Super Lawyer

Category: Featured Insights

  • Poornima Hatti, Partner-Dispute Resolution, Samvad Partners, on studying in London, her association with the UN, and editing her book

    Poornima Hatti, Partner-Dispute Resolution, Samvad Partners, on studying in London, her association with the UN, and editing her book

    Poornima Hatti graduated from NLSIU, Bangalore, in 2003. She then went on to pursue her Masters in 2005 from London School of Economics. Her repertoire includes associations with the likes of Amarchand Mangaldas and Herbert Smith. She is currently Partner-Dispute Resolution at Samvad Partners. Poornima also has strong expertise as an anti harassment professional particularly in relation to anti sexual harassment issues at the workplace. She sits as an external independent professional on a number of enquiry committees. She is also a trained mediator. She works with various public interest organisations particularly on matters of urban planning and growth on a pro bono basis.

    In this interview we speak to her about:

    • Her time at NLSIU
    • Her experience at Tier-I firms
    • Her pro bono work

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I would like to believe I am a thinking lawyer who believes that law can bring about change. My practice lies in dispute resolution and in related advisory.

     

    Why did you choose to pursue a degree in law?

    My parents are lawyers, so black robes and AIR manuals were not alien to me. I was therefore extremely aware of law as a profession and the wide ranging work that could be done as a lawyer. Looking back, in 1997, a lot of my peers were also very excited about the prospect of learning law at the National Law School (NLSIU). As I learned more about the institution and the people involved in the new “legal experiment”, I was very interested in getting admission at NLSIU. If I had not gotten through to NLSIU perhaps I would have looked at becoming a doctor.

     

    Give us a brief overview of your life at NLSIU.

    I enjoyed all aspects of my time spent at the NLSIU. I can truly say that I met some amazing and very intelligent people, both in terms of students and faculty, many of whom are now lifelong friends. The institution taught me to write and to think independently and shaped my political and ideological beliefs. For the first time I understood what dissent was and how dissent should be respected. It gave me the confidence to believe in myself and truly allowed me to explore the myriad opportunities a young law student has within her reach.

    I am not sure whether there is a “NLU culture”. Institutions are often shaped by the people who lead them. I know that there are non NLU universities in India where very interesting courses that are being taught and where the environment is truly conducive for a holistic legal education. Every institution should do all it can to be true to its own idea of why it came to be.

     

    What are the subjects that you took particular interest in, during your law school days?

    I was interested in the humanities, particularly in political science. Constitutional law was also very exciting and this led me to look more closely at constitution theory at the London School of Economics where I studied later. I even came back and taught it at NLSIU as a seminar course. At times the subject itself may be appealing and at other times the people who teach a subject can make you very interested in it! I was clear that criminal law was not for me! I was always clear that I would be a disputes lawyer, courts were always more inviting to me. Even today it is difficult to predict how events can unfold in Court, you may be hoping for a dull day, only to be surprised later.

     

    What activities, both academic and non-academic that you engaged in as a law student?

    In a fairly small group of students in a university, you can try your hand at most things and I did! I was not very good at sports and even broke my ankle trying to high jump in my first year, but still won a medal. I did debate, quiz and participated in a number of student bar association activities, primarily the legal services clinic. I was also elected as president of the student bar association in my fourth year and I learnt many things about working with people in this role. I was late to the mooting scene and only did so in my fifth year and participated in the Bar Council Moot and the International Maritime Arbitration Moot in Brisbane.

    I cannot stress how important it is to be involved in non academic activities at your institutions. These activities allow you to engage with your own peers in different contexts and allow you to build skills which will stand you in good stead in whatever path you choose later. You will learn to engage with the “real world” in many ways.

    Even as partners, we do work with Chambers of Commerce and other institutions that interest us or that we are passionate about. I would love for mediation to be used more actively and so I am part of the Centre for Advanced Mediation Practice here in Bangalore.

     

    What kind of internships did you engage in during your student years?

    Almost all my internships were connected with dispute resolution as an area of practice. I interned with non governmental organisations who were involved in litigation, like the Environment Support Group and Human Rights Law Network. I later interned with the National Human Rights Commission, with the then Attorney General’s office and finally clerked with a Supreme Court judge. Each internship taught me valuable skills and perspectives. It also gave me the opportunity to meet with some wonderful people. Looking back, each person I worked with taught me something new in terms of working with people, approaching clients or looking at a solution for a problem. I would say choose your internships carefully and work hard. There is someone always watching.

     

    Would you say higher studies are absolutely essential for a career in law?

    No, an LLM is not essential for a practising lawyer. However, it does give you perspective on theory and practice and it gave me, a more rounded view of the world. During my time in London, I also did some mini pupillages at a few Barristers’ Chambers and this gave me an insight into the working of the law outside of India.

    Which is the ideal time to do an L.L.M?

    I would strongly recommend working for a few years. Personally, I appreciated the class room better, made better use of my time as a student both academically and in terms of peer interaction, as I had learned to value my personal time. One also approaches law differently, after one has seen it being practised. You want to solve a problem, and you think out of the box.

     

    What are your areas of specialisation in law?

