Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas Mumbai
Vasani had been GC at the Tata Group since 2000.
We have not been able to confirm the exact timing of Mandal’s joining at the time of publication.
Update 20:26: We understand that he will likely be joining in the coming months.
Mandal had had joined Shardul Amarchand from AZB as the firm’s national M&A head in September 2015. He is an NLSIU Bangalore alumnus, having joined AZB directly after graduating in 2000.
Mandal had been instructed late last year to advise Tata Sons on its spat with ousted
Mandal’s links with the Tatas stem from his AZB days under
We have reached out to Shardul Amarchand Mumbai managing partner and Mandal for comment.
Update 18:29: We have reached out to Vasani for comment.
The Tata Group has around 660,000 employees globally, with dozens of subsidiary companies with their own respective GCs.
Update 20:57: The Tatas have now sent out a press release confirming the news
Several mainstream papers are now reporting Mandal’s move. The Economic Times carried the following quotes:
Chairman N Chandrasekaran said, “Mr. Mandal brings wide-ranging legal experience and energy into this important role as the Group General Counsel. His time spent at India’s top legal firms have given him a ringside view of different legal strategies and his long experience of working with multiple Tata companies in the past will hold him in good stead in his new role.” He further added, “Vasani will continue to advise the group to ensure a smooth transition.”
Shuva Mandal while reacting to the news said, “It has always been an enriching and learning experience working with the Tata group as an advisor, and now I look forward to playing a bigger role under the guidance of Mr. Chandrasekaran and his new team. These are exciting times for the Tata group and I look forward to contributing to its future growth.”
Tata’s press release also stated:
As a prelude to his retirement next year, Mr. Bharat Vasani, the current Group General Counsel of Tata Sons for the last 17 years, has expressed a desire to move into a more strategic and advisory role. Accordingly, Mr. Vasani will continue with the group as Legal Adviser to the Chairman’s office.
A graduate of the National Law School, Bangalore, Mr. Mandal has over 17 years of experience in the legal profession and has advised leading Indian enterprises, global private equity firms as well as Fortune 500 companies. A member of the Bar Council since 2000, Mr. Mandal began his career with legal firm AZB Associates between 2000-15 before moving to Shardul Amarchand & Co (Advocates & Solicitors) as Partner and National Practice Head for Corporate, M&A and Private Equity. During his career, Mr. Mandal has been actively involved in deal structuring, advising on securities law and development of legal strategy for corporations.
We are awaiting a press statement from Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas.
Update 21:20: Shardul Amarchand has also issued a press release:
He will be part of N. Chandrasekaran’s special team that will assist in transforming the TATA Group. Mr. Mandal has been with SAM & Co for almost two years. During that time, he led the General Corporate, and M&A practice at SAM & Co, steering the National Practice Group through an important period of the Firm’s growth and transformation. The Firm’s practice is ranked amongst the top corporate practices in India.
Mr. Shardul Shroff, Executive Chairman, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, said: “While Shuva’s resignation leaves us deeply saddened, we are also pleased to know that he will be joining the very highly regarded TATA team. The TATA Group has been a client of the firm and we have a strong and extensive relationship with the Group. This relationship will only strengthen with Shuva’s move to the TATA Group.”
“The SAM & Co team remains strong. Our national footprint of 91 partners including 44 general corporate partners, many of whom are ranked at the top of their fields of practice, will continue to deliver the highest quality of services to our clients,” Mr Shroff added.
Mrs. Pallavi Shroff, Managing Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, said: “We wish to offer our very sincere thanks to Shuva for all of his hard-work in helping us establish a national Corporate practice at SAM & Co. We look forward to continuing our relationship and working together with Shuva.”
Mr. Akshay Chudasama, Managing Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, said: “Shuva is a stellar lawyer and has been instrumental in helping to establish the SAM & Co office in Mumbai and growing it from strength to strength. He has led and developed a highly-professional team of lawyers, who will continue with the Firm.”
“The Firm continues to actively look out for opportunities to team with quality lawyers in the legal market the Firm services,” Mr Chudasama added.
