Table of Contents

Contents

Table of Contents. 2

INTRODUCTION.. 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.. 5

LEGAL OUTSOURCING IN INDIA.. 6

Entry of LPOs in India and Why. 6

The Official Indian Position on Foreign Firms. 7

Impact of Outsourcing on India Pros and Cons. 9

CONSIDERATIONS FOR OUTSOURCING.. 12

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS. 18

BIBLIOGRAPHY.. 21

Page No.

INTRODUCTION

For the past few decades the term that can perhaps be said to have been the guiding
philosophy of most economies is globalisation the aim is to open up national
boundaries in terms of economic activity especially. The legal profession also has
naturally been affected by the trend of unification of economies, as there are clear
benefits to allowing foreign lawyers to set up shop in ones country. However, while
internationalisation of legal profession is an attractive concept, its actual implementation
would be extremely utopian in character. The legal profession will obviously meet
numerous barriers in its attempt to bring into existence a unified world bar where lawyers
can freely render services in any part of the world. These barriers would result from the
existence of widely divergent legal systems, linguistic differences, the desire to protect
ones local Bars and so on.

Nevertheless, partial opening of the legal sector to foreign firms and lawyers is becoming
the trend of the day. After the Business Process Outsourcing boom to India over the last
ten years, American firms started outsourcing more knowledge based as well, including
legal and accounting work. Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) essentially refers to
outsourcing legal related work like preparation of pleadings, docketing, proof-reading,
litigation support and research, case studies, transcription of recorded documents to
another country.[1] The phenomenon is also known as Legal Knowledge Services or
Legal Services Offshoring, and essentially implies getting foreign lawyers to do
domestic legal work.

Outsourcing of such work to India, for foreign law firms, is quite lucrative in terms of
reduction of operation costs; further, Indian lawyers in the past decade or so have been
able to satisfy the standards of work expected by foreign firms as well; which is why no
other South Asian nation is even close to competing with us as an LPO destination.

Employment as well as income prospects of Indian lawyers have increased due to this
trend. The Indian policy makers, the Bar Council of India (BCI), and as recently seen the
Courts as well, seem reluctant to allow entry of foreign firms into the country; in such a
scenario, indirectly setting up shop in India via the outsourcing mechanism allows these
firms to reap the benefits that working in India could provide to them. This paper studies
the phenomenon of LPO with reference to India, and ethical and other considerations that
arise from the same.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Aims and Objectives:

This paper aims to stuffy Legal Process Outsourcing in India its genesis and the reasons
behind it coming in, its pros and cons, and practical and ethical issues that arise.

Scope and Limitations:

This paper is limited in scope to legal process outsourcing, and more specifically to the
ethical considerations within it. Due to time and word limit constraints, the concept of
Foreign Legal Consultants and the entire tussle between the GATT countries, the Indian
government and BCI on entry of foreign firms is excluded from the scope. These have
only been explained in brief because it has encouraged the indirect route of coming via
LPO into India.

Research Questions:

What is legal process outsourcing and when did it start in India?

Why is India such a coveted destination for LPO?
How does India respond to letting in foreign firms, and has this encouraged LPO as it is
an indirect form of entry?
What are the pros and cons of LPO on the Indian legal fraternity and economy?
What are the ethical considerations that come into play with LPO? Can they be resolved
by stringent guidelines?
Sources of Data:

Primary sources of data such as Formal Opinions, and Secondary sources of data in terms
of journal, newspaper and blog articles have been used in this paper.

Method of Writing:

An interpretative and analytical method of writing has been used in this paper.

Mode of Citation:

A uniform mode of citation has been used throughout this paper.

LEGAL OUTSOURCING IN INDIA

Entry of LPO in India and Why

While the legal outsourcing boom can be said to have started in 2003-2004, outsourcing
of legal work to India started as early as 1996 initiated by the American firm Bickel and
Brewer who created a subsidiary in Hyderabad. In 2001, General Electric (GE) started off
shoring legal services to its captive centre in one of the India offices.[2] By 2005 there
were at least 60 legal service providers of varying size and nature of work in the industry.
[3] While in the beginning only paralegal and secretarial work was being outsourced,
gradually this extended to contract review, patent writing, litigation support and general
research.[4] Different studies use different estimates to project the expected growth of the
sector, since the variables in such estimation are hard to measure; what is undeniable
however is that the LPO sector is expanding at an ever increasing pace.