    I have always been a disputes lawyer. Today I am a commercial disputes lawyers, although we do undertake a few pro bono matters which are public law matters. As a disputes lawyer, other than the procedural laws that are essential, one learns to look at various issues in the context of different disputes. It could be a projects/infrastructure dispute or a complex shareholders disputes or an intellectual property dispute, most practising dispute lawyers handle all kinds of disputes. Of course there are specialist IP disputes lawyers and maritime lawyers but most disputes lawyers work across the spectrum.

    Every dispute teaches me something new.  My advice to law students would be not to specialise too early. Try and get adequate exposure to as many types of law as possible and then you can choose to specialise. A well rounded lawyer can also be prepared for issues that may arise across practice areas and may not be pigeon holed one way or another.

     

    How were the first few years after your graduation?

    I was fortunate enough to not be surprised by law in terms of the substantive aspects of law when I started working. The practise of the law is a completely different thing, one needs to understand client expectations, time management and one needs to learn a whole lot of people skills along with substantive law. A lot of this is not taught at law school and often internships do not offer real responsibility in terms of communication with all parties involved. As you grow senior, you will realise that people skills will stand you in good stead. Often clients tell me, that they chose to work with people they like and not always because they are fantastic lawyers. To be fair, law schools cannot prepare you for the real world practice, that is where the first few years are important. Young lawyers need to understand where and how they can be trained with rigour and opt for those places to work.

     

    Give us some insights on the qualities that Tier-I firms look for in prospective candidates.

    I think the focus should be for young lawyers to work with good people and where they can be busy. If you wish to work on diverse areas of law or a particular kind of law, then choose accordingly. Importantly, there should be an opportunity to learn and think. In terms of what does a law firm look for in a prospective candidate, I think any good law firm, even we at Samvad, look for a good work ethic and enthusiasm. There is nothing more refreshing than a young lawyer thinking ahead of his senior and adding value to the case at hand. These are things that can be seen in the context of an internship, so again, young lawyers should make the most of their internships.  I have seen this at Amarchand, at Herbert Smith LLP (as it then was) and here at Samvad.

     

    Tell us about your association with the UN.

    (Poornima has worked with the Executive Board of UN women where she has worked on equal pay and other women’s rights issues across the South East Asia region.)

    I was part of the Executive Committee at UNIFEM (now UN Women) in Singapore. As Singapore is a high income country, the group worked on issues relating to women across South East Asia, which included raising awareness of the UN Convention for Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), working with local non governmental organisations on issues of violence against women, be it in Indonesia or Cambodia. We also focused on ensuring that domestic help/maids employed in Singapore would get a day off during their work week and ensuring that payments were made properly. We even worked on a shadow committee report for the UN as part of Singapore’s CEDAW obligations. UN Women was and is a vibrant and active space where I learnt a lot about women’s right in practice and the tough role that one has to play to achieve them.

     

    Tell us about your role at Samvad Partners.

    While the partnership at Samvad Partners continues to grow, it is still quite close knit and very collegial. While I am primarily based out of Bangalore, as part of my disputes role, I work across offices be in Chennai, Hyderabad, Mumbai or Delhi to ensure that if there is something that needs to be addressed on the dispute resolution front, it is effectively addressed. The average day includes client work (be it meetings, attending hearings, building and strengthening relationships with clients) as well a fair share of administrative work, which could be resolving HR issues, putting new systems in place or just figuring out if we need revamped stationary. It is exciting to be part of  a relatively young and diverse group of partners and to shape strategy and growth of a legal practice together.

     

    How important are grades, in your opinion?

    Call me old fashioned, but I think grades are important. If someone has consistent good grades, it demonstrates a certain level of hard work and knowledge of the law. On the contrary, if there are students with consistent low grades, it would be difficult to explain why that is the case. I believe that Indian legal education has taken a great leap forward in the past decade. There are more people interested in teaching the law and different types of subjects are being taught. The fact that there are so many young people interested in learning the law is itself a pointer that things are moving ahead. I am optimistic about the future.

     

    Tell us a little about the book that you are currently co-editing, on role modelling and mentoring at the workplace.

    A lot of us have often wondered about the lack of positive and focused mentoring in the legal profession, be it at the Bar, at law firms or at law schools. This led to a wider quest and the book was shaped by that. Interestingly, it’s not a law book, although my co-editor Shruti Vidyasagar and I are both lawyers. The book is part of a larger series on leadership at the workplace and is to be published by Palgrave McMillan and should hit the stands by next year.

     

    What is your message to our readers?

    There is no substitute for hard work and enthusiasm. Do both. Read and keep abreast of everything happening around you. Look beyond the law, too often as lawyers we do not look or make friends outside the law, we must. It keeps us balanced and makes us more relevant. You should want to get out of bed and get to work everyday, else its time to rethink what you want to do.

    Many thanks for giving me the opportunity.

  • Sandeep Parekh, Founder-Managing Partner, Finsec Law Advisors, on Securities, working with Harish Salve, and academia

    Sandeep Parekh, Founder-Managing Partner, Finsec Law Advisors, on Securities, working with Harish Salve, and academia

    Sandeep Parekh graduated in law from Delhi University in 1995. He then went on to pursue his Masters in Securities and Financial Regulation in 1997. Since then, he has served as International Associate at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, Associate Advocate at Wadia Ghandy & Co., Partner, Securities and Financial Practice Group at P.H. Parekh & Co., and Executive Director at SEBI. He is also visiting faculty at IIM-A. He is currently Founder cum Managing Partner at Finsec Law Advisors.

