Will foreign law firms open first in SEZs (and GIFT)? Not yet, but gov’t paves a way with rule change

Will the first foreign law firm to set up in India be coming to Gujarat?
Will the first foreign law firm to set up in India be coming to Gujarat?

As first reported by Live Law this week, the ministry of commerce and industry, which has been spearheading the government’s efforts to liberalise the legal market, alongside the law ministry, has revoked a ban on the practice of law from special economic zones (SEZs), by issuing a notification in the Gazette of India amending the Special Economic Rules governing Special Economic Zones on 3 January 2017.

LiveLaw called it a “baby step towards opening India’s legal and accounting sector to foreign players”, and indeed, the amendment is a small one, deleting just five words - “excluding legal services and accounting” - from Rule 76 of The Special Economic Zones Rules, 2006, which specifies some of the businesses that are allowed to set up in such zones.

In effect, this would allow domestic law firms and possibly legal process outsourcers (LPOs) to set up shop inside SEZs, and could be evidence of how the government will eventually intend to open up the legal market.

And interestingly, one foreign lawyer with a focus on India whom we spoke to last month, had predicted: “I suspect that GIFT (Gujarat International Financial Tec-City) will be the first FTZ (free trade zone) for foreign law firms to set up in, followed by Mumbai.”

That said, the change by itself neither lifts the 1961 Advocates Act restriction that law can only be practised by Indian nationals and firms, nor the Bombay and Madras high court judgments restating that foreign law firms are not allowed to practice here.

However, the Economic Times reported in a more upbeat fashion today:

Foreign law and accountancy firms now have a chance to operate in India on their own. On 3 January, the ministry of commerce and industry amended a rule allowing such foreign firms to set up offices and advise clients from SEZs.

The paper also quoted the head of IFSC at the GIFT, Dipesh Shah, saying: “Until now, no foreign law firm could operate in India and not even Indian firms were allowed to provide their services in any of the SEZs.

“The new amendment allows not only Indian law or accountancy firms to set up a base in GIFT, but even multinationals can directly advise upon international disputes or arbitration by setting up a base there.”

Of course, if a foreign law firm were to open up in an SEZ and advise on foreign law or arbitrations, they would still brave running a risky business since the SEZ rule amendment does not explicitly mention foreign law firms at all.

However, they may take solace and safety in the idea that despite continuing Bar Council of India (BCI) (and softer Society of Indian Law Firms (Silf)) opposition to their entry, at least the government (and presumably Narendra Modi) may have their back in an SEZ such as Gujarat’s.

The amended rule

Rule 76 of The Special Economic Zones Rules, 2006 states (emphasis added):

The “services” for the purposes of 1[clause] (z) of section 2 shall be the following, namely:— Trading, warehousing, research and development services, computer software services, including information enabled services such as back-office operations, call centers, content development or animation, data processing, engineering and design, graphic information system services, human resources services, insurance claim processing, legal data bases, medical transcription, payroll, remote maintenance, revenue accounting, support centers and web-site services, off-shore banking services, professional services (excluding legal services and accounting) rental/leasing services without operators, other business services, courier services, audio-visual services, construction and related services, distribution services (excluding retail services), educational services, environmental services, financial services, hospital services, other human health services, tourism and travel related services, recreational, cultural and sporting services, entertainment services, transport services, services auxiliary to all modes of transport, pipelines transport.

Presumably, the segment to be amended (and highlighted above) is missing a comma, and should have read “professional services (excluding legal services and accounting), rental/leasing services without operators”.

Comments

Guest 14 Jan 2017, 14:27
+3 -0
I request Legally India to interview respected pro-liberalisation voices from the bar, bench and the academic world, who are independent and have credibility compared to Manan Mishra and Lalit Bhasin. Eminent figures like KKV, Salve, Fali Nariman, Soli Sorabjee, Justice Ruma Pal etc must be interviewed.