The primary rationale for outsourcing of legal work is the costs that it enables foreign
firms to cut costs. In the US for instance, one hour of legal work costs between $225 to
450; the same work in India can be done at $33 to $67 per hour given the lower salary
structures in India. It is estimated that the outsourced work in the US legal field is $20
billion.[5] Even assuming half of this entering India through outsourcing, it would be a
boon to the Indian legal fraternity.

Outsourcing legal work to India, it is said, can result in overall savings of up to 50% or
more, for the foreign firm in terms of expenses, and also for the clients because the cost
of providing them the service is lower. The financial advantages are not only because of
the difference in salaries, but also because of the cost of office space which in cities like
London and New York are sky-high.[6]

Additionally, the workforce of Indian lawyers comfortable with the English language and
trained by well structured law courses encourages getting legal work done by Indians.
Another advantage is the fact that India has a fairly similar legal system to the US and
UK, all based on the common law model.[7] The time gap between western countries and
India effectively means that work could be brought to India and sent back completed on a

single day.

The Official Indian Position on Foreign Firms

Even though the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) does not specifically
mention legal services, many Asian countries have accepted GATS as covering the legal
profession as well, and seek opening up of the legal profession between countries. For
e.g. South Korea has made an offer to open up its legal services. Malaysia on the other
hand has offered to permit foreign lawyers and firms to provide legal services covering
advisory services relating to their home country laws, international law, and Malaysian
offshore companies law thus it retains the concept of foreign legal consultants which
is now used the world over by not permitting them to practice domestic law[8]. India had
not, at the Uruguay and Doha rounds, made any comment of legal services, and hence is
technically under no obligation to provide market access to foreign legal consultants [9]

The Indian Law Ministry and the Bar Council have, over the last couple of decades, been
of the view that foreign firms should not be allowed in India.[10] This is founded on the
letter of the law which is almost straightforward: S. 29 of the Advocates Act states that
the only class of persons allowed to practise law are advocates who are entered on the
roll of the Indian Bar Councils. Further, as per the Act, while it is stated that non-Indians
can practice as advocates if their respective country allows Indians to practice
(reciprocity), and if the persons degree is recognized by the BCI, this is contradicted by
the provision that to practice one must be on the rolls of a State Bar, for which one must
be an Indian Citizen. Thus clearly very few foreigners have chosen to move to India and
practice here.

On 16th December, 2009 the Bombay High Court decided that the practice of all law by
foreign firms in India is illegal, in the Lawyers Collective case.[11] The foreign firms
argued that the practise of law under the Act only includes court-based legal work in
India and that transactional work was not subject to the Act. The Court rejected this view.
Within days of the order declaring practice by foreign firms illegal, Britains justice

department has swung into action and asked the Indian law ministry to intervene and
come up with a policy.[12] The Law Minister Mr. Veerappa Moily, however, stated that
the ministrys moves to develop a policy have always been shot down by the BCI. BCI
Chairman SNP Sinha justifies their stand by saying that if the UK only takes Indian
lawyers to do corporate work and not practice in their courts, there is no reason for India
to open up its practice; thus the BCI insists on reciprocity.[13]

Given this hesitation to allow foreign firms to establish offices and practice in India, it is
no surprise that foreign firms have been entering into informal arrangements like referral
or best friend agreements with Indian ones; which is likely to continue till the Indian
government opens up its doors to them. Such tie ups are low-cost ways to build a
presence and profile in India it helps the firm test the waters and see if it has enough
opportunities.[14] Apart from this, the other major resultant phenomenon arising from the
conservative Indian position is that of legal outsourcing units, because by this means,
foreign firms can legally reap the benefits of working in India, if not working for Indian
clients and under Indian law per se.

As far as the nature of LPO units is concerned, they are separate Indian companies, given
the reluctance of Indian authorities to let in foreign law firms directly. While majority of
them are captive of a particular law firm[15] or corporate house[16], while others are
third party vendors and work for different law firms.[17] However LPO units, whatever
their administrative structure, are not law firms in that they dont practice law or
provide legal advice; if a client they have worked for wants legal representation etc., they
have to go to the foreign law firms concerned.[18] In this manner, they circumvent the
official Indian disapproval of foreign firms entering India

Impact of Outsourcing on India Pros and Cons

Given the sheer number of lawyers in India today, it is clear that majority of them to not
make it to the top of the profession so to speak, and are looking for more meaningful
employment. The LPO industry is considered a boon for young law graduates who have

no work experience and can easily be incorporated in this industry. Consequently, those
who do no get recruited by big Indian corporate firms can use the LPO route and earn
more than they would if they took to litigation where there are already an excess number
of experienced lawyers. In this regard, the LPO route benefits not only the foreign firm,
but also pours in money into the Indian economy.[19] An indirect benefit could also be
the reduction of corruption in the judiciary reduced number of lawyers practicing in the
courts hence lesser malpractices.