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • Starting his own firm
    • His experience in Securities Law
    • His passion for teaching

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I would introduce myself as a securities lawyer who specialised early in my life. My advice to students has always been to focus on education and build a strong foundation, rather than building on experience early in life. You literally have a lifetime to build on experience. But there is limited time for foundational study and really deep research. As a professional there is little time available for doing either and the foundation of basic legal building blocks and deeper research stay with you for a lifetime. Finally, the early work helps in daily work. If one were to tell a client that you don’t know what a contingent contract is, but will look it up, you are unlikely to win the client’s confidence. The advice is even more important for people who turn specialists, as later exposure to constitutional, contract, transfer of property and other basic laws becomes limited.

     

    Is there any specific anecdote that means a lot to you, which you would like to share with our readers?

    My law school days in DU were intense. I was working nearly full time with Mr. Harish Salve from the day I joined law school. I would start the day early, to be in time for a little research before the first conference would start at 8 AM. I am certain I was of little or no use to Mr. Salve for a long period of time, but I learned a lot reading cases for Monday and Friday SLP days at the Supreme Court. There was a lot of fundamental research we did at his chambers and we relied on the best books on the subject. This ensured that even in law school I always relied on quality primary, secondary and tertiary sources of information, rather than the shortcuts available to pass exams. Our law school, popularly known as LC-II was an evening course of Delhi University, though as a full time course it had the same contact hours as the day course and classes were taken seriously by both faculty and students. What was unusual was the class age. It was close to 40. Many mid to senior level bureaucrats and police officers were part of the class.

    A fun anecdote relates to a case where Mr. Salve had a prior commitment, but another case went on longer than expected. The briefing lawyer was not ready with the matter as his junior who was familiar with the matter was also stuck in another court. As it happened, I had made detailed notes on the content and research and I fed the advocate the argument virtually line by line. It was intimidating as I was not supposed to sit on the front seats with my black student tie, rather than a gown and a band. But the high was that we won that trademark case and the ruling was even covered in the papers a few days later.

     

    What were the activities, academic or otherwise, that you undertook in your law school days which in your opinion have shaped you and your career?

    The nature of the school meant that the only other activity I did outside of coursework, which I attended to religiously, was moot courts. I was competent primarily because I was doing this in real life ten hours a day seven days a week. Researching, drafting and of course observing the best counsels of the country argue before the highest court of India. I would sometimes spend a few hours on weekends rock climbing before or after work at an Indian Mountaineering Foundation site in Dhaula Kuan, close to Mr. Salve’s office.

     

    Who was your mentor, or main source of inspiration who motivated you all along the way?

    I have had three mentors, one I described above, Mr. Salve. The other was Mr. Arthur Mathews, who was a partner at Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering and taught me a course at Georgetown law. He was also responsible for getting me a position at his firm as an international attorney and then even though I didn’t work with him at Wilmer, he treated me as family and took me out for a baseball game with his family. The last was of course Mr. Damodaran of SEBI, who took me in at a senior position at SEBI at a young age and mentored me. He continues to be a source of support to me and is a great sounding board as well. I must also mention my partner at Wilmer, Brandon Becker, who was a former director at the SEC and a force to reckon with in market regulations. My partner at Wadia Ghandy, Nihar Mody, was also a great person to learn from.

     

    Would you say higher studies are relevant for a career in law?

    This is a tricky question and I assume the answer would differ from person to person. The main reason for me undertaking this particular course was the specialised learning I would get. My LL.M. was in securities and financial regulations and I practically didn’t attend any non-securities course. The other major reason why people undertake an LL.M. is job opportunities. This is true both in India and abroad. So I would say, to each his own, if a degree opens up educational avenues not otherwise available, one should pursue higher studies. Similarly, if a degree opens jobs, one should use it to open that market, though both domestically and internationally, it has limited use for that purpose. Often it is both reasons. The advantage of a foreign education is that it opens global doors to both education and to jobs, though is quite expensive by comparison.

     

    What does the CV of a student seeking admission in a premier university offering an LL.M. program have to look like?

    I was a part of the admissions committee at Georgetown Law and thus got substantial exposure to this, having reviewed hundreds of applications. The criteria run into objective and subjective ones. In the objective ones are grades, publications and any public positions held at the college or law college. Subjective ones are those which can easily be padded and inflated and are therefore of a lesser value in an international evaluator’s mind. But a skilled student would back it up with evidence and make this also a strong suite. Say a passion for right to information backed by papers and actual usage for public good would help a student’s cause immensely. Usually some inflation of your background is tolerated, but lying is not. To say you topped the university when you did not, would pollute the believability of the rest of your application.

    An LL.M. abroad would be best after at least a year or two of practice because many areas of procedure and evidence which are best understood in court or in corporate practice make LL.M. courses easier to grasp. Experience is also very useful in case you choose to appear for the New York or California bars.

     

    What was the experience of working with Mr. Harish Salve like?

