Indian Law Firms Cannot Present Themselves As Part Of Foreign Firms : BCI Warns On Tie-Ups, Clarifies Scope Of Ban In Indian Arbitration

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has issued a stern warning against unauthorised collaborations, tie-ups, or integrated platforms between Indian and foreign law firms or advocates, reiterating that such arrangements amount to the “practice of law” in India and are impermissible under the Advocates Act, 1961.

In a detailed press release dated October 21, 2025, the BCI clarified that its earlier release of August 6, 2025, stood withdrawn and substituted with the current statement. The earlier press release, which had named certain firms, was withdrawn in terms of the statement given to the Delhi High Court in Atul Sharma v. Bar Council of India.

The BCI raised concerns over foreign law firms and advocates entering into “strategic alliances,” “exclusive referral models,” and “joint branding initiatives” with Indian counterparts, often marketed as unified or integrated global service platforms.

“The combinations are often structured through Swiss Vereins, strategic alliances, exclusive referral models, or joint branding initiatives, and are publicly promoted under combined identities,” the BCI said, warning that such portrayals create a “de facto integrated legal practice across jurisdictions,” which is not permitted under Indian law.

The BCI said that the restriction applies not only to foreign law firms acting on their own but also to situations where an Indian firm functions under the name, brand, or identity of a foreign firm. If an Indian firm presents itself publicly as part of a foreign law firm or network, it will, in effect, be treated as the foreign firm practising Indian law, an activity prohibited under the Rules.

"The Supreme Court also held that the Advocates Act applies not only to individual advocates but equally to companies, firms, associations, or juridical persons. If prohibition applies to an individual foreign lawyer, it applies equally to a foreign law firm, to a network styled asian association, and to any group of lawyers acting collectively. Institutional entities and natural persons who control, manage, or facilitate such arrangements are all bound by the Act and the Rules. Partners, etc. who are in pith and substance involved in practice of law, may, therefore, be held jointly and severally liable for violations," the BCI stated.

BCI explains Regulatory Framework

Referring to the Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2023 (as amended in 2025), the Council said that any entity registered under the Rules is required to adhere to strict conditions of disclosure, governance, and compliance.

Foreign law firms are allowed to practice only 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 participate in any manner that constitutes the “practice of law” as defined under the Advocates Act.

The BCI also cited the Supreme Court's judgment in Bar Council of India v. A.K. Balaji [(2018) 5 SCC 379], which held that foreign lawyers cannot indirectly practice Indian law through contractual arrangements or other structures. The true nature of the activity is decisive, not its form or label, the Council reminded, adding that activities such as drafting contracts, negotiations, and connected services fall within the scope of the Act if performed within India.

"A foreign law firm or group of firms may only practice foreign law and international law in non-litigious matters in India after registration under the Bar Council of India Rules. It cannot practice Indian law in any form in India, directly or indirectly. It cannot under its head or brand practice Indian law in any form even though the work is executed by an Indian firm acting under that name. It cannot appear in courts or tribunals, nor can it draft or advise on Indian law transactions," the BCI reminded.

Show-Cause Notices And Investigations

The BCI disclosed that it has already issued show-cause notices to several entities suspected of entering into such collaborations. It directed them to furnish written explanations, documentation of arrangements, and regulatory disclosures.

“The Council is also in the process of issuing show-cause notices to other entities which appear similarly placed,” the release stated, warning that failure to comply may lead to proceedings for professional misconduct, reprimand, suspension, or even removal from practice.

It further observed that continuous publicity of such arrangements through media campaigns, joint branding, or launch events amounts to prohibited solicitation and advertising under the BCI's Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette.

Clarification On Arbitration Proceedings

To dispel confusion regarding arbitration, the BCI clarified that while foreign lawyers may appear in international arbitrations concerning foreign law under the “Fly-in Fly-out” provision, they cannot engage in any activity governed by Indian law or record evidence on oath. Where the substance of a dispute is governed by Indian law, participation by a foreign lawyer or firm amounts to practising Indian law and is strictly prohibited.

The Council clarified that foreign law firms and lawyers may appear or advise in international arbitrations seated in India only to the extent that the dispute involves questions of foreign or international law. This limited permission is available under Rule 8(5) of the Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2023 (as amended in 2025), commonly referred to as the “Fly-in Fly-out” provision.

However, if the governing law of the dispute is Indian law, or where evidence is recorded on oath, or where the arbitration tribunal applies the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, or the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, foreign lawyers cannot participate, the Council said.

“Where an arbitral tribunal seated in India elects to receive or record evidence on oath, the prohibition under the Gazette Notification and the Bar Council Rules naturally extends to such proceedings,” the BCI clarified.

Foreign lawyers may address or cross-examine witnesses on issues governed by foreign law only if they do not record evidence under oath and if their participation does not extend to any matter where Indian law governs the substance of the dispute. “Once evidence is recorded on oath, or where Indian law governs the substance of the issue, any participation by a foreign lawyer amounts to the practice of Indian law and is prohibited,” the release stated emphatically.

The BCI also clarified that even though arbitral tribunals are not bound to apply the Indian Evidence Act, they are still “authorities legally competent to receive evidence,” and thus, foreign participation in such processes must remain within the narrow limits defined under the Rules.

The BCI's press release stated :

"For abundant clarity, arbitral tribunals, though not bound to apply the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, are nevertheless authorities legally competent, where they so choose, to take evidence on oath under Section 19(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Accordingly, when an arbitral tribunal seated in India elects to receive or record evidence on oath, the prohibition under the Gazette Notification and the Bar Council Rules naturally extends to such proceedings. This position has also been reaffirmed through the Bar Council's clarifications to parties wherein it was emphasized that cross-examination and arguments on Indian law issues constitute advocacy and are reserved exclusively for advocates enrolled under the Advocates Act, 1961.

For further clarity, 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. Once evidence is received or recorded on oath, or where Indian law governs the substance of the issue, any participation by a foreign lawyer amounts to the practice of Indian law and is prohibited.

The permitted sphere of practice for foreign lawyers remains strictly limited to non-litigious advisory work relating to foreign law and international law, and only in the manner and within the duration permitted under Rule 8(5) (Fly-In Fly-Out) or after due registration under the Bar Council of India's regulatory framework.

Foreign lawyers may advise or appear in international arbitration seated in India only to the extent the dispute involves questions of foreign or international law. Where the governing law is Indian law, or where evidence is recorded on oath, they may not appear or participate in advocacy functions.

The prohibition applies equally whether the foreign law firm acts directly or whether an Indian firm operates under its head, brand, or group identity. If an Indian firm holds itself out to the public as part of a foreign law firm or group, then in substance it amounts to practice of Indian law by that foreign firm or group, which is impermissible under the Rules."

Public Communication And Media Conduct

The Council emphasised that public communications by law firms must be limited to basic information such as name, address, contact details, and areas of practice. Announcements of mergers, launches, or collaborations that project a unified global brand will invite scrutiny, it warned.

Reiterating its commitment to a liberal but transparent framework for foreign lawyers, the BCI said that while foreign law firms may register to advise on international law and cross-border matters, they cannot operate under unified identities or joint practice structures with Indian firms.

Click here to read the press release