Latest news with #LalitBhasin
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Bar Council of India Opens Doors to Foreign Law Firms: Experts Demand Regulatory Clarity, ET LegalWorld
The Bar Council of India (BCI) has officially formalized the decision to open the Indian legal market to foreign law firms, a move that was first announced two years ago. While the step marks a significant milestone in the liberalization of the legal services sector, prominent legal expert Lalit Bhasin, President SILF (Society of Indian Law Firms) has called for caution, emphasizing the urgent need to amend the Advocates Act to provide a clear, legal framework for foreign lawyers. Speaking to ETLegalworld, Bhasin highlighted that India's approach to allowing foreign law firms remains cautious and structured, drawing parallels to regulated markets such as the UK and Singapore. 'India is not lagging behind,' he said, 'but unlike some countries where foreign firms face stringent conditions or local partnerships, India must ensure a fair and lawful system.' Advt Advt Bhasin criticized the Bar Council's recent move to issue regulations permitting foreign lawyers before the necessary legislative amendments, calling this approach 'putting the cart before the horse.' He warned that without amending the Advocates Act, these regulations risk being unenforceable and could damage India's legal veteran lawyer explained that while the legal profession initially opposed foreign entry in the 1990s due to concerns about competitiveness, by 2014 Indian firms had matured and welcomed foreign collaboration — provided there was a proper regulatory Supreme Court in 2018 reinforced that foreign lawyers cannot practice law in India without legislative backing. Despite this clarity, neither the government nor the BCI has taken decisive steps to amend the law. Instead, recent regulatory efforts appear to have been driven by pressures related to trade talks with the UK, according to Bhasin.'Reciprocity must be real,' Bhasin stressed, noting that while India allows foreign firms under conditions, the UK has yet to issue work permits to Indian law firms. He called for a 'level playing field' and urged the BCI to act more responsibly to safeguard the interests of India's over 1.2 million move to formally allow foreign law firms comes amid growing globalization of legal services and increasing demand for cross-border expertise. However, Bhasin insists that any policy should balance openness with protecting domestic legal talent and the rule of law. By , ETLegalWorld Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals Subscribe to our newsletter to get latest insights & analysis. Download ETLegalWorld App Get Realtime updates Save your favourite articles Scan to download App
India Gazette
10-05-2025
- Business
- India Gazette
Justice Manmohan calls for agile legal framework to support trade, tech and trust
New Delhi [India], May 10 (ANI): The Services Export Promotion Council (SEPC), in collaboration with the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) and the Indian National Association of Legal Professionals (INALP), on Saturday successfully hosted the International Legal Conference 2025 on the theme 'India's Legal and Regulatory Framework: Navigating International Trade Opportunities.' The conference brought together leading voices from the legal, policy, regulatory, and corporate sectors. The event was attended by Justice Manmohan, Judge of Supreme Court, as Chief Guest. Speaking at the inaugural session, Justice Manmohan said, 'At times, the complexities of international law and the constantly shifting regulatory environment can feel like navigating through a storm--unpredictable, fast-changing, and demanding sharp legal foresight. Today's global challenges--from cross-border intellectual property enforcement to fintech innovation, data privacy, cybersecurity, and the rise of artificial intelligence--require legal systems to be far more agile, interoperable, and forward-thinking. Yet even amid this turbulence, our constitutional values provide a steady vessel, and the rule of law remains our most reliable compass.' He further added, 'India's judiciary is committed to ensuring that the legal framework evolves in step with technological transformation and global trade dynamics. Initiatives like the e-Courts project and the Mediation Act represent a conscious shift toward greater efficiency, accessibility, and adaptability in the justice delivery system. By fostering legal innovation while preserving fairness and predictability, we can enable a regulatory ecosystem that not only upholds justice but also empowers sustainable economic growth in an interconnected world.'