    I think Harish Salve is just an incredible force of nature in terms of intellectual firepower. His brilliance is matched by his hard work, I recall he would wake up around 5  5:30 AM and read and research thoroughly before a conference. As a result many of his conferences lasted seconds rather than minutes or hours. He urged me to read Seervai and Palkhivala from cover to cover and often course corrected me when I went off course.

    Can you tell us about your tryst with academia?

    I have been teaching at IIM-A for the past sixteen years as a visiting faculty and have tremendously enjoyed teaching all these years. After SEBI, I had joined as a full time faculty because of my rather sensitive job at SEBI as head of legal affairs and enforcement. The chance of conflict was very high if I had started practicing immediately after my regulatory role and there was also a chance of inadvertent conflict since my signature would be on thousands of files. At IIM-A however, I did many interesting consulting tasks like being a plaintiff’s lawyer at New York courts in the infamous Satyam matter.

    What or who motivated you to take the leap of faith and start Finsec Law Advisors?

    There seemed few good options in terms of a professional set up in top Indian law firms with the legacy issues which we are all aware of. Instead of joining a mid-tier firm, I thought of starting a small, high quality top tier law firm. We continue to have a quality focus and have no growth plans or plans to diversify into other areas. We dominate the securities regulatory domain and would like to believe we have no competitors in the field in which we operate. We believe in spending a quarter of our time on public policy and intellectual pursuits. Our firm has three books to its credit in the past few years, we run newsletters, monthly dialogue series, an annual roundtable, we routinely respond to regulatory comment papers. Our advice has been sought formally and informally by several regulators and parliamentary committees. I sit on most industry committees relating to financial markets viz. CII, Ficci, Assocham BCCI, IMC etc. These pursuits make our task interesting and worthwhile. Work without a purpose becomes uninteresting after a few years. What we don’t do is lobbying for clients and what we respond to is based on our consistent belief in a better regulatory environment for the country. There is indeed substantial regulatory cholesterol which needs to be reduced. Knowing it exists is the first step in addressing it.

     

    Where do you see yourself ten years from now?

    We don’t have growth targets, we do expect to maintain the same quality as we currently have. We would like to expand into other areas of financial regulatory work where we currently don’t operate. However, we never expect to become a full service law firm as we would rather be the best in what we do instead of being above average in many areas. Interestingly, we are referred a large part of our work from other law firms and also the big four accounting firms.

     

    What is your message to our readers?

    Focus on your education, build your foundation, rely on the best commentary on any subject (including my book!) and read it cover to cover where foundational. You will never have that luxury when you start practicing. Lot of your success will be a result of pure luck, of standing at the right place at the right time. But if you aren’t prepared when the good wind blows, you can’t blame ill luck later. So prepare to let the wind push your back and stand in ready position on the concourse. Work hard in the first two decades of your career and take a path less beaten, even if it is not the most lucrative financially. If work is work, then you will not last long in your current job. Make it fun, fulfilling and bring a purpose to improve the world in whatever small way possible.

     

  • Rajiv Choubey, General Counsel, HCL Infosystems, on the Indian legal regime, Corporate Law, and his experience

    Rajiv Choubey, General Counsel, HCL Infosystems, on the Indian legal regime, Corporate Law, and his experience

    Rajiv Choubey graduated in law from Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, in 1999. He is also a certified Company Secretary. He then went on to pursue his LLM from Kurukshetra University in 2014. Rajiv is an in-house corporate counsel working for the last twenty years in the field of Corporate Laws (having handled M&A, JVs FDI Policy, Foreign Trade Policy, in bound & out bound, Securities Laws, Corporate Governance), Commercial Laws, International Trade Laws, Environment related laws, Electricity related issues, Industrial & Labour Laws, Economic laws-Excise, Service Tax, Customs and Foreign Trade Policy.

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • His diverse experience
    • Corporate Law
    • Pursuing an LLM in India

    What motivated you to pursue law?

    I was born and brought up in Asansol in West Bengal. Honestly, as a kid I wanted to pursue sports and become a footballer. However, that remained an unfulfilled dream since sports wasn’t encouraged or taken seriously back then. I pursued commerce, which was another happy accident. I like commerce as a subject, which exposed me to economics and I developed a liking for the subject. While pursuing B.Com at University of Allahabad, I was introduced to Law of Contract as part of Business Law. A lot of credit goes to our teacher, Prof. Arun Garg, who taught “Contract Act” with a lot of passion and interest. He taught packed classrooms and his students admired him so much, that sometimes we stood at the back of the classroom for lack of space, just to hear his lectures.

     

    Tell us a little about your days in law school.

    The best part of the DU law curriculum is that it is based on case studies. The moment you get admission, as part of admission process they hand over a booklet of case studies. Initially, I could not understand, what kind of booklet is this? Then I understood the system of study, the method of citation. It created immense interest in me and it changed the entire approach to study law. The best way to study and understand law is the case based approach. It was completely different from the Business Law we studied during our graduation day.

     

    What were the activities, academic or otherwise, that you undertook in your law school days which in your opinion have shaped you and your career?

    When I did law, the number of activities were much less when compared to the present day. Further since I was also pursuing CS at the same time, I could not participate in many of extra-curricular activities.