Mr. Shuva Mandal, said: “I wish to thank the wonderful team at SAM & Co and my Partners with whom I thoroughly enjoyed working over the last 18 months. The experience has been great. The team at SAM & Co will go places.”
Comments
The law firm(s) that create(s) a model that is genuinely fair and equitable (in sharing value created with those who create it) will achieve alignment of interest, people thinking of their firms as their own (and imbibing that spirit in everything they do), broad basing and institutionalisation - becoming the marker leader and possibly holding that position even after the foreign firms arrive.
A raw nerve somewhere...
A jobless oldie somewhere.
Hope Shuva or his protege give you your biscuit for holding fort on the "comments section". Shoo now! Go fetch.
On a serious note, Its a foregone conclusion that any loss to SAM is a gain to CAM and vice-versa. It's personal as it is family. Scroll through the rest of the comments to see the same sentiment being reverbated again and again!
But then you have logic, it must be nice spending time with it.. ALONE.
Btw, when does Vasani retire?
Also Kian for curiosity sake, what have been the top 5 highest rated by comment articles at LI?
The profession has regressed in the last 15 years.
I highly doubt he's feed work to a place he's been at for 1.5 years than send it to the firm best placed to serve the Tata group. From the sudden departure and his lack of prior notice to SAM, I doubt this will result in 'tata' to SAM.
#askarnab
#trumpknows
Else I am curious to know why a top practitioner like him will move in-house at this stage in his career. No offence meant to anyone but he was on his way to be the next Cyril.
Because you've been brainwashed by your seniors into thinking that GCs don't do any work and don't know any law.
The kind of prestige that comes with being GC of the Tata Group is much higher than the prestige associated with being a partner at someone else's firm. If your peer group is Indian law firm lawyers, all of whom are like you and can't fathom a very rational upward move, then you're in a bubble.
Tend to agree with @sabkepitaji - that time for mediocre law firm lawyers pushing their mediocre work on clients will see its decline (winter is coming!); good thing is with a top notch lawyer like Shuva taking the helm ... quality of work and quality of advice needs to improve and only a substantial value add will earn one a seat at the table. The it me for status quoist lawyers will end. Interesting times if this spreads across the industry, as much as this news elevates the significance of general counsel office, it will also force law firm lawyers to break the traditional rusting mounds to driver the "goods".
Looks like the family guy (cyril) is goin to have the last laugh.
Shuva is personally going to make it a point to fuck their happiness :'D
Now back to my billion dollar deal, where I am but a lowly junior associate handling the "employment section" of the legal due diligence but will brag to anyone who cares to listen that I was involved in an intricately complex structured leveraged buy-out, while refusing to disclose names out of respect for bogus confidentiality reasons and simply saying "read the papers in a few days. Front page!". Corporate lawyers I tel you..
Really? You doubt this about Tata?
Or are you not sure about the usage of the term "allegedly" but wanted to use it anyway?
Having said that, they can be as stupid and anal as Indians - in fact more so given that they are more process driven and less likely to see the "bigger picture". The amount of shit we sometimes get from foreign law firms is not funny.
I have no interest in whether or not Shuva is qualified for the job - time will tell. I just dislike the idea of some pompous firang lording it over the poor "Indian product of law firms". I hope we get to negotiate an NDA or a MAC someday.
http://zhlaw.com/foreign-national-employees-settle-wage-and-hour-and-breach-of-contract-claims-for-30-million/
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-software-firm-pays-oc-26m-to-settle-contract-2016aug23-story.html
http://m.economictimes.com/tech/ites/us-jury-slaps-940-million-fine-on-tcs-tata-america-international-corp-in-trade-secret-case/articleshow/51853894.cms
The only reason I engaged with you is because I found your notion that Indian law firm "products" are unable to handle a deal of even "moderate sophistication" a bit silly.
If you really think Tata Sons has hired Shuva to expand their greatly successful global criminal enterprise, there is not much I can say.
I am not racist or any of the other stuff. I just feel an itch at the tip of my shoes and an urge to kick someone's backside when I hear unsupported blanket statements on Indian law firms' competence from an Indian who has gone abroad and now wants to look down on us.