However, outsourcing of legal work also has certain cons that affect the progress of this
industry in the legal sector. The first relates to secrecy of documents; some believe that
the clients may not be happy to know that the firm they retain does not do their work, and
that it may unethical to do so.

Secondly like all other outsourcing industries, working hours would be a biological and
social concern, as Indian lawyers would have to work at night when dealing with foreign
clients. One of the biggest concerns espoused by senior Indian lawyers has been that in
the last few years there has been a dearth of young proficient lawyers in the practice.
Expansion of legal outsourcing means that even fewer of the graduates from law schools
each year will end up joining the practice as the financial gains in the alternative options
are quite attractive. Further, faculty in law schools at present are also usually not highly
compensated and the LPO route may seem lucrative to them as well. Thus overall the
number of legal minds in the country working for clients and deals within the country
will reduce.[20] One can also not argue that a person may practice regularly and
occasionally engage in adhoc work for an LPO and vice versa, because Rule 47 of the
Bar Councils Rules governing Advocates doesnt allow advocates registered with the Bar
Council of India (BCI) to work in any other organization while practicing.[21]

Another concern is that not many Indian lawyers have passed US and UK Bar exams,
which would mean that the industry would be restricted to comparatively lower end
services which do not involve client counselling etc, or that the persons doing legal work
for foreign clients arent entirely trained to do so. The first of these lowers the dignity of
Indian lawyers and the latter is an unethical way of handling client problems on the part

of the foreign firm, both of which are problematic. It is probably due to this, that
outsourcing is usually in terms of corporate law, which is more similar than the civil and
criminal aspects of the concerned legal systems.

The opportunities brought by LPOs are immense, but there are a number of
considerations India has to keep in mind; practices that may raise concerns over data
security and service quality in the buyers market abroad have to be weeded out.[22]

CONSIDERATIONS FOR OUTSOURCING

The positive and negative sides to legal services outsourcing have been discussed above.
Taking off from there, it is now imperative to see what considerations, ethical or
practical, determine the efficacy and value of outsourcing activity.

(1) The overarching ethical issue of legal process outsourcing is the problem of the
unauthorized practice of law. The American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional
Conduct, Rule 5.5 (a) states: A lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction in violation
of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction or assist another in doing so.
The reason behind this being an issue is to prevent unqualified persons from providing
legal advice and to limit practice of law to members of the bar.[23] Although the
definition and terms of ABA Model Rule 5.5 may seem to explicitly outlaw offshoring,
the nuance is in the phrase practice of law. Legally, anyone who is not a registered
lawyer in the U.S. cannot give legal advice nor do anything that would constitute
practicing law. This has typically restricted LPO firms from supplying core functions
such as legal opinions, judgments, or crucial communications with clients. LPO firms,
however, do perform a variety a non-core, manpower intensive functions such as legal

transcription, Due Diligence services, document conversion, legal data entry, legal coding
and indexing.[24]

At least two ethics panels in the US already have addressed the issue, and both ruled in
favour of LPOs. One of these was the American Bar Association Ethics Opinion which
stated that outsourcing to lawyers and even non-lawyers is a salutary trend as long as
ethics rules are followed. The opinion details rules to be followed which place ethical
responsibilities on the part of the foreign firm outsourcing its work, ranging from
ensuring the LPO unit hires competent people, to proper supervision.[25] Essentially,
offshoring is not unethical and illegal, because even though the lawyer in India is not
authorized by an American state to practice law, the review by American lawyers
sanitizes the process. The burden is on the U.S. attorney engaged to ensure offshoring
meets these standards and that he/she does not participate in aiding unauthorized and
therefore illegal practice of the law.[26]

Hence one can conclude that offshoring is legal in theory, but also dependent on the
nature of the services being outsourced and the structure and degree of supervision in the
relationship.