     

    Who was your mentor, or main source of inspiration who motivated you all along the way?

    My teacher at Allahabad University Mr. Arun Garg and former boss Mr.Vinay Shukla (who himself is LLB and CS) and Mr.Vikas Goel (who is CA) always motivated and were sources of inspiration.

    While working with Vedanta, Chairman Mr. Anil Agarwal and Vice-Chairman Mr. Navin Agarwal were great sources of inspiration. In one of my key matters, our Chairman made us believe that we can achieve something which we thought was impossible.  I had the opportunity to work with lots of colleagues at Vedanta and it was fantastic to work with them and handle some of key environmental issues and coming out successful. My current Group CFO, Mr. S.G. Murali is a great source of inspiration, as he leads by example. I am greatly privileged to work with some of great minds.

     

    Are L.L.Ms absolutely necessary for a career in law?

    I do not think so. At the same it is good if one can pursue the same from any foreign university, with specialisation in any particular area (say Competition law, IPR, M&A, etc.) which one ultimately desires to pursue. If someone wants to go into academics, LLM is a must.

     

    What should one expect out of an L.L.M program, if they opt to pursue one?

    I have expressed my views that LLM should be with the sole intention of obtaining specialisation in any particular area. One should always do the cost/purpose – benefit analysis before pursuing any further studies. Doing LLM from a foreign university also provides the global perspective and outlook, which is essential in today’s world, where one may be required to handle clients across the globe.

     

    Why are students only considering universities abroad for an LLM?

    There are good universities in India such as NLS, Bangalore, NALSAR, Delhi University and other National Law Schools. I think one of the reasons students go abroad is because the LLM there is only a year long. Now, even Indian Universities have switched to a one-year curriculum. However, the key reasons for pursuing LLM in foreign universities is that you get specialisation in one particular area, which one would like to pursue. Further, it provides you a global perspective, experience and access to some of best faculties.

    One the issue of Indian legal education system (on LLM Curriculum), I feel Indian Universities need to upgrade their curriculum and focus on specialisation. Currently, it is more inclined towards an academic perspective. Universities can have two branches of LLM, one LLM (Specialisation) and the other LLM (Academic), the former being more inclined towards practice areas and other more inclined towards research and academics.

     

    Which is the ideal time to do an L.L.M?

    I am personally of the view that one should pursue LLM after at least five years of practice, when you feel the need to specialize in a particular area. The initial years of practice will provide clarity in terms of areas of interests, in which one would like specialise. It is like doing MBA after initial years of experience as post work-experience, one can appreciate various facets of management and can link it with their experience.  Ultimately, it is an individual choice as many people find it difficult to pursue LLM once they start working.

     

    From your experience, would you recommend the corporate environment for fresh graduates?

    (Rajiv has worked with several corporate giants such as Vedanta Ltd. and Maruti Suzuki before joining HCL Infosystems Ltd.)

    Career is an individual choice. It also depends what is one liking, strengths. When I started my career, there was no concept of in-house legal counsel and only few MNCs like Hindustan Lever had strong in-house counsels. The role of in-house counsel in other companies was limited to attending courts on behalf of the company. However, the scenario today has completely changed post the 1991 Liberalisation policy. It took almost ten to fifteen years for the role of in-house counsels to shape up and take prominence. India today is an open economy but at the same time has a strong regulatory regime. Today, the exposure of corporates on some of key regulatory issues being faced in the telecom, coal, power, mining and other sectors has increased the scope and role of in-house counsels. I have been a witness to some key environment and mining issues and without the contribution of the in-house counsel/ legal department, it would have been difficult to successfully win the battle in court and clear the regulatory hurdles. Hence the in-house counsels used to ride pillion earlier, but now, they are at the helm of all corporate affairs. Be it advising on contracting, dispute resolution, M&A, structuring transactions, advisory, regulatory issues, or compliance, in-house counsels are playing a major role. Their role is comparable to what the HR Department used to do several years ago. Today HR has moved away from the traditional personnel and administration to more organizational development, strategic utilization of employees to serve business goals, talent management and development. Similarly, in-house counsel is to work closely with the business in terms of advising them on key issues and resolving the same to meet the business objectives and plans of the organisation.

    Fresh graduates can look at working in-house as it offers you a variety of roles and is not limited to only doing a routine job. HCL offers opportunities in all facets of law, contracting, advisory, litigation. The Legal Department is mid-sized law firm, which deals with multiple customers and meets their expectations every day.  Since we are dealing with variety of issues, it is a real challenge in terms of delivery and at the same time upgrade ourselves with the latest of what is happening in law as well as in the industry.

     

    What does a regular working day look like for you, as General Counsel of HCL Infosystems Ltd?

    Prior to taking over as General Counsel of HCL Infosystems Ltd. in June last year, my entire experience was in the manufacturing sector. HCL being into distribution, services and system integration, the issues are completely different. The business model is different, the issues are different. Every day, we have different issues to handle. Since we participate in various bids/ tenders, we receive numerous requests for vetting from the business for RFQs/ RPFs other contracts with Business Partners/ Vendors/ Channel Partners. As I stated, we are in multiple businesses – distribution, services, learning, system integration, financial inclusions; every day is full of action. Apart for advisory, we also have to attend to the pre-litigation advise and strategize in all litigation matters, brief counsels etc. There is no time for the team to relax as it very action packed.

