Case Law Details

Case Name : Bar Council Of India Vs. A.K. Balaji And Ors. (Supreme Court)
Appeal Number : Civil Appeal No. 7875-7879 Of 2015 , Civil Appeal No.7170 Of 2015 And Civil Appeal No. 8028 Of 2015
Date of Judgement/Order : 13/03/2018
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : Supreme Court of India (987)

Bar Council Of India Vs. A.K. Balaji And Ors. (Supreme Court)

We have considered the rival submissions. Questions for consideration mainly arise out of directions in para 63 of the Madras High Court judgment which have already been quoted in the beginning of this judgment. viz. :

(i) Whether the expression ‘practise the profession of law’ includes only litigation practice or non-litigation practice also;

(ii) Whether such practice by foreign law firms or foreign lawyers is permissible without fulfilling the requirements of Advocates Act and the Bar Council of India Rules;

(iii) If not, whether there is a bar for the said law firms or lawyers to visit India on ‘fly in and fly out’ basis for giving legal advice regarding foreign law on diverse international legal issues;

(iv) Whether there is no bar to foreign law firms and lawyers from conducting arbitration proceedings and disputes arising out of contracts relating to international commercial arbitration;

(v) Whether BPO companies providing integrated services are not covered by the Advocates Act or the Bar Council of India rules.

RE : (i)

38. In Pravin C. Shah versus K.A. Mohd. Alt”, it was observed that right to practice is genus of which right to appear and conduct cases is specie. It was observed:

…………….. The right of the advocate to practise envelopes a lot of acts to be performed by him in discharge of his professional duties. Apart form appearing in the courts he can be consulted by his clients, he can give his legal opinion whenever sought for, he can draft instruments, pleadings, affidavits or any other documents, he can participate in any conference involving legal discussions etc. „

In Ex, Capt, Harish Uppal versus Union of India“, same view was reiterated.

Ethics of the legal profession apply not only when an advocate appears before the Court. The same also apply to regulate practice outside the Court. Adhering to such Ethics is integral to the administration of justice. The professional standards laid down from time to time are required to be followed. Thus, we uphold the view that practice of law includes litigation as well as non litigation.

RE : (ii)

We have already held that practicing of law includes not only appearance in courts but also giving of opinion, drafting of instruments, participation in conferences involving legal discussion. These are parts of non-litigation practice which is part of practice of law. Scheme in Chapter-IV of the Advocates Act makes it clear that advocates enrolled with the Bar Council alone are entitled to practice law, except as otherwise provided in any other law. All others can appear only with the permission of the court, authority or person before whom the proceedings are pending. Regulatory mechanism for conduct of advocates applies to non-litigation work also. The prohibition applicable to any person in India, other than advocate enrolled under the Advocates Act, certainly applies to any foreigner also.

RE : (iii)

Visit of any foreign lawyer on fly in and fly out basis may amount to practice of law if it is on regular basis. A casual visit for giving advice may not be covered by the expression ‘practice’. Whether a particular visit is casual or frequent so as to amount to practice is a question of fact to be determined from situation to situation. Bar Council of India or Union of India are at liberty to make appropriate rules in this regard. We may, however, make it clear that the contention that the Advocates Act applies only if a person is practicing Indian law cannot be accepted. Conversely, plea that a foreign lawyer is entitled to practice foreign law in India without subjecting himself to the regulatory mechanism of the Bar Council of India Rules can also be not accepted. We do not find any merit in the contention that the Advocates Act does not deal with companies or firms and only individuals. If prohibition applies to an individual, it equally applies to group of individuals or juridical persons.

RE: (iv)

It is not possible to hold that there is absolutely no bar to a foreign lawyer for conducting arbitrations in India. If the matter is governed by particular rules of an institution or if the matter otherwise falls under Section 32 or 33, there is no bar to conduct such proceedings in prescribed manner. If the matter is governed by an international commercial arbitration agreement, conduct of proceedings may fall under Section 32 or 33 read with the provisions of the Arbitration Act. Even in such cases, Code of Conduct, if any, applicable to the legal profession in India has to be followed. It is for the Bar Council of India or Central Government to make a specific provision in this regard, if considered appropriate.