In academia, Madhav Menon and Ranbir Singh have supported it. Please interview more people like them, such as Faizan Mustafa, NL Mitra etc.
Spaced 14 Jan 2017, 16:06
+0 -0
How does this work? On one hand you have the Bar Council Act and the HC judgements prohibiting foreign lawyers and law firms and on the other hand, the SEZ rules permitting them.
TJ 16 Jan 2017, 00:11
+1 -0
This does not change anything in so far as practice rules are concerned. All it does is that now a lawyer / accountant can open office within an SEZ and get export-related benefits under SEZ law upon billing from foreign clients in foreign exchange.
eyeopener 15 Jan 2017, 05:43
+0 -0
specific prevails over general. a sigh of relief for companies deprived of availing world class legal service. oldies like amarchands, luthras,khaitans, mody's, sagars and of course their age old (but loyal) assistant bhasin must now come to reality.
aa 16 Jan 2017, 11:59
+0 -0
yes, but a "rule" cannot prevail over an "act"!!
Guest 15 Jan 2017, 08:48
+0 -0
The media should seek a comment from foreign law firms on whether will use this provision to open or whether they need more clarity. And ones to be ver watchful of Mishra, Bhasin etc indulging in blackmail tactics by going to court and challenging the notification.
Live Law 15 Jan 2017, 14:58
+0 -0
Sir, today Live Law has published a story about a very important BCI notification that affects the autonomy of law schools. It asks for minimum number of teachers for various subjects (which will affect law schools with faculty crunch) minimum requirement of experience of VC (which will affect young VCs) and requirement of PhD for associate professor and above (which will affect many appointments, as someone like Shamnad Basheer was given even professor rank without PhD).

It will be good if your team can analyse it.

http://www.livelaw.in/bci-invites-comments-draft-rules-legal-education-first-amendment-rules-2016/
Guest 16 Jan 2017, 06:29
+2 -0
Kian - the SEZ Act has a non-obstante clause:

"51. (1) The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument
having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act."

If legal services are allowed to be provided by a unit in an SEZ it should be possible for a foreign law firm to set up shop. Even on a conservative reading, as long as they do not provide advice on Indian law issues, there are not practicing Indian law and do not need to be (and should not be) regulated by the BCI.
kianganz 16 Jan 2017, 06:57
+0 -0
Thanks, that's super interesting, was wondering about exactly that and had asked a few lawyers but they weren't sure.

If that's indeed the case, then the government might very well be able to entice some foreign firms to set up limited practice in an SEZ... Clever stuff...
Name and Alias 16 Jan 2017, 07:22
+1 -1
The term 'law firm' is undefined under the SEZ Act. To qualify as a law firm or a lawyer, the requirements of the Bar Council Act, Advocates Act et. al. would still apply. Therefore, to say that an entity set up by foreign lawyers is a law firm is something open to challenge. Foreign lawyers are not lawyers in India unless recognized as such under Indian law.
Guest 16 Jan 2017, 12:53
+1 -1
is that you manan?
Guest1 18 Jan 2017, 07:47
+0 -0
There is no application of Section 51 for the simple reason that there is no inconsistency. The amendment merely allows lawyers/ law firms to set up shop within the SEZ premises. It does not allow foreign law firms to practice from India, either on Indian law or foreign law. Right to practice is through the Advocates Act, 1961 which does not abrogate the SEZ Act.
Mrinal32 19 Jan 2017, 05:35
+0 -0
Good Lawyer.... so Welcome foreign law firms in India.... How can i set up an office in an SEZ when i am just a budding lawyer.
Guest 16 Jan 2017, 13:43
+1 -0
The education notification by BCI is troubling news for NLUs. It may make sense for poor quality law schools but not NLUs, which seek to offer innovative and modern courses.
Resistance 16 Jan 2017, 14:27
+1 -0
Kian it looks like Manan Mishra's latest plan is to derecognise faculty who study at NLUs and do LLMs abroad. Please see the newest notification. What a genius this guy is!
Guest 17 Jan 2017, 08:18
+1 -0
Kian there is much confusion about the new BCI directive on law school faculty. Please ask some experts and clarify it.
Full Service Boutique 17 Jan 2017, 09:53
+1 -0
Foreign law firms in SEZs would only create more outsourcing opportunities in Bangalore.