BCI Warns Against Unauthorized Tie-Ups Between Indian And Foreign Law Firms; Clarifies Scope Of Practice Under Advocates Act And 2025 Rules
Pranav B Prem
The Bar Council of India (BCI) has issued a strong warning against unauthorized collaborations, tie-ups, or integrated platforms between Indian and foreign law firms or advocates, stating that such arrangements amount to the “practice of law” in India and are therefore impermissible under the Advocates Act, 1961.
In its press release dated October 21, 2025, the BCI withdrew and replaced its earlier statement from August 6, 2025, clarifying its stand following directions issued by the Delhi High Court in Atul Sharma v. Bar Council of India.
The Council expressed concern over foreign law firms entering into “strategic alliances,” “exclusive referral models,” and “joint branding initiatives” with Indian counterparts, which are publicly portrayed as unified or integrated global legal platforms. It warned that such portrayals create a de facto impression of joint legal practice across jurisdictions — a direct violation of Indian law. “These combinations, often structured through Swiss Vereins or strategic alliances, are being publicly promoted under combined identities, which effectively amount to practising Indian law indirectly,” the BCI stated.
Regulatory Framework And Scope Of Foreign Lawyers’ Practice
The BCI reiterated that under the Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2023 (as amended in 2025), foreign law firms may only practice foreign and international law in non-litigious matters, and only after registration under the BCI framework.
They cannot appear before Indian courts or tribunals, draft or advise on Indian law, or engage in any form of activity that constitutes practising Indian law under the Advocates Act, 1961.
Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Bar Council of India v. A.K. Balaji (2018) 5 SCC 379, the Council emphasized that the Act applies not just to individual advocates but also to firms, associations, or juridical persons. Any entity that operates under the name or brand of a foreign firm, or presents itself as part of a global legal network, would be treated as engaging in the practice of Indian law — an activity strictly prohibited.
Show-Cause Notices And Investigations
The BCI revealed that it has already issued show-cause notices to several entities suspected of entering into such tie-ups, directing them to produce written explanations and documentation of their arrangements. It warned that failure to comply could lead to proceedings for professional misconduct, reprimand, suspension, or even removal from practice. The Council also noted that publicising such alliances through joint branding or launch events amounts to solicitation and advertising, which is barred under the Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette.
Clarification On Arbitration Proceedings
Addressing confusion regarding foreign participation in arbitration, the BCI clarified that foreign lawyers may appear in international arbitrations concerning foreign law under the limited “Fly-in Fly-out” provision of Rule 8(5) of the 2023 Rules. However, they cannot participate in arbitrations governed by Indian law or where evidence is recorded on oath.
The Council stressed that once evidence is recorded on oath or the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applies, participation by a foreign lawyer would amount to practising Indian law and is strictly prohibited. “If an arbitration involves foreign law, a foreign lawyer may address or cross-examine strictly on that issue, provided the tribunal does not record evidence on oath and the participation does not extend to any Indian law matter,” the BCI clarified.
Public Communications And Branding Restrictions
The BCI emphasized that law firms’ public communications must be limited to basic details such as name, address, and contact information. Announcements of mergers, collaborations, or unified branding between Indian and foreign firms will attract scrutiny and potential action.
Reaffirming its commitment to a transparent yet liberal regime, the Council stated that while foreign law firms may register to advise on foreign and international law, they cannot operate under a joint or unified brand with Indian firms or act in ways that mislead clients about their scope of practice.
