Currently, agitation by lawyers leading to work stoppages in courts is a regular feature. A nadir of sorts was reached recently in Kolkata where advocates practising at the Calcutta High Court decided to stay away from work for three days because of the heat wave. The disapproval of the chief justice - as also the fact that court rooms at the high court are at least air-conditioned - made no difference. If foreign competition leads to an improvement with Indian lawyers becoming more professional, then that would be a big gain. One of the main reasons for the legal delays in India is the granting of numerous adjournments of hearings, some of which often appear to suit the convenience of lawyers appearing in the relevant cases.
While competition from more professional international practitioners is important and would be a welcome development, two issues need to be kept in mind. First, should opening up in India require reciprocity and should lawyers and law firms from India be required to have the same kind of access to the legal world of those countries that India is giving access to? This may be difficult to ensure. Uniform access across the US, for example, is likely impossible - as, under its federal system, each state has the right to set its own regulations. On the other hand, at the moment Indian law firms can open shop in the main US commercial centres, whereas American law firms cannot do the same in India. Secondly, there is the equally important need to address some of the long-standing demands of Indian law firms like their being allowed to advertise, and also constitute themselves as limited liability partnerships. Perhaps the most important missing part is adequate infrastructure for arbitration and mediation which can be a big source of revenue.
