Why suspend ?
When a doctors or engineers can do business, why not advocates ?
They are technically more equipped than them.Age old rules needed to be changed.

#1 - Isn't that the law? That an advocate can own but not be actively involved in the management of a business.

Your point about changing "age old rules" is valid, but as an advocate or a law student, you should know that until the law is changed you must comply and be prepared to face the music if found breaking it.

LOL! That is ridiculous! So at a time when the country's resurgent economy encourages entrepreneurs, advocates are supposed to sit back and avoid benefitting from it?
I'm an aspiring entrepreneur myself, and within two years of starting work and building up a healthy amount as savings, i cant wait to put my ideas into practice and see how they go.

Meerkat #3 - You can always test the validity of a law by breaking it and arguing your case in court. However, you should be prepared to face the consequences should you lose.

Incidentally, nothing stops you from branching out on your own as an entrepreneur. But, you cannot at the same time be a practicing advocate. Good luck with your future enterprise.

Once a law is passed it becomes positive and we all shall have to follow it. Thus, the State Bar Council is justified in taking this measure. However, such age old laws can definitely be challenged (for which we have seperate provision in the Constitution).

- Aninda.

The above news seems to be based on outdated information - http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4569509

Thanks for pointing this out, we were not aware that the High Court had passed an order staying the BC decision so quickly.

We have corrected the headline and added an update to the story.

Best regards
Kian

Do lawyers know the law? First the Judicial Branch of the Kerala High Court overrules its own Administrative Branch. Now it has ruled that the Bar Council has not interpreted the law correctly.

This is good for business. If everyone agreed on the law, lawyers would have little to do.

if the Bar Council Rules are seriously enforced 99% of the lawyers (if not more :-) would be under suspension. Perhaps the proposed super regulator may do something

Who are the owners of Law firms then ? Just curious !!

BCI is right in taking action. Once person is lawyer he is bound by rules and regulations and conducts or misconducts...if he want to do business, he is free, surrender the certificate and do business..who is stopping ... but one cannot run two things side by side...it is professional requirement and as i know all professional bodies..be it C.A, C.S. ICWA or doctor cannot hold business and practice side by side..once person enters into professional he has to follows ruels and regulation of the professions as amended.. but these days vast percentage of lawyer get registered with bar council as lawyer to take advantage of identity card issued for lawyer to mis-use it in their business or other benefit and flashing it at every places to get weight-age as society/officials/other authority at large don't want to get involved with lawyer..and these type of lawyer not only giving bad name to profession but also lowering image of legal profession in the eyes of general public. it is rampant abd prevalent practice. I know many example of it personally, I request Bar Council to make thorough inquiry and take affidavit from each and every lawyer that he is really into practice, Mal practice in name of lawyer in respect of recovery of loan, credit card dues etc. is well know..basically they are are not lawyer but just got registered themselves as lawyer and acts as recovery agents and it is lawyer who gets bad name...

Many head of legal firms, manager of legal firms never seen court or not seen couts for long periods still they call themselves as law firms..but they are basically liaising agent between client and person who real appears in the court..etc..Knowing law and practising law as lawyer is two different thing..one must bear in mind, thousands of member of bar council are in full time of employment and side by side holding certificate of practice, system requires modification where one must differentiate person who is really lawyer and in practice and one who is working merely as employees or officers under command and control of other person with vested interest in masters not in law, lawyer should be independent from clients views and must not have master to command .lawyers master is none except the law..legal framework irrespective of clients interest , interest of law is supreme for lawyer..this is law, follow it or not it is your own conciousness but once caught in red handed don't take excuse that every body is doing same.. BCI and Bar council are impotent bodies now...therefore all type of Mal practices going on

@#11- you unnecessarily raising fingers on law firm professionals. Come and take a look what kind of work in done in law firms..practising law isn;t only appearing in courts...our courts itrself are giving a wide interpretation to 'practising law'..see the Common Cause Case..BOM HC. Lawyers are a fraternity, you shouldn"t be creating this divide now! Come on!

@12 I was not talking about serious law firms, kindly read the line carefully ...and as i stated there ..is that " many head of legal firms.....I meant that many person in disguise of law firm, mere acting as liaising agent or recovery agent for banks. i did not meant for real law firms who doing real legal works. here I am commenting about only unethical practice in disguise as lawyer or firms ...not about person engaged in ethical practice of law, may it be part of firms or individual.

...scrap the law and set more realistic standards...the clause prohibiting side business for lawyers is an entry barrier for those who are first generation practitioners...in the name of misconceived dignity and honor, does the bar expect the freshers to subsist on air!?! In absence of any law making it mandatory for the seniors to pay basic remuneration to their juniors, all such prohibitions of sided business are bad and discriminatory.

The law needs to change. Lawyers should be allowed to have diversified careers like everyone else. These rules are archaic. How is the dignity of the law being tarnished by freelancing or becoming an entrepreneur.