    My previous organisation was into commodities/ natural resources, where issues were different. In HCL since you are essentially providing different services, as the in-house legal department, we are involved in advising the business in contracting, risk analysis/ mapping. Further, since in our business of providing services, they are always issues of recovery of money, which leads to multiple litigations, arbitrations. The in-house team also advises on many pre-litigation issues, which may be potential litigation issues. However, due to the intervention of the legal department, we are able to recover dues. I have felt that people in sales/ marketing and the delivery team are reluctant to take issues with the customer, even where we have delivered. Sometimes issues also arise with respect to understanding the contract obligations to issue such as drafting and put the perspective to clients/ customers. To bridge the gap, we have started an initiative called ‘Legal for Non-Legal’ where we will conduct workshops to improve the understanding of basic facets of law so that they can front face the issues in a better way and take care of the organisation interest. I have a big team of more than fifteen lawyers. Some of the lawyers have joined us at different level with two to eight years of practice. While they are good at general understanding of law, it is always better to improve their understanding or other facets of corporate laws. I have started internal workshop for my team for knowledge sharing called ‘Episteme’ where we discuss various changes/ developments in law, landmark judgments. One recent example is to update my team on the ‘Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code’ (IBC), which I felt was very necessary. There is no much to do and very less time.

     

    If given an opportunity, what would you do differently in your career journey up to this point?

    I could have practised at the Bar as I am the outgoing type. I love to take challenges, meet people and present my point of view. Further, when you are practising at the bar, apart from your practice and service to clients, you can also help people who cannot afford to engage a lawyer. Of course, there is still time and I can still purse the same.

    A student should purse that career option, which he thinks he will be good at and which excites and interests him or her. Once should never try to emulate, seeing the success of others. Further, there is so short cut to success and one has to go through the rigour which is required to prepare oneself to be in a position to advise someone and to deliver to the satisfaction of the client.

     

    Is there any other suggestion you would like to give to our budding lawyers?

    When we pursued law, it was a profession where there was lots of struggle and there was lack of guidance. Being a first generation lawyer, there was no one to guide me. Initially I wanted to practice at the bar but people discouraged me saying it is very difficult. Because of my dual qualification of Law and CS, people advised me to join corporate, saying it is financially rewarding. I still feel that I should have practised at the bar.

    My suggestion to young lawyers is to pursue their dreams – i.e., if they like litigation, they should follow the same and should not swayed by financial aspects. At the same time, if one likes advisory/ solicitor job, they should join a law firm, which has its own challenges. If one wishes to start their own firm, they should take the plunge early, may be after five years of experience. One needs self-belief and determination to start on their own. Today law as a profession is very rewarding and if one remains focused and willing to put in hard work, success is just a matter of time.

    Young lawyers should be tech savvy as today technology is being used big time in law and hence traditional approach needs to be married with new tools being used to deliver to the satisfaction of clients. One more word of advice to young lawyers is that, today’s world is an era of specialisation. While one needs to have a decent understanding of various facets of law, only those who specialize and develop expertise will survive and be valued.

     

     

  • Apurva Agarwal, Founding Partner, Universal Legal, on starting his own firm, and working at Luthra & Luthra

    Apurva Agarwal, Founding Partner, Universal Legal, on starting his own firm, and working at Luthra & Luthra

    Apurva Agarwal graduated from National Law School of India University, Bangalore, in 1999. Soon after, he started work with Shah Desai Doijode & Phatarphekar.  He then pursued his LLM, with a focus in Corporate and Commercial Laws, at Bond University, Australia, where he achieved academic distinction when his name appeared on the Dean’s List.  Upon completion of his LLM he returned to India where he worked for DSK Legal (formerly Andersen Legal India) and Luthra and Luthra Law Offices.  He now has his own firm, Universal Legal.  His areas of expertise include Real Estate, Corporate and Commercial, Medical, Intellectual Property and Media. His articles have been published in various newspapers and magazines.  

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • Working at Luthra & Luthra
    • Starting his own firm
    • Being a first generation lawyer

     

    What motivated you to pursue a career in law?

    I have always wanted to be a lawyer. And being a first generation lawyer at that made it all the more challenging. 

     

    Tell us a bit about your time at NLSIU, Bangalore.

    Studying law was challenging as the methods adopted in NLSIU were different. It was not lecture-oriented but discussion-oriented. Students were expected to read before coming to class, so that a healthy discussions could happen. It was an initial shock to me coming straight out of school to this. I come from an all-boys school, hence interaction with girls on campus was a pleasant surprise. Further, the faculty included stalwarts like Dr N R Madhava Menon, Dr. N. L. Mitra, Prof. S. V. Joga Rao, etc. which gave us perspectives of law beyond our imagination. Also, we had practicing lawyers coming and sharing their experiences with us , which allowed us to have practical insights to law.

     

    Did you take part in co-curricular activities while in college? 

    Yes, I did take part in co-curricular activities. I participated in a few moot courts—although, with rather unsuccessful results, I should add. I helped the institution organise several conferences.  The highlight was, when I led a team to organise an international conference on Human Rights in association with Interights. The conference was attended by 40 odd judges including Chief Justices from across the world, including Dr. A. S. Anand, the then Chief Justice of India.

