Firms use interim tactics to position for Indian liberalisation
UK firms are waiting with bated breath for the Indian legal market to liberalise, but by all accounts the country is unlikely to welcome international firms anytime soon.
Clifford Chance’s hire of Indian capital markets partner Rahul Guptan from top Indian firm Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co, as reported on TheLawyer.com (19 August), is symbolic of the strategy pursued by many international firms, albeit it is unusual for the hire to be of a partner. This strategy is creating ill-feeling among some Indian lawyers and firms though.
Amarchand managing partner Cyril Shroff said that, by poaching Indian lawyers, international firms are creating distrust at an institutional and industrial level in India, although he added that Indian firms will continue to work with their international counterparts.
For international firms, building large teams of Indian lawyers is a good way to pre-empt liberalisation.
“The idea isn’t to practise Indian law, but to involve lawyers who understand the Indian regulatory environment,” says Clifford Chance capital markets partner Edward Bradley, who will be relocating to Singapore at the end of the year to lead the local Indian capital markets team.
The team will include new recruit Guptan and around five other lawyers, many of whom hold Indian qualifications. This ties in to a network of almost 200 lawyers internationally who focus on Indian markets.
Bradley says he believes that capital markets in India will be a lucrative area and one that, despite current weakness, will bounce back. “There are a number of very strong companies in India that will desire to tap in to international capital markets,” says Bradley.
Nevertheless, partner moves from Indian firms to international ones remain relatively rare. Aside from Guptan, one of the most recent happened a year ago when J Sagar Associates finance partner Srinivas Parthasarathy joined Allen & Overy’s Singapore ;office ;as ;a ;partner (TheLawyer.com, 11 May 2007).
One London firm’s India head says: “Only a few [Indian] partners have managed to make the transition. At that level many will be looking, but getting partnership at one of the international firms is tough for anybody. But right at the top end with the really top-level people, there may be a bit of movement.”
Fox Mandal Little managing partner Som Mandal agrees that partner poachings are unlikely to become a greater trend. By contrast, he says that the market for associates is buoyant, assisted by a perceived lack of career progression at many traditional Indian firms.
“Most of the Indian firms have been very traditional and very cautious about offering partnership,” says Mandal. “Many firms are first generation, controlled by one or two lead partners, who don’t try to promote young partners. As a result associates don’t make it past a certain point.”
An increasing trend is for Indian lawyers to set up their own small local firms to enable them to create links with international firms.
Mandal takes a different attitude to poachings. “Our point is simple,” he says. “If you feel there’s a better opportunity at an international firm, please go ahead and let us remain friends. Our view is, it’s good for building up relationships.”
And while tie-ups with Indian firms are increasing, the Law Society of England and Wales is also getting in on the act. From 2 September it will host a four-day ‘trade mission’ in London, Birmingham, Cambridge and Leeds, where around 20 Indian law firms will drum up business and forge connections with UK firms.
Liberalisation may not be landing for a while yet, but preparations are well underway for when it does.
Readers' comments (6)
Anon. | 2-Sep-2008 12:05 pm
Liberalisation will be good for India
Opposition to liberalisation of the Indian legal market comes from two places: the small number of Indian firms, and the large number of one or two-man practices.
The tiny firms in actuality have nothing to lose from liberalisation, as the kind of work they do is not of interest to international firms. However they have been misled about the supposed threat by the large firms, who between them have almost a monopoly on top work and are making a fortune as a result.
Liberalisation would indeed be bad news for the tiny number of equity holders at those firms (most of them family members), but it would be good for other India corporate lawyers who will stand a far better chance of getting rich.
More importantly, however, it will be good for Indian business, which for the first time would be presented with a range of different law firms to choose from that as a result of market dynamics, will in time push down the prices, and push up the quality. Viva the revolution!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sreejit | 3-Sep-2008 6:21 am
Sign of Things to Come
Well, Rahul Guptan's move is nothing unusual from his as well as CC's perspective. If the international firms plan to position themselves for an imminent Indian entry in the next five years packing up competent Indian lawyers is but obvious. Associate hire cannot give the desired boost unless there are some Indian hires at the partner level to guide the hired associates and maneuver the Firm's visibility among Indian business and Indian focused businesses.
As for the Indian firms, the lateral shifts could be shaped to work out for their benefit by helping strengthen relationship between the foreign firm and the Indian firm. Most likely the foreign firms would take time to be full service providers in India and would necessarily have to rely upon strong Indian connections. This is what the Indian firms may look at for creating supporting relationships with the outgoing lawyer/partner and the foreign firm.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Sep-2008 9:36 am
Who you foolin??
Whilst its true that liberalization of the Indian market has taken long, a lot of the blame must be attributed to the tactics adopted by the global firms.
Their intensions are purely selfish and profit orientated. this is understandable from a free market perspective but no real attempt has been made to address the underlying issues.
who is bradley foolin when he claims that CC is not practicing indian law. for that matter, the hordes of lawyers in linklaters are doing the same thing. they are in fact providing indian law advice and marketing themselves accordingly. the interiem tactics to position for india must be carefully srutinized by indian and english regulators to ensure that regulatory lines are observed. full scale investigation by regulators at both ends is called for. the english law society cannot connive with the likes of bradley and co, and must adopt an independant regulators stance.
have the hordes of indian qualified lawyers, including people likle guptan and partha promised to surrender their indian licenses?? this must be done if the claim of not practising indian law is to be credible.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Sep-2008 9:44 am
Mandal bundle!!
For all the tall claims by Mr. Mandal, he should clarify how much equity his family holds in the firm and also, his interests in the outsourcing outfit.
What’s the partnership track in his firm and what are the chances of a non family partner being given an equity share in the firm. Do the non family partners have any management rights?
As a known proponent of liberalisation it will be good to get these clarifications. At least his partners and associates, and also the market place, would like to know since Mr. Mandal makes a lot of tall claims, without practicing what he preaches.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Sep-2008 2:36 pm
india
no one is going to push for stripping licenses of indian lawyers working in london or new york..most of them are related to indian partners..
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
indian lawyer for more professionalism | 26-Sep-2008 10:26 am
very true
where does Shardul's daughter and son-in-law work - CC and Freshfields! need i say more!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment