in negotiations, settling of documents
and conducting arbitrations in India.
 There was no bar to carrying on
consultancy/support services in the field of
protection and management of intellectual, business
and industrial proprietary rights, carrying out
market survey and research, publication of reports,
journals etc. without rendering any legal advice
 SECTION 29
 Advocates to be the only recognised class of persons
entitled to practice law. - Subject to the provisions of
this Act and any rules made there under, there shall,
as from the appointed day, be only one class of
persons entitled to practise the profession of law,
namely, advocates. (not brought into force so far)
 SECTION 30
 Right of advocates to practise. -Subject to provisions
of this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in
the State roll shall be entitled as of right to practise
throughout the territories to which this Act extends,
 (i) in all Courts including the Supreme Court;
 (ii) before any tribunal or person legally authorized
to take evidence;
 (iii) before any other authority or person before
whom such advocate by or under any law for the
time being in force entitled to practise.
 ' to practise the profession of law' in Section 29 of the
1961 Act is wide enough to cover the persons
practising in litigious matters as well as persons
practising in non litigious matters and, therefore, to
practise in non litigious matters in India
 direction of the Madras High Court is modified in
Para 63(ii) that there was no bar for the foreign law
firms or foreign lawyers to visit India for a
temporary period on a "fly in and fly out" basis for
the purpose of giving legal advice to their clients in
India regarding foreign law or their own system of
law and on diverse international legal issues.
 We hold that the expression "fly in and fly out" will
only cover a casual visit not amounting to "practice
 B.P.O. Companies providing wide range of
customized and integrated services and functions to
its customers like word processing, secretarial
support, transcription services, proof reading
services, travel desk support services, etc. do not
come within the purview of the Advocates Act, 1961
or the Bar Council of India Rules.