Dentons Link Legal has alleged in its plea before the Delhi High Court that the Bar Council of India (BCI) defamed the firm in its press release flagging unauthorised collaborations between Indian and foreign law firms.

The petition filed through Executive Chairman Atul Sharma contends that the press release, issued alongside a show cause notice, prejudged the matter and caused irreparable damage to the firm's professional reputation.

The petition calls the August 5 press release “highly defamatory and prejudicial” for making allegations public before any inquiry or adjudication. It is argued that the BCI went beyond its own amended rules by declaring that Swiss verein structures, strategic alliances, referral models and joint branding initiatives are impermissible without registration, when no such prohibition exists in the rules themselves.

By directing Link Legal not to continue with “Dentons Link Legal” branding, the BCI effectively passed an adjudicatory order disguised as a notice, the plea stated.

Drafted by Advocate Himanshu Anand Gupta, the petition also takes issue with the BCI’s demand that the firm discloses all matters handled, classified as Indian, foreign or cross-border law. Such a demand, they say, is vague, violates advocate–client privilege and trade secrecy, and amounts to a fishing or roving inquiry with no rational nexus to any specific alleged infraction.

The firm avers that it does not retain any foreign lawyers or law firms and does not practice foreign law in India or abroad. Clarifying its position, it states,

"Petitioner No. 2 (Link Legal) in May 2023 joined Dentons Group, which is an association of independent law firms practicing law in their respective jurisdictions. Dentons Group is not a law firm but purely an administrative entity and its principal object is to ensure global quality minimum standards..."

It clarified that the tie-up with Dentons is a “combination” and not a “merger”, rather it is the term used to describe an independent law firm becoming a member of the Swiss Verein.

"Since the combination of the Petitioner No. 2 with Dentons Group was fully compliant with the Advocates Act and the rules thereunder, Respondent No. 1 despite widespread public knowledge of the said combination did not raise any objections and never challenged the same. Further, Petitioner No. 2 continues to be fully compliant with the Amended BCI Rules."

This apart, the plea challenges the May 2025 amendments to the BCI’s 2022 Rules on Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms. It is argued that the Advocates Act, 1961 confers no power on the BCI to regulate foreign lawyers, a position acknowledged in the Law Commission of India’s 266th Report and in the government’s draft Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

That Bill, later withdrawn after protests from sections of the Bar, had sought to insert Section 49A(cc) empowering the Central government to frame rules on the entry of foreign law firms and lawyers. The petitioners say that this confirms that the BCI lacks jurisdiction, and that the amended rules are ultra vires, unconstitutional and void ab initio for want of mandatory approvals from the Chief Justice of India and the Central government under Section 49 of the Advocates Act.

On Thursday, the Delhi High Court directed the BCI not to take a final decision on its notice until the next hearing, and expressed concern at its decision to issue a press release while the matter was still at the show cause stage.

On August 5, 2025, the BCI issued a press release cautioning against unauthorised collaborations between Indian and foreign law firms. It specifically named Dentons Link Legal and CMS IndusLaw, warning that arrangements structured through Swiss vereins, referral models or joint branding initiatives amounted to prima facie violations of its amended rules. The release further directed such firms not to continue public or professional activity under combined names without prior registration.

Dentons Link Legal has mounted a two-fold challenge: first, to the notice directing disclosures on its collaboration with Dentons; and second, to the validity of the amended BCI rules.

The petitioners also allege that the amended rules unlawfully create new categories such as “Indian-foreign law firms” and “dual-qualified Indian advocates.” By allowing such firms and foreign law firms to practice international law while barring Indian law firms and advocates from doing so, the rules are said to violate Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and undermine the BCI’s statutory duty to protect Indian lawyers’ interests.

The petition further notes that the BCI’s General Council had, on June 12, 2025, constituted a committee of leading lawyers including Cyril Shroff and Ajay Bahl to examine concerns about the rules, with consultations scheduled in Mumbai in September 2025. Press releases issued on June 18 and June 29 had reiterated that no final decision would be taken until stakeholder consultations were completed.

Issuing the show cause notice and press release against Link Legal before this process, the petitioners argue, demonstrates that the regulator had already prejudged the issue.

Dentons Link Legal was represented by Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Arvind Nigam.