A feeling that appears to be shared by other commentators here.
The fact that he came from a small town and achieved success should be inspiring right? Or are we making the same point about "elite" jobs being reserved for "elite" people? Of course it's great to study abroad and work abroad but in itself is no qualification. Shuva has all the depth breadth and sophistication the job will need and then some but more importantly he has the ability to learn. I hope he does well.
Aditya Ghosh was GC of Interglobe (Indigo) in his 20s.
This does not even include the numerous GCs of Indian arms of MNCs.
Aditya Ghosh is really a business guy whose principal exposure to foreign issues is in highly specialized and routine work - aircraft leases, fuel supply contracts, etc... The narrow and repetitive nature if their legal issues is why they can maintain a small in house team.
Infosys is an excellent example. Their "real" GC was an experienced US tech lawyer based in SV. Anyone watching Infy noticed he bailed (or was bailed) as a prelude to the board compensation and other domestic ethical issues He would have had no knowledge of and even less influence. Infosys's systemic legal problems shows their legal function is weak or kept weak by their biz side.
Another shortcoming of Mandal - if he's simply an Indian advocate, and complies with bar regulations, he will not actually be a lawyer when he takes up his post. Management communications with him will be discoverable in US and EU litigation, and very likely in UK litigation. If he stays a "retained" lawyer, he's not actually the GC. Those of you who understand the issue consider the implications.
1. Too much strength of feeling in your objections and less substance. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. For instance: "A GC should be.... someone who can convey internally the strategic value of his contribution in the broader context". What a lot of words that amount to a mere nothing.
2. International experience (in the right person) helps. It isn't critical and, if needed, can always be paid for on individual deals. Having spent a decade abroad, the biggest difference I find between quality lawyers abroad and my contemporaries in India (including Shuva) is that lawyers abroad have (i) more time to spend on individual matters, which allows for better quality analysis and drafting; and (ii) access to more institutionalized knowhow, which is a credit to how the international firms are run and not a testament to the competence of an individual lawyer.
3. Certainly, at the highest level in both countries (and I count Shuva as being one of the more experienced corporate lawyers in India), I don't see much difference in raw intelligence, grammatical ability (it wasn't your point but to the other person who made it) or emotional intelligence/the ability to manage people within an organisation. The last of the three (EQ), which I agree is important to have in leadership positions, is for the most part, internal to the individual in question. Plenty of partners in law firms abroad are unduly aggressive, somewhere along the autistic spectrum or plain old introverted and others are perfectly normal well adjusted individuals. I doubt the position is any different for a lawyer who has worked for his entire career in one or more Indian law firms.
4. I don't know if your intent was to subliminally belittle Shuva as an individual by constantly referring to him by his last name (Mandal). Perhaps you have been away from India for so long that you have forgotten local cultural sensitivities - although in this case, it would be a fairly rude way to speak in most places I would care to visit. I would have taken your comments far more seriously if I saw them as a form of respectful and measured articulation of your concerns, rather than appearing needlessly disrespectful of home grown talent and evidencing fairly unadulterated worship of the white man.
5. You write well. I liked your line about table stakes, in particular.
Irony Much below belittles people for BD and "prostrating themselves" before Mr. Mandal for work in the future. I think there is dignity in honestly seeking and doing work. Irony Much seems a little like that paan ad from a couple years ago, where the guy buys a wharf or something from white people in England and then he dips some paan afterwards in a triumphant manner. I guess paan and payback can each be a bitch, but I don't see it like that.
The celebrated story is Mr Mandal's appointment; but is it the 'real' story?
A reflection of our times, where 'newsspeak' has replaced real news. Which, is not the coronation of a new king (yes, myopic, but heck am a lawyer too); but dethroning of the last one. Vassani's exit was imminant; as anyone (yes even an intern) at Bombay House will tell you. Mr Mandal, counsel-par-excellence, was at the right place at the right time.
King is dead; long live the king.
Just follow the appointments / realignments in the last 5-6 months and the picture gets clear..