     

    What were you areas of interest during your legal education?

    I was interested in doing Corporate Law. However, when I got into practical world and started working, real estate and succession planning became my forte. In fact, I have also authored a book on real estate called Layman’s Guide to Property Transaction Rights.

     

    What are the causes you feel strongly about? 

    We need to simplify the laws and legal writings so that a common man can understand it. I consciously wrote my book in a language other than English, to make it more accessible. Further, I conduct legal workshops and lectures through various fora to make people understand the same.

     

    What advice would you give students in avoiding a decision paralysis?

    Unless you want to get into academics or work abroad, pursuing further studies is not required. It’s better to dive into the big bad world headfirst. Practical experience is the best teacher.

     

    How did you keep up with Bond University’s academic rigour? 

    It was very exciting as you got to meet with students from across the world, which was not possible in India. It was a melting pot of diverse cultures. It was a confluence of various legal systems. The university expected very high standards of academic performance from all its students. The faculty was very approachable and friendly. We used to have lunches and drinks together and learn more outside the class than inside it.

     

    Tell us about your early professional experiences at DSK Legal and Luthra and Luthra Law Offices. 

    DSK Legal, through its managing partner Anand Desai taught me how to apply law to suit the clients’ requirement. The aim was to provide the client with the most appropriate solution. At the Luthra and Luthra Law Offices, I learnt to work against stiff timelines. The body of work was varied but mainly concentrated on Real Estate and Media.

     

    Did you have a mentor or guide during the formative years of your career?

    I did not have a mentor. I think it’s essential to have someone to look up to and guide you during the initial phase of your career.

     

    How did you come to be the Founding Partner at Universal Legal? 

    I was one of the first few recruits of Luthra and Luthra Law Offices, in Mumbai. This enabled me to get insight on how to establish a law office. This got me thinking, if I can do it for someone else, then why not for myself. We are a full service law firm. At the firm, we tried to incorporate all that we admire about reputable Tier-1 firms, and add a personalised touch to it. Also, we did not want to sit in office and idle our time. It was clear that people have to work long hours if there is work on the table. But if there are days, when there is less work, you are not required to sit in office. We believe in five day weeks and promote a healthy work life balance.

     

    Do you consciously focus on building a specific body of work? 

    Yes we do.

     

    What are the challenges and learning opportunities that you have faced in your career so far?

    The challenges are to constantly get work in the firm and keep abreast with the developments happening in the field of law. With the laws changing so fast and being adapted to new scenarios, we have to be on our toes.

     

    How do you deal with the pressures associated with your position?

    If you enjoy what you are doing, then there is no pressure.

     

    What qualities and achievements do you look for in potential job applicants/ interns at Universal Legal?

    The person should be willing to learn and have the basic knowledge of law. The person should have the ability to find the law and solution.

    Can you describe the process that goes behind writing?

    There is no processes as such. It’s the knowledge that we gather along the way gets translated into the writing.

     

    How do you keep yourself updated about the latest developments in the law?

    Reading and doing research. Also, by trying constantly reinvent myself

    What advice would you like to give our readers, who are mostly law students and young lawyers?

    Just be yourself and enjoy what you do.

  • Ameeta Duggal, Partner, DGS Associates, on studying at York, working at AMS, and starting her own firm

    Ameeta Duggal, Partner, DGS Associates, on studying at York, working at AMS, and starting her own firm

    Ameeta Duggal graduated in law from Campus Law Center, Delhi University, in 1991. She started her career with Mr. Ashwini Kumar, former Minister of Law and currently the special envoy to Japan. She then worked briefly with Amarchand Mangaldas Shroff before joining Associated Law Advisers. Ameeta was awarded a British Chevening Scholarship by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to study at the College of Law, York from 1996 – 1997. Thereafter she worked briefly in the London office of Clifford Chance, one of the world’s largest law firms before returning to India. Ameeta founded DGS Associates in 2004.

    In this interview we speak to her about:

    • The legal industry in the ’90s
    • Working at AMS
    • Winning the British Chevening Scholarship by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I am a somewhat unconventional lawyer who has always tread the unchartered path. There has been no planning that has gone into charting my professional growth. This has helped me in exploring various areas of law, which may have been lost to me had I proceeded with a predeteremined growth trajectory. I do not believe in compartmentalising my practice areas and have tried to explore various aspects of law. I started my professional career as a pure litigator and have continued to keep litigation as one of my practice areas irrespective of the fact that over the years I have moved to a completely different line of practice, being my trade laws practice, which I started in 2008. I believe that my strength lies in drafting and negotiations rather than arguing in Court. While I am immensely passionate about my work, I ensure that it never deprives me of my love for travel so I strive to make my work complement my travels to the greatest extent possible.

     

    Tell us a little about your days in law school.

    I studied law from the Faculty of Law, Campus Law Centre, Delhi between 1989 and 1991. In those days, Law was a residual career option since majority of the law students were writing their Civil Services exams. There were just a handful of us who were there to pursue law as a career option. The others just wanted to have a Plan B should they fail to clear the Civil Services exam or such other options.