(2) One of the major concerns would naturally be as to whether outsourcing of legal
services means a compromise in quality as that would amount to the clients of the foreign
firms being cheated out of what they deserve. In this regard a number of LPO units in
India say that they go far beyond what is considered typical LPO work and the services
they provide compare favourable with work done by attorneys at top tier firms in the
West. Further, a team of US-licenses attorneys usually supervise the work done; this
means both quality assurance and accountability for the western clients.[27] Also, if
recruitment is selectively done from the top law colleges in the country and experienced
professionals who are then trained in American law, the problem of quality control gets
minimized.[28]

In this regard, the UKs Law Society had earlier raised concerns about client

confidentiality and supervision and stated that liability remains with the English firm
even if it outsources work.[29] As already mentioned, the recent ABA Formal Opinion
sets out that it is the responsibility for the U.S. lawyer to ensure that the persons
performing their tasks are competent to perform them, uphold standards of
confidentiality, and take reasonable measures to ensure they do not violate US Federal
and State ethical codes. For ensuring this, a reasonably strict level of supervision is
mandated.

(3) Confidentiality is a fundamental principle of a client-lawyer relationship. Offshoring

presents specific challenges to confidentiality in terms of security of connection and
legality of transferring information. For some back office tasks like document review, it is
possible for companies to upload documents on a secure Intranet site, have foreign
lawyers work on it, and then return it to the client. In this case the foreign lawyers only
need limited information and do not need to know the larger context of the case.
However, with the trend toward complex patent drafting and legal research, it is
necessary for foreign lawyers to be privy to more information. Patent applications, for
e.g. can be especially tricky because there exist laws that regulate what technology can be
shipped abroad without a license.[30]

One way to deal with these issues is to not share any confidential information when
outsourcing and instead include hypothetical anecdotes to steer the researcher. Despite
these measures (which can be limiting to quality and are by no means foolproof) there
remain real concerns of the security of any transaction over the Internet. Security
concerns will thus continue to be a limiting factor to the complexity of work that is
offshored.

(4) Another ethical issue relates to whether or not the clients deserves to know who is
actually doing his work, because a reasonable man would not expect his lawyer to get the
work done by another. The ethics of disclosure become even more pronounced when
discussing fee sharing. Although the law firm is most likely saving significantly from
offshoring, they are under no strict legal obligation to pass these savings onto the client.
[31]

In practice there have emerged two ways a lawyer can bill for offshored legal services.
First, the offshored costs can be billed to the client as fees. In this scenario the law firm
may or may not pass on the lower costs to the client, because they can stick to their
earlier rates. In regard to this scenario, a 2006 Los Angeles Bar Association opinion
stated that the lawyer has an obligation to accurately disclose the reason for those fees.
[32] The second method of billing is to list offshoring as an expense incurred by the law
firm. In this case the bill should represent the actual amount spent on the legal services
with no mark up. In this scenario the cost saving is passed onto the client.

The issue of fee sharing is an important ethical issue to discuss as it gets to the heart of
what some think will be the LPO revolution of the legal industry. Many cite the profitable
pyramid structure based on billable hours of western law firms as the driving force
behind LPO. In this regard LPO presents a solution, but the degree to which it translates
into savings can depend on how the change is represented in billing procedures.[33]

(5) Lawyers have an important duty to identify and resolve conflicts of interest in their
legal work conflicts between two different clients, or conflicts between client interest
and personal interests. Offshoring complicates the issues of conflicts of interest in several
ways. First in many common structures of outsourcing the role of the middleman, or LPO
company, is often taking an active role in distributing work assignments and monitoring
lawyers performing outsourced work. In this scenario it seems logical the LPO company
would need to have a working knowledge and information regarding clients served and
their corresponding lawyers.[34] Second, it is hard to determine whether an LPO
company or middleman working with a firm is thus associated with the firm, and
precluded from representing a client with which any lawyer in the firm may have a
conflict of interest. Third, it is difficult for LPO companies to assess obligations between
former and current clients because their contracts are for discrete projects.[35] Foreign
lawyers performing the work cannot be held accountable under U.S. law for instance; this
underlying complication brings us to the next issue of discipline.