. Presenting the introductory remarks, Dr Lalit Bhasin, Chairperson- Conference and President, SILF said, 'The Conference has been organised by Services Export Promotion Council to explore avenues of exporting India's legal services overseas and also to welcome more collaboration and cooperation with the foreign legal fraternity. The Conference has explored India's evolving legal frameworks and their impact on international business, focusing on sectors such as Energy, Technology, Finance and Infrastructure. Experts have also discussed how to integrate ESG into the business model. Presentations were also made on the most topical issue today regarding Techno-Legal Regulations: AI, Data Privacy and Cybersecurity.' He further added, 'The Dispute Resolution mechanism in India, which is far from satisfactory, was also discussed and the recent steps taken by the Government of India to promote mediation were welcomed. It was also felt that there is an immediate need to liberalise India's legal market by deleting stringent conditions regarding advertising, etc.' Prominent dignitaries present at the conference included Dr Anju Rathi Rana, Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice, Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Chairperson- Conference and President, SILF; Dr Upasana Arora, Vice President, SEPC; Dr. Shardul S Shroff, Founder and Executive Chairman, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. and senior representatives from the Bar, Bench, top law firms, academia, industry, and regulatory bodies. The conference also paid tribute to the brave personnel of the Indian Armed Forces and offered heartfelt homage to those who lost their lives in the recent terror attack in Pahalgam. Against the backdrop of heightened cross-border tensions, participants stood in solidarity with the families of the fallen and reaffirmed their collective commitment to the principles of justice, national unity, and the rule of law. (ANI)
Hindustan Times
28-04-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Plea in Delhi HC challenges order holding restaurants can't mandatorily levy service charge
New Delhi, A plea in the Delhi High Court has challenged an order holding that restaurants cannot mandatorily levy service charge on food bills as it was against public interest and amounted to unfair trade practice. The appeal filed by National Restaurants Association of India is likely to be listed before a division bench on Tuesday. The association challenged the single judge's March 28 verdict dismissing the petitions of restaurant bodies against the Central Consumer Protection Authority guidelines prohibiting hotels and restaurants from mandatorily levying service charge on food bills. The single judge upheld the guidelines and imposed ₹1 lakh cost each on the petitioners to be deposited with the CCPA towards consumer welfare. The mandatory levy of service charge by the restaurant establishments, the single judge said, was against public interest and undermined the economic and social fabric of consumers as a class. The single judge further said the collection of service charge was a "double whammy" for consumers who were forced to pay Goods and Services Tax on top of the service tax. NRAI, in its appeal through advocate Lalit Bhasin, raised several questions of law including whether a levy of service charge, which is specifically mentioned on the menu card of a restaurant and displayed elsewhere in the establishment, constituted an unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. "Where it is specifically and distinctly provided on the menu card that service charge at a certain percentage of the bill is payable by the customer does it not constitute a contract where the customer becomes liable to pay the total amount of the bill which is inclusive of the service charge and taxes?" the plea asked. It added, "Is it permissible in law to treat the levy of service charge as a consumer protection right, as against the rights of millions of employees in catering establishments across the country. Is it not an anti labour practice?" Is it open to the authorities under the Consumer Protection Act to dictate to the owners of restaurants as to how they should structure the price, particularly when the Consumer Protection Act is not a price control legislation, it argued further. "Is it not open to the owners of restaurants to fix the price of the product by splitting the same under different nomenclatures?" the plea asked. The appeal further asked if the guidelines were not beyond the jurisdiction of the CCPA. "Is it not open to the customer not to avail the services of the restaurant if he does not wish to pay service charge?" it added. Before the single judge, Federation of Hotels and Restaurant Associations of India and NRAI had filed two separate petitions in 2022. The single judge, while referring to consumer complaints and restaurant bills in its judgment, said it was convinced that service charge was being "arbitrarily collected and coercively enforced" and it couldn't "be a mute spectator" in such a situation. "An establishment is free to price its products in the manner as it pleases taking into account the raw-materials, salaries, expenditure, capital expenses on premises, man and machinery, etc. However, once the pricing is done, to collect over and above the price, a prescribed rate of service charge – that too on a mandatory basis would not be justified," it added. The single judge said consumer rights couldn't be subjugated to an argument that a contract was being entered into by the consumer while entering the establishment to pay service charge as the payment and collection of service charge was contrary to the law. The verdict, however, said if consumers wished to pay any voluntary tip for the services, it wasn't barred. "The amount, however, ought not to be added by default in the bill or invoice and should be left to the customer's discretion," it ruled. The single judge clarified all restaurants would have to adhere to the guidelines passed by the CCPA and in case of any violation, would face action.
