BCI Tells Delhi High Court: No Need for CJI or Centre Nod for Foreign Law Firm Rules

The Bar Council of India (BCI) informed the Delhi High Court on Tuesday that its Rules permitting foreign lawyers and foreign law firms to operate in India do not require approval from either the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or the Central government.

This submission was made before a Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. The Bench was hearing petitions filed by Dentons Link Legal and CMS IndusLaw, who have challenged the Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2022.

Senior Advocate Arvind Nigam, representing one of the petitioners, argued that the BCI had not placed any evidence on record to show that it had obtained mandatory approvals from the CJI or the Central government.

In response, the BCI’s counsel maintained,
“We don’t need the approval. Allow me to file a counter, and I will justify it.”

Court Calls the Rules a “Mess”

The Bench repeated its earlier criticism of the BCI Rules, particularly the provisions that allow strict action against law firms based only on a preliminary inquiry. The judges remarked that the Rules appear to be a “mess” and asked the BCI why it cannot consider amending them.

The Court told the BCI,
“Please frame the rules properly. You are the Bar Council after all.”

The BCI said that it was already conducting consultations and would consider suggestions for improvements.

Two Weeks’ Time Granted

The Court has given the BCI two weeks to file its affidavit. The matter will now be heard in January. Until then, the Court’s earlier direction restraining the BCI from taking any final decision in its proceedings against the law firms will remain in force.

Why the Law Firms Approached Court

IndusLaw and Dentons Link Legal have challenged both the Rules and the show cause notices issued to them in August. These notices were related to alleged unauthorised collaborations or tie-ups between Indian and foreign law firms.

The petitioners argue that:

• The BCI has no authority under the Advocates Act, 1961 to frame Rules regulating the entry of foreign law firms.
• The Rules violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution.
• Section 49 of the Advocates Act does not empower the BCI to regulate foreign lawyers.
• Certain provisions of Section 49 require prior approval of the CJI or the Central government, which was allegedly not obtained.

Dentons Link Legal also pointed out that while the Rules focus on foreign law firms, they do not clearly define what constitutes an “Indian law firm.”

Earlier hearings similarly saw the Court raising concerns over provisions that allow strong action based solely on a preliminary inquiry without a detailed process.