(6) The question of discipline is key to ensure protection if there is a problem with

offshoring, but it is still not clear what ethical standards an outsourced lawyer will be
held accountable to. Darya Pollack, and American expert, summarises the issue regarding
discipline by writing:

Are outsourced lawyers bound only by 1) the ethical rules of their home bar; 2) the
ethical rules of each state for which they perform services; 3) the ABA Model Rules of
Professional Conduct; or 4) some combination of the above?[36]

There are problems with applying each of the standards listed above. Using the standards
of a lawyers home bar is not viable because it is possible there may be differences in
ethical rules between countries regarding important issues. It would be similarly
impractical to regulate on a state by state basis within the U.S., because outsourced
lawyers are likely to practice in more than one state. The best option would be to have all
outsourced lawyers bound by the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, or
something of its equivalent. Even this situation is a hypothetical as the Model Rules are
currently only advisory and if they were to become the standard, it would require State
Bar Associations in the US to secede some of their power.[37]

Moving beyond the problem of an ethical standard, there is the question of enforcement.
Who would have the right to bring enforcement actions, and where would they be
brought? Furthermore, who would they be brought against- the U.S. law firm, the LPO
firm/business, or the individual lawyer performing outsourced work? The questions
regarding enforcement reflect the great degree of uncertainty that surrounds the industry.
Thus far, these issues have been handled within contracts between LPO companies and
clients. As of yet, there has not been a major incident or security breech prompting
widespread public outcry, but the first mishandling of information is sure to lead to
concerns over disciplinary regulation.[38]

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

Legal process outsourcing (LPO) has virtually taken the Indian legal market by storm.
With humble beginnings in the form of legal transcription, a modern Indian LPO now
boasts of undertaking high-end legal work like drafting software licensing agreements,
conducting legal due diligence and reviewing commercial contracts. India can tap this
burgeoning LPO market for the simple reason that it has a vast resource of legal talent.
However, while LPO in India is expanding, there are still numerous firms and clients
reluctant to join the bandwagon due to issues of confidentiality and loss off attorneyclient privilege. As the Indian Advocates Act, 1961, does not extend the attorney-client
privilege to foreign legal work outsourced to India, this is a valid concern, and brings
about the need for India to have its own policy and rules with respect to outsourcing.

As seen, the ABA in the USA has released a formal opinion on the issue of LPO. There
have been three formal State Bar Association opinions addressing the specific issue of
legal offshoring: New York (August 2006), San Diego (2007), and Florida (September
2007). In June 2006 the Los Angeles Bar Association considered the issue of fee sharing
in relation to domestic contracting and issued an opinion that has relevance to offshoring

urthermore, they are based on the laws of the individual state and are purely advisory and
not binding either in state or national jurisdiction. However, these also have issues apart
from the fact that they are not entirely authoritative and are statements of opinion which
dont lay down a concrete set of rules. For e.g. although throughout the opinions and a
growing body of literature there is a growing consensus that supervision is the
mitigating factor in offshoring, there are no specific regulations as to what supervision
entails.[39] The opinions have also not recognized the practical reality offshoring
presents in terms of time difference, distance, language, and training.

Leading the way, however, in this regard has been the LPO industry itself. It is through
individual contracts between offshoring companies and their clients that many forms of
self- regulation and testing have developed. Recognizing the novelty of their service and

the need to legitimize their field, leaders of LPO both in India and the US have pushed
forward with training, certification tests, other forms of quality insurance, and guidelines
to solve the ethical implications.[40] Moves are being made both in India, the US/UK, in
a growing library of literature and in the on-line community of blogging where LPO
professionals/customers push for standards, through informal dialogue and guidelines.
[41] Off late, legal talent management firms like Rainmaker and the Indira Gandhi Open
School (IGNOU) have, in fact started one year courses training lawyers and law students
to acclimatize them to work in LPOs, focussing on skills needed in LPO: English
fluency, technology and professional skills, personal effectiveness and legal knowledge.
[42]

Further steps are required, however. The Indian government can act as a catalyst and
facilitate the influx of outsourcing work to India. It can do so by extending tax
concessionspresently available to BPOsto LPOs. The government can also amend
the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Advocates Act, 1961, with a view to
protecting the privacy and confidentiality of foreign clients; this will ensure
confidentiality of information handled by LPOs.[43]

The legal fraternity and law firms can also contribute their bit to the growth of the LPO
sector in India by opening a separate LPO unit to handle all outsourced work. Since
several Indian law firms already represent foreign clients, it will be easier for them to
operate an LPO unit as compared to a stand-alone start-up LPO outfit.

