BCI issues fresh notice on unauthorised collaborations between Indian and foreign law firms; withdraws earlier release

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has issued a fresh notice, after withdrawing a press release naming Dentons Link Legal and CMS IndusLaw in connection with alleged unauthorised foreign collaborations.

The new press release, issued on October 21, follows the BCI’s statement before the Delhi High Court in Atul Sharma v. Bar Council of India & another, where it undertook to withdraw the earlier release and issue a revised one after revisiting the matter.

On August 28, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela recorded the BCI’s assurance that it would withdraw the August 5 press release and issue a fresh one. The Court directed the BCI to file its counter-affidavit within four weeks and continued the interim order restraining the regulator from taking any final decision on the show-cause notice against Dentons Link Legal.

The earlier press release, now withdrawn, had named Dentons Link Legal and CMS IndusLaw as examples of “unauthorised collaborations or combinations” between Indian and foreign law firms. Dentons Link Legal challenged the statement before the High Court, terming it “highly defamatory and prejudicial” for publicising allegations before any inquiry or adjudication.

The current release clarified,

"This Press Release and the earlier Press Release do not pronounce guilt. They record the issuance of show-cause notices, with further show-cause notices being in the pipeline, and clarify the regulatory position. It urges all advocates and law firms to audit their websites, media announcements, and social media to remove prohibited content."

In its revised release, the BCI said that it had noted several instances of Indian and foreign law firms presenting themselves as unified global legal service platforms through Swiss Vereins, strategic alliances, exclusive referral models, or joint branding. Such structures, it said, mislead clients and contravene the Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2023 (as amended in 2025), which mandate registration, disclosure and ethical compliance before any such collaboration can commence.

Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Bar Council of India v. AK Balaji & Ors, the BCI reiterated that foreign law firms “cannot do indirectly what they cannot do directly.” The judgment clarified that the “practice of law” includes not only courtroom appearances but also legal advice, contract drafting, and negotiation. Hence, any arrangement that in substance constitutes the practice of Indian law, regardless of its form, is governed by the Advocates Act, 1961 and falls under BCI’s regulatory jurisdiction, the release stated.

The BCI clarified that where arbitral tribunals seated in India take evidence on oath under Section 19(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, foreign lawyers cannot appear or cross-examine witnesses. Any such participation, the Council said, would amount to advocacy in India and is prohibited. It stated,

"...if an arbitration involves a discrete and identifiable issue of foreign or international law, a foreign lawyer may address or cross-examine strictly on that limited foreign-law issue provided that the arbitral tribunal does not record that portion as evidence on oath within the meaning of Section 19(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and such participation does not extend to any Indian law issue."

Confirming that it has issued show-cause notices to concerned firms, the BCI said that these entities prima facie found violating the rules have been asked to furnish full disclosures on their structure, governance and operational arrangements. Non-compliance may lead to proceedings for professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961. The Council added that additional notices to other similarly placed entities are under consideration, and continued operation under combined or foreign-linked names without registration would be treated as an aggravating factor.

Reiterating Rule 36 of the Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette, the BCI cautioned lawyers and firms against media announcements, launch events or social media campaigns that portray integrated global operations. Such publicity, it said, would be assessed under both Rule 36 and the 2023 Foreign Lawyers Rules and may amount to professional misconduct if found to solicit clients or advertise legal services.

The Council also noted that it had observed “multiple public communications including launch events of foreign-linked entities, press releases announcing membership in international networks, and websites portraying India offices as part of a single global firm.” Such communications, it said, would be examined under the “principle of pith and substance.”

Where the content advertises, solicits, or presents an integrated global practice, it will be deemed a violation of the Advocates Act and the BCI Rules. The Council stated that it “will act accordingly” under its statutory powers, signalling active enforcement of its professional conduct and registration framework.

The Council said that its regulatory framework remains “liberalised and transparent,” allowing foreign lawyers to practise foreign and international law within defined limits while safeguarding the independence of the Indian Bar. It also urged law firms to audit their public communications for compliance, warning that violations could attract reprimand, suspension, or removal from practice.

[Read Press Release]