Amarchand sizes up options for first international base as India's unlevel playing field continues to frustrate
Less than three years away from his firm's 100-year anniversary, Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co's Shardul Shroff is ambitious as ever.
October 27, 2014 at 08:08 PM
4 minute read
Less than three years away from his firm's 100-year anniversary, Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A Shroff & Co's Shardul Shroff is ambitious as ever. The corporate partner, who co-heads India's largest law firm alongside his brother Cyril, talks of possibly opening a ninth domestic office in one of the country's second-tier cities, and remains committed to breaking the 100-partner barrier by the end of the year. The firm currently has 86 partners.
Perhaps most importantly, his sights remain set on launching Amarchand's first international office – a move that could spark a major turning point in a legal market that has been purely domestic up to this point. Shroff identifies Singapore as potentially the destination of choice. "Singapore [is the strongest contender] because its links with India are quite strong," he explains. "Singapore enables clients to service the whole of the ASEAN market.
"But it could be Hong Kong, London, Dubai or New York – it depends on what 2016 looks like. It also depends where clients need us."
He makes it clear that the firm will approach the prospect of international expansion with caution. The goal is not to merely plant a flag, as lawyers are wont to say, but to ensure a profitable base that won't upset the firm's 'best friends' network.
"It would have to be an office of significance, not just a representative office where you receive the mail," he insists. "We want to do it properly. We also don't want to disturb our international relationships with global law firms – we want to preserve these. But equally we want to provide Indian expertise that is relevant to the international market. We want to be present in markets where the local Indian situation becomes relevant; approaching the clients on their doorstep rather than expecting them to come to India."
Entering the global market has, evidently, not been easy for any Indian law firm, even a relative behemoth like Amarchand. One of the reasons is that, despite the country's now flourishing economy, there remain just a handful of local companies operating abroad, and therefore few anchor clients for firms to follow. Under these circumstances Shroff says it is difficult for firms to compete beyond their own turf.
But the biggest barriers to firms' global aspirations are a host of administrative constraints within their own market. Until April this year, Indian firms could have no more than 20 partners. Although that rule has been binned, firms continue to be plagued by restrictions around maintaining a website, distributing marketing material and other advertising activities. Indian insurance companies, meanwhile, offer extremely limited professional indemnity cover to lawyers, who are also subject to an unlimited liability structure as opposed to the LLP option enjoyed by their UK and US counterparts.
Firms are also far from the stage of being able to access capital from non-lawyers, as UK firms can do in the wake of the Legal Services Act. Most outfits therefore remain small and with limited skill sets.
"This is what stands in the way of Indian firms becoming truly global," Shroff explains. "There are firms that have gone to China or Singapore but their offices are small and not significant enough to make a statement on behalf of Indian lawyers."
Although the restriction on partner numbers has been lifted, he believes there is a lot more work to do: "The gap needs to be reduced; they need to resolve the local firm issues and create a level playing field between local and international firms. They need to put a timeline on it – to bring in new rules."
As for international players coming to India, Shroff still thinks this could be permitted within the next 10 years, and insists it could be beneficial for the country, opening the market in "many ways".
Nonetheless, he believes that without new freedoms for domestic firms, such a move would be a disaster as it could place international firms at an advantage. "The regulatory restrictions [on Indian firms] need to be addressed," he argues. "Very few firms are ready for that kind of thing. The level playing field is critical."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/378/2023/04/Moscow-Russia-767x633.jpg)
Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll
5 minute read![As the Rules of the Game Change, Is the EU Taking a New Approach to Competition? As the Rules of the Game Change, Is the EU Taking a New Approach to Competition?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/bb/d3/1cba698f4432beaeba552f1c8e14/adobestock-656436782-767x633.jpg)
As the Rules of the Game Change, Is the EU Taking a New Approach to Competition?
5 minute read![AI Helped a Big Insurer in Australia Reduce Legal Costs by $20M AI Helped a Big Insurer in Australia Reduce Legal Costs by $20M](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/390/2024/03/AI-Machine-learning-767x633-4.jpg)
Trending Stories
- 1Dissenter Blasts 4th Circuit Majority Decision Upholding Meta's Section 230 Defense
- 2NBA Players Association Finds Its New GC in Warriors Front Office
- 3Prenuptial Agreement Spousal Support Waivers: Proceed With Caution
- 4DC Circuit Keeps Docs in Judge Newman's Misconduct Proceedings Sealed
- 5Litigators of the Week: US Soccer and MLS Fend Off Claims They Conspired to Scuttle Rival League’s Prospect
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250