The Bar Council of India or the Society of Indian Law Firms can supplement the efforts
of the legal fraternity and law firms by formulating a code of conduct or developing
guidelines for undertaking LPO work in India. As discussed in this paper, outsourcing in
the researchers opinion, is a positive development. However, given that it has limitations
and has raised concerns as to the quality and sanctity of the Indian legal fraternity
practising in Courts, it makes all the more sense for India to devise its own policy and
rules so that it can encourage outsourcing in a controlled manner. If the authorities cannot
prevent this phenomenon, at least they can regulate it to their advantage.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Articles:

Bar Council Should Draw a Code of Conduct for LPO Units (Feb 10, 2006) sourced
from www.financialexpress.com/news/bar-council-should-draw-a-code-of-conduct-forlpo-units/54622/0[1].
Off shoring Legal Services to India (December, 2005) sourced from
www.valuenotes.biz/bpo/legaloutsourcing.asp[2].
Akshaya Mukul, UK Wants India to Act on Legal Firms Issue, Times of India
(Bangalore, Dec 30, 2009).
Alexandra Hanson, Legal Process Outsourcing To India: So Hot Right Now!, 62 SMU
L. Rev. 1889 (2009).
Ashwin Madhawan, Outsourcing of Legal Services Its Implications on Indian Legal
Profession, 47(1) Indian Journal of International Law 96 (2007).
Darya Pollack, Im Calling My Lawyerin India!: Ethical Issues in International Legal
Outsourcing, 11 UCLA J. Intl L. & Foreign Aff. 99 (2006).
Dorothy Thomas, Legal Process Outsourcing The Argument for India, The Hindu:
Business Line (October 13, 2005) sourced from
www.blonnet.com/2005/10/03/stories/2005100300850900.htm[3].
Kian Ganz, Advocates Act Unfit For Purpose After Lawyers Collective HC Judgment
(Dec 18, 2009) sourced from www.legallyindia.com/20091218353/Analysis/AdvocatesAct-unfit-for-purpose-after-Lawyers-Collective-HC-judgment[4].
KK Venugopal, Foreign Legal Consultants and the Emerging Economies of Asia, K
Gururaja Charis Advocacy and Professional Ethics (1st edn., Nagpur, Wadhwa and Co.,
2000).
Rashmi Agarwal, India Courts Western Law Firms, sourced from www.outsourcingasia.com/india2.html[5].

Offshoring of Legal Services: An Ethical Perspective on Outsourcing Abroad, 717

Practicing Law Institute 97 (Dec.2004-Jan.2005).
Alison Kadzik, The Current Trend to Outsource Legal Work Abroad and the Ethical
Issues Related to Such Practices. 19 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 731 (2006).
Malathi Nayak, IGNOU, Rainmaker Offer LPO Courses, (Dec 23, 2009) sourced from
www.livemint.com/2009/02/17231318/Ignou-Rainmaker-offer-course.html[6].
Malathi Nayak, India Holds Huge Opportunity for Legal Outsourcing (Dec 24, 2009)
sourced from www.livemint.com/2009/01/30002134/India-holds-a-hugeopportunity.html[7].
Maya Karwande, Legal Process Outsourcing: Efficient and Ethical? (2008) sourced
from www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0926-karwande.shtm[8].
Sandeep Dave, Outsourcing Legal Services to India sourced from
www.globallawreview.com/outsourcing.html[9].

Books:

K Gururaja Charis Advocacy and Professional Ethics (1st edn., Nagpur, Wadhwa and
Co., 2000).
Raju Ramachandran, Professional Ethics: Changing Profession, Changing Ethics (New
Delhi, Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2004).

Miscellaneous:

Judgment

Bombay High Court Writ Petition 1526 of 1999. The Judgment can be found at
www.legallyindia.com/images/stories/pdf/Lawyers%20Collective%20v%20Ashurst
%20&%20Ors%20Judgement%2016%20Dec%202009.pdf[10].
Formal Opinions

American Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics, Formal Opinion 08-451

(August 5, 2008) sourced from www.abanet.org/abanet/media/release/news_release.cfm?
releaseid=435[11].
Los Angeles Bar Association Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee Opinion
No. 518 (June 19, 2006) sourced from www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/Documents/
%20Ethics%20%20%20[12] Opinions/Files/Ethics_Opinion_518.pdf.

