Build your professional network on facebook via our app Go to app
 
<< Prev  24 of 45 in Topic  Next >>
Associated with other topics :
  Rate : 
 

HC says no to entry of foreign law firms: Is this a right decision?

Created by : Aarti Gupta, Legal Consultant  | 12 17 2009 07:16:59 +0000
Industry : LawFunctional Area : Indian judicial system(Others)
Keywords : rbi high court indian judiciary law firms indian law firms judicial system indian lawyers hc foreign lar firms
Activity:  346 views;  last activity : 07 06 2010 20:18:09 +0000

After more than 15 years when RBI had permitted 3 foreign law firms now have finally got their answer from HC, that a firm no-entry sign for India. And HC said that the decision of the bank was unjustified under the existing laws that governed advocates and their practice in the country.

Putting a full stop on the `can-they-can't-they' arguments over entry of foreign law firms into India even for practice on only non-litigious matters, the HC bench headed by Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar held that foreign law firms were barred from practising in the country under the existing Advocate Act of 1961 and the various bar councils under it.

Would like to know form colleagues on the platform that, Is this a right decision by HC giving a no entry to foreign law firms?  Share your views on this.

  
 Refer 94
Share
 
 
  Rate : 
 
 
Yes Vs No
9
 
 
 
 
2
5
1
Support   Support
Top Argument
2
0

I think the HC has done the right thing here and this case was there in court for nearly 15 years, though in 1995, the HC had stayed the bank's decision, but then the matter lay in cold storage for years before a lengthy and heated hearing on the issue took place in court for and against the proposition. The government said that practice by lawyers under the law meant only litigious practice in court, but dismissing that argument, the HC held that, and it would mean that advocates debarred for professional misconduct would then merrily carry on with practice in litigious matters. So HC has taken a right decision.
By Aarti Gupta, Legal Consultant  12 17 2009 07:16:59 +0000
 
1
0

Reciprocity should be available to Indian Lawyers without

passing further examination in that country
By Ramachandran Mahadevan, Freelancer, Freelancer  | 12 27 2009 06:46:03 +0000
1
0

Yes as is the policy adopted by various countries the local laws are in consistent with the local culture and the foreign cultural boundries still exist. The foreign lawyers will not be able to understand the circumstances and culture for implementation and understanding of local laws. Let them first allow our lawyers to practice in their countries and then we can reciprocate with them. 
By Iqbal Ahmed Shaikh, CEO/MD/Director, Moavin Legal Associates  | 12 19 2009 06:56:32 +0000
1
0

Naturally foreign law firms will have their base out side the country, a layman or any person resident in India may not know the legal consequnses while dealing with a foreign nationals or foreign firm. Action against their negligence, if any, on the side of foreign firm, is a complicated issue to deal with. Similarly enforcibility of agreement between the foreign firm and an Indian resident is also to some extent is a debatable question. Considering several such other issues involved in assigning the professional matter to them, to my knowledge, I personally feel that this decision is in right direction as far as national interest is concerned.
By RAMANATHA PRABHU N, Chartered Accountant  | 12 18 2009 06:44:15 +0000
1
0

we should become aware of of the latest devlopment of various fields of law particulars in consumers, torts information,intelctuals rights and climate field
By NL Kalra, Law Officer, Govt. of India Ministy of Law  | 12 17 2009 12:43:09 +0000
0
0

indian advocates cannot compete with goras / gorees ..

so have managed indirect reservation .. is'nt it..

till when .... and it's not a null hypothesis ..mind you ..
By Ajay Ziz, Dy. Registrar,, University of Jammu  | 12 17 2009 07:39:47 +0000
Argue for "Yes"
Argue for "No"
 Found the debate "HC says no to entry of foreign law firms: Is this a right decision?"  interesting ?  Suggest to your connections and communities  
 
Viewers also viewed
 A Sessions Court at the Sabarmati Central Jail in Ahmedabad on Tuesday delivered the crucial...
 
518 referals 6 arguments, 436 views
borrower alone should be liable as he is the only beneficiary vs Guarantors should repay when...
 
1187 referals 19 arguments, 412 views
MNC vs SMALL PVT. FIRM
 
97 referals 6 arguments, 289 views
more...  
Recent Knowledge (3)
WE HAD A GOOD NUMBER OF INVENTORS WITH GREATER VISION ABOUT THE SOCIETY. INVENTORS HERE NEED NOT...
 
2 referals 2 arguments, 97 views
These days as I switch on the tv or radio or look at a hoarding I do feel that power of ads I...
 
3004 referals 23 arguments, 492 views
C vs B
 
0 referals 3 arguments, 51 views
more...  
Sponsored Jobs
More From Author
Guarantor is a person who takes guarantee that money will be repaid. So even if friendships may change he is legally bond to this.
No we do not need change first. We need the implementation of laws first. Once they are implemented properly then we can think of change. How will change be helpful if pre-existing laws are also not implemented? 
It is not so simple to reduce inflation . It is in the hands of government and they should try to bring the inflation level down. Step one : say bye bye to black money.
more...  
  • Popular Knowledge
  •  
  •  
  • Popular Jobs
  •