In its 2018 judgment, the Supreme Court of India made several observations regarding the rights of foreign lawyers or law firms to practice/operate in India.
Here are some observations from the said judgment:
1. Thus, we uphold the view that the practice of law includes litigation as well as non-litigation (Para 39).
2. The prohibition (to practice law in India) applicable to any person in India, other than the advocate enrolled under the Advocates Act, certainly applies to any foreigner also (Para 40).
3. The plea that a foreign lawyer is entitled to practice foreign law in India without subjecting himself to the regulatory mechanism of the Bar Council of India Rules can also be not accepted (Para-41).
4. We uphold the view of the Bombay High Court and Madras High Court in para 63 (i) of the judgment to the effect that foreign law firms/companies or foreign lawyers cannot practice the profession of law in India either in the litigation or in non-litigation side (Para-41).
5. Visit of any foreign lawyer on a fly-in and fly-out basis may amount to practice of law if it is on regular basis (Para-44).
6. If in pith and substance the services amount to practice of law, the provisions of the Advocates Act will apply and foreign law firms or foreign lawyers will not be allowed to do so (Para-46).
In view of the above observations made by the Supreme Court of India in its judgment, Advocate Prashant Ajmera was interviewed by EB-5 Investors Magazine regarding the impact of this judgment on the EB-5 industry and residency and citizenship practice in India.
To read this complete article on EB5 Investor magazine click here