Websites

blog.law-scribe.com/[13]
international.westlaw.com[14].
legallyours.blogspot.com/[15].
www.legalsupportglobal.com/faq.html[16].
www.sddglobal.com/[17].
[1] Dorothy Thomas, Legal Process Outsourcing The Argument for India, The Hindu:
Business Line (October 13, 2005) sourced from
www.blonnet.com/2005/10/03/stories/2005100300850900.htm[3].
[2] Ashwin Madhawan, Outsourcing of Legal Services Its Implications on Indian
Legal Profession, 47(1) Indian Journal of International Law 96, 98(2007).

[3] See Off shoring Legal Services to India (December, 2005) sourced from
www.valuenotes.biz/bpo/legaloutsourcing.asp[2].

[4] Supra. note 2 at 98.

[5] Rashmi Agarwal, India Courts Western Law Firms, sourced from
www.outsourcing-asia.com/india2.html[5].

[6] www.legalsupportglobal.com/faq.html[16].

[7] Supra. note 2, at 99.

[8] KK Venugopal, Foreign Legal Consultants and the Emerging Economies of Asia, K
Gururaja Charis Advocacy and Professional Ethics (1st edn., Nagpur, Wadhwa and Co.,
2000) at 616.

[9] Raju Ramachandran, Professional Ethics: Changing Profession, Changing Ethics

(New Delhi, Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2004) at 84-86

[10] See generally, Id.

[11] Writ Petition 1526 of 1999. In the 1990s Ashurst Morris Crisp, as it was then
known, Chadbourne & Parke and White & Case were granted licences by the Reserve
Bank of India (RBI) to set up liaison offices in India. In 1995 the Mumbai-based nongovernmental organisation the Lawyers Collective challenged this in the Bombay High
Court and argued that the foreign firms were practising law in contravention of the 1961
Advocates Act. The Judgment can be found at

www.legallyindia.com/images/stories/pdf/Lawyers%20Collective%20v%20Ashurst
%20&%20Ors%20Judgement%2016%20Dec%202009.pdf[10].

[12] Kian Ganz, Advocates Act Unfit For Purpose After Lawyers Collective HC
Judgment (Dec 18, 2009) sourced from
www.legallyindia.com/20091218353/Analysis/Advocates-Act-unfit-for-purpose-afterLawyers-Collective-HC-judgment[4].

[13] Akshaya Mukul, UK Wants India to Act on Legal Firms Issue, Times of India
(Bangalore, Dec 30, 2009).

[14] Malathi Nayak, India Holds Huge Opportunity for Legal Outsourcing (Dec 24,
2009) sourced from www.livemint.com/2009/01/30002134/India-holds-a-hugeopportunity.html[7].

[15] For instance Clifford Chance set up Integreon Solutions, the worlds largest
offshoring initiative.

[16] The GE example mentioned earlier is an example.

[17] E.g. in the case of SDD Global (See Infra. note 27), while attorneys form SmithDehn
LLP play an role in the management, supervision, and training at SDD, the Indian
company is not a captive of any one law firm, and it has clients who are not clients of
SmithDehn. Other examples are CPA Global, Mindcrest and LawScribe.

[18] See Maya Karwande, Legal Process Outsourcing: Efficient and Ethical? (2008)
sourced from www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0926-karwande.shtm[8] for a discussion on the
different models for setting up LPO units.

[19] See Supra. note 2, at 100-1.

[20] See Supra. note 2, at 102.

[21] Id.

[22] Supra. note 5.

[23] Darya Pollack, Im Calling My Lawyerin India!: Ethical Issues in International

Legal Outsourcing, 11 UCLA J. Intl L. & Foreign Aff. 99 (2006) sourced from
international.westlaw.com[14].

[24] Supra. note 18.

[25] American Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics, Formal Opinion 08451 (August 5, 2008) sourced from
www.abanet.org/abanet/media/release/news_release.cfm?releaseid=435[11].

[26] Mark Tuft, Offshoring of Legal Services: An Ethical Perspective on Outsourcing

Abroad, 717 Practicing Law Institute 97 (Dec.2004-Jan.2005) sourced from
international.westlaw.com[14].

[27] www.sddglobal.com/[17]. SDD Global Solutions is one of the best known LPOs in
India today. Managed by SmithDehn LLP based in London and New York, SDD has
offices in Bangalore, Mysore and London, it has primary focus on entertainment and

broadcasting law and intellectual property.

[28] For instance SDD Global (refer Id.) claims it gives an associates position to one out
of every 900 applicants are then hold rigorous training sessions.

[29] Sandeep Dave, Outsourcing Legal Services to India sourced from

www.globallawreview.com/outsourcing.html[9].