RE: (v)

The BPO companies providing range of customized and integrated services and functions to its customers may not violate the provisions of the Advocates Act, only if the activities in pith and substance do not amount to practice of law. The manner in which they are styled may not be conclusive. As already explained, if their services do not directly or indirectly amount to practice of law, the Advocates Act may not apply. This is a matter which may have to be dealt with on case to case basis having regard to a fact situation.

In view of above, we uphold the view of the Bombay High Court and Madras High Court in para 63 (i) of the judgment to the effect that foreign law firms/companies or foreign lawyers cannot practice profession of law in India either in the litigation or in non-litigation side. We, however, modify the direction of the Madras High Court 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”. In case of a dispute whether a foreign lawyer was limiting himself to “fly in and fly out” on casual 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 or whether in substance he was doing practice which is prohibited can be determined by the Bar Council of India. However, the Bar Council of India or Union of India will be at liberty to make appropriate Rules in this regard including extending Code of Ethics being applicable even to such cases.

We also modify the direction in Para 63 (iii) that foreign lawyers cannot be debarred from coming to India to conduct arbitration proceedings in respect of disputes arising out of a contract relating to international commercial arbitration. We hold that there is no absolute right of the foreign lawyer to conduct arbitration proceedings in respect of disputes arising out of a contract relating to international commercial arbitration. If the Rules of Institutional Arbitration apply or the matter is covered by the provisions of the Arbitration Act, foreign lawyers may not be debarred from conducting arbitration proceedings arising out of international commercial arbitration in view of Sections 32 and 33 of the Advocates Act. However, they will be governed by code of conduct applicable to the legal profession in India. Bar Council of India or the Union of India are at liberty to frame rules in this regard.

We also modify the direction of the Madras High Court in Para 63(iv) that the 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. We hold that mere label of such services cannot be treated as conclusive. If in pith and substance the services amount to practice of law, the provisions of the Advocates Act will apply and foreign law firms or foreign lawyers will not be allowed to do so.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Corporate Law

Posted Under

Category : Corporate Law (3930)
Type : Judiciary (11709)

2 responses to “Foreign law firms/ lawyers cannot practice in India; SC answer 5 Questions”

  1. Tax.Adv.BSKRAO says:

    Other than Advocate cannot definitely make Suo Moto appearance before revenue authority by the strength of power of attorney, but can definitely appear before revenue authority against specific summons issued to them. Hitherto Non-Advocates were appearing on own motion, this is not definitely permitted in future.

    All others can appear only with the permission of the court, authority or person

  2. Adv.BSKRAO says:

    BCI vs A.K.Balaji case reached finality today the 13.03.2018 in Apex Court of India. Now it’s well settled that in order to plead & act in the course of practice of law, both in litigious & non litigious matter, enrollment in Bar Council must
    Section 29 of the 1961 Act specifcally provides that from the appointed day, there shall be only one class of
    persons entitled to practice the profession of
    law, namely Advocates. It is apparent that
    prior to the 1961 Act there were different
    classes of persons entitled to practise the
    profession of law and from the appointed day
    all these class of persons practising the profession of law, would form one class, namely, advocates. Thus, Section 29 of the 1961 Act clearly provides that from the
    appointed day only advocates are entitled to
    practise the profession of law whether before
    any Court/authority/person

    Thus, we uphold the view that practice of law includes litigation as well as non litigation. We have already held that practicing of law includes not only appearance in courts but also giving of opinion, drafting of instruments, participation in conferences involving legal discussion

    These are parts of non-litigation practice which is part of practice of law. Scheme in Chapter-IV of the Advocates Act makes it clear that advocates enrolled with the Bar Council alone are entitled to practice law, except as otherwise provided in any other law. All others can appear only with the permission of the court, authority or
    person before whom the proceedings are pending. Non-Advocates can only appear before revenue authority on behalf of clients against specific summons issued. I.e., Suo Moto appearance of Non-Advocates before revenue authority by the strength of Power of Attorney not allowed

    Regulatory mechanism for conduct of advocates applies to non-litigation work also. Other professionals have no regulatory mechanism to practice law in India & hence they can not practice law any more in India

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *