PSL Advocates & Solicitors has set up a small office in China’s fifth-larges city, Hangzhou, and is in the process of hiring a local lawyer there to capitalise on increasing outbound work to India.
As far as we’re aware, it will be the first Indian law firm with an office in the country, which India has traditionally had a rather complicated relationship with. Correction 13 March 2019: It appears Remfry & Sagar used to have a “presence” in China at some in time.
justCo-managing partner Sameer Jain, who had founded Delhi-based Pamasis Law Chambers that had merged with Mumbai-based SanAd Legal in 2017 to form PSL, said that PSL currently had at least five regular clients in China, including a local consulting firm, which has agreed to use PSL as its preferred Indian law firm.
“There’s a crazy amount of work happening in China… There was an opportunity for China and we realised […] a lot of firms are focusing on China, but without an office there,” said Jain, citing Link Legal India Law Services partner Santosh Pai, in particular. “Having an office there gives more opportunities.”
Jain added that while PSL’s overseas jurisdictional focus had mainly been on Japan, Israel and Russia work, he and his co-managing partner Sandeep Bajaj had been spending a lot of time in China and would continue to do so with the new office, in which they were finalising one local law hire.
However, the firm would only advise, broadly, on India-inbound investment advisory and international arbitration disputes work.
“Once we have a Chinese national set up there, we will [evaluate] whether we would require a licence to practice Indian law there.” explained Jain. “But it’s more of a representative office, we’re not doing Chinese courts, but purely India advisory work.”
Buckling up for a bumpy ride
China’s so-called “One Belt One Road” initiative has seen its government make billions of US dollars of investment in land and sea transportation and other infrastructure projects, particularly amongst China’s neighbours.
Coupled with China waiving later waiving loans it provided for projects and its government then taking ownership of foreign infrastructure assets, such as roads in Pakistan, has not been popular with China’s rivals, such as India or the US.
However, Jain argued: “Belt and road is an opportunity pool for everyone in the Asian region. The amount of contracts, the quantum of contracts entered into for belt and road is immense.”
“India is not quite happy,” he conceded about the domestic reception of belt and road, saying that India’s government response “has always been contradictory”, having made no formal statements for or against it, and has been “very hesitant to come out in open support, very naturally so”.
“But I don’t think India has an option,” he added. “They [India] will certainly have to cave in and participate in belt and road.
“It’s a tricky situation the Indian government but from a private corporate side, [Indian corporates working with Chinese corporates, as well as Chinese corporates] have a big earning opportunity. They will grab it with both hands.”
India was not in a position to undo belt and road, opined Jain. “It’s too huge to jeopardise, when there are international pressures to cave in, they’ll have to cave in.
“I’m sure they’ll not be too happy with it. but from our perspective as a law firm it’s a great opportunity.”
Comments
Just because they have opened an office in China, do they think that makes them Chinese?
Furthermore, 'they' in this is very obviously referring to the Indian government, which is a different entity from the Indian people, India the country, or a signifier of your own nationality, as far as I understand it...
It's for the larger good of legal fraternity. Don't fall into the trap of Big 6 or 7. They want you to be their slaves forever. It's time to break their domination.
Kudos to PSL and the team on their new venture!
https://www.remfry.com/gaurav-mukerjee/
https://www.clatgyan.com/the-window/interview-ashwin-julka-partner-remfry-sagar/
An office space, permanent space, a WeWork shared space, at least one person at the reception?
It is not clear what has PSL established in China. I am assuming LI would have surely made enquiries before publishing.
Also, it’s surprising that, the firm states that, “Once we have a Chinese national set up there, we will [evaluate] whether we would require a licence to practice Indian law there.”
So, an office has already been set-up without evaluating whether that office will require a license? What kind of an office is that - in breach of local laws, or a non-functional office, or just a space where visiting Indian lawyers spend some time? Is that a China office then, as is generally understood when a firm claims to have an office in another country.
I am sure you would have asked these questions.
But generally, good luck to PSL. They seems to be doing great and we need some first generation legal entrepreneurs to break the dominance of the big firms. Possibly, they could learn a thing or two from the big firms about public relations and substance.
Note that your coverage for firms opening offices in India is quite detailed and also refers to square feet, and in some cases lease rental as well.
I see your views about legal practice in China. Would you know what are the views of PSL, and are you planning to update this article, regarding this?
To be honest - what LI has published reads like a press release.