[30] See Alison Kadzik, The Current Trend to Outsource Legal Work Abroad and the
Ethical Issues Related to Such Practices. 19 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 731
(2006) sourced from international.westlaw.com[14].

[31] Supra. note 26.

[32] Los Angeles Bar Association Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee
Opinion No. 518 (June 19, 2006) sourced from www.lacba.org/Files/Main
%20Folder/Documents/%20Ethics
%20%20%20Opinions/Files/Ethics_Opinion_518.pdf[18].

[33] Supra. note 18.

[34] Supra. note 30.

[35] Alexandra Hanson, Legal Process Outsourcing To India: So Hot Right Now!, 62
SMU L. Rev. 1889 (2009) sourced from international.westlaw.com[14].

[36] Supra. note 23.

[37] See Id.

[38] See Id. and Supra. note 18.

[39] Supra. note 18.

[40] Supra. note 18.

[41] An example of an Indian blog entirely on LPO and developments in the field is
Rahul Jindals blog found at legallyours.blogspot.com/[15]. On the other hand,
LawScribes LPO Blog (found at blog.law-scribe.com/)[19] examines the offshoring
industry from an American and English perspective.

[42] Malathi Nayak, IGNOU, Rainmaker Offer LPO Courses, (Dec 23, 2009) sourced
from www.livemint.com/2009/02/17231318/Ignou-Rainmaker-offer-course.html[6].

[43] Bar Council Should Draw a Code of Conduct for LPO Units (Feb 10, 2006)
sourced from www.financialexpress.com/news/bar-council-should-draw-a-code-ofconduct-for-lpo-units/54622/0[1].

Endnotes:
www.financialexpress.com/news/bar-council-should-draw-a-code-of-conduct-for-lpounits/54622/0: http://www.financialexpress.com/news/bar-council-should-draw-a-codeof-conduct-for-lpo-units/54622/0

www.valuenotes.biz/bpo/legaloutsourcing.asp:
http://www.valuenotes.biz/bpo/legaloutsourcing.asp
www.blonnet.com/2005/10/03/stories/2005100300850900.htm:
http://www.blonnet.com/2005/10/03/stories/2005100300850900.htm
www.legallyindia.com/20091218353/Analysis/Advocates-Act-unfit-for-purpose-afterLawyers-Collective-HC-judgment:
http://www.legallyindia.com/20091218353/Analysis/Advocates-Act-unfit-for-purposeafter-Lawyers-Collective-HC-judgment
www.outsourcing-asia.com/india2.html: http://www.outsourcing-asia.com/india2.html
www.livemint.com/2009/02/17231318/Ignou-Rainmaker-offer-course.html:
http://www.livemint.com/2009/02/17231318/Ignou-Rainmaker-offer-course.html
www.livemint.com/2009/01/30002134/India-holds-a-huge-opportunity.html:
http://www.livemint.com/2009/01/30002134/India-holds-a-huge-opportunity.html
www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0926-karwande.shtm:
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2008,0926-karwande.shtm
www.globallawreview.com/outsourcing.html:
http://www.globallawreview.com/outsourcing.html
www.legallyindia.com/images/stories/pdf/Lawyers%20Collective%20v%20Ashurst
%20&%20Ors%20Judgement%2016%20Dec%202009.pdf:
http://www.legallyindia.com/images/stories/pdf/Lawyers%20Collective%20v%20Ashurst
%20&%20Ors%20Judgement%2016%20Dec%202009.pdf
www.abanet.org/abanet/media/release/news_release.cfm?releaseid=435:
http://www.abanet.org/abanet/media/release/news_release.cfm?releaseid=435
www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/Documents/%20Ethics%20%20%20:
http://www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/Documents/%20Ethics%20%20%20
blog.law-scribe.com/: http://blog.law-scribe.com/
international.westlaw.com: http://international.westlaw.com
legallyours.blogspot.com/: http://legallyours.blogspot.com/

www.legalsupportglobal.com/faq.html: http://www.legalsupportglobal.com/faq.html
www.sddglobal.com/: http://www.sddglobal.com/
www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/Documents/%20Ethics
%20%20%20Opinions/Files/Ethics_Opinion_518.pdf: http://www.lacba.org/Files/Main
%20Folder/Documents/%20Ethics%20%20%20Opinions/Files/Ethics_Opinion_518.pdf
blog.law-scribe.com/): http://blog.law-scribe.com/