    Having come from an all girls’ college, Lady Shri Ram, life in he Delhi University campus was an experience with a varied mix of students. One of the incidents that has, however, stayed with me is from a class in Negotiable Instruments. In my first semester, one of our Professors had asked us a question pertaining to the bouncing of a cheque and I remember getting up and saying that “my common sense tells me…” The professor told me something that I have never forgotten. He said that we must always remember that law is not about “common sense” but what is provided in the statute. Over the years, I have often been reminded of this saying and how true it holds.

     

    What are your areas of specialisation in law? 

    Specialisation in a given field of law is a fairly recent practice in Law. During our days at the Law Faculty we neither specialised in any specific area nor were we required to intern. Those who belonged to a family of lawyers may have spent time interning. But the rest of us had not seen a lawyers’ chamber till the time we started to looking for work. Accordingly, there were no areas of specialisation but we had areas of interest. I was always interested in contractual and corporate laws. We, however, did not have the option of International trade laws as a subject.

    I personally do not conform to specialisations. I have always been open to assisting a client with all areas of law. The only distinction I draw is between civil and criminal laws and I have stayed away from criminal law in all my years of practicing law. Other than that I have worked on varied assignments, including environmental audits, project financing, mergers & acquisitions, International commercial arbitrations and litigation (both as a Government and private counsel). It is only recently, that I have started focusing more on International trade and mergers & acquisition as my preferred areas of work.

    While on the issue of specialisation, I would like to share one of my experiences at Clifford Chance when I was working with them briefly. One morning we received a fax from a client with some four to five questions, including queries on tax and securitisation. The fax was shared across three floors depending on the areas of  law involved. This was in my initial week at Clifford Chance. Having worked in India for a few years by then I was somewhat surprised since in those days, a client query like that would have come to our table in India and we would have responded to all of them, more like a single window clearance. In my opinion, it is more comforting for a client to go to a single person for advice rather than being sent from one team to the other.

     

    How were the first few years after your graduation? 

    Unlike today, when students spend considerable time interning and gaining practical experience, for us studying Law was essentially an academic exercise, which guided us through the legal fundamentals and taught us what and how to look for the answer to a query received from a client. However, what we learnt at the law faculty was far removed from the real world practice. Objectively speaking we cannot be taught how to be a lawyer sitting in a classroom. Legal practice can only be learnt standing in a courtroom, sitting in a board room negotiating across the table or sitting across a Government authority proposing policy changes.

    This is where I owe a lot to the chambers of Dr. Ashwani Kumar (including my gown, which traditionally is presented by one’s senior) with whom I worked for almost a year. We used to be paid pittance in those days but the experience we gained was immense. Dr. Kumar was in those days a standing counsel for the Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU), one of the biggest litigators in the Delhi High Court. On any given day we had at least ten to twelve cases listed in the High Court and we had no option but to start arguing from the very first day. Credit is also due to the judges who encouraged freshers to seize the opportunity and argue rather than seek an adjournment on the ground that the senior lawyer was unavailable. I have had a very special hearing before a Division Bench of Justice B.N. Kirpal (former Chief Justice of India) and Justice Sunanda Bhandare, who coaxed me into arguing a petition in the very first month of having joined Dr. Kumar; guiding me through the arguments and eventually dismissing the petition in my favour. Those were days filled with excitement and exhaustion but the thrill of getting a good order from the High Court was priceless. I learnt to be a lawyer overnight.

     

    Tell us about working at a Tier-I firm such as Amarchand Mangaldas Shroff.

    Amarchand Mangaldas Shroff is  undoubtedly a sought after firm now and also in those days when it was not so huge. I had the privilege of working directly with Pallavi Shroff and her team, I realised in my first few days there that I was not meant to work in a big law firm. I tendered my resignation within weeks of my joining that firm to move to a start up firm, Associated Law Advisers (ALA), which was still getting established in terms of office space. I spent almost eleven years with ALA and left only to start my own law firm.

    ALA is where I grew as a lawyer. We started as a small team of four lawyers (two partners and two associates). Each one of us supported the other and we learnt to do everything on our own – from filing to researching to drafting to appearing in courts and before arbitrators and to do large sized acquisitions, legal and environmental due diligences. My first acquisition was when Whirlpool acquired Kelvinator. I learnt as we moved through the acquisition and all credit goes to my partners, Mr. O.P. Bhardwaj and Ms. Lira Goswami, who never hesitated in giving us complete charge of a client file while keeping a broad check on the deliverables. I owe my growth as a lawyer to my years in ALA.

     

    Tell us about winning the British Chevening Scholarship by the Foreign Commonwealth Office.

    Applying for the British Chevening Scholarship was almost an accident. My then senior partner, Lira Goswami, mentioned the scholarship while we were waiting for our matter. From Court I went to the British Council to collect the form only to learn that I had just a day to submit it. Of course, I never expected to be selected but I did get an interview call. The interview panel comprised two faculty members of the college of law, York, a senior counsel from India and a representative of the Foreign Commonwealth Office. The counsel posed some direct questions on the various provisions of the Companies Act. After having fielded a few questions I remember telling him that as a lawyer I am aware which legislation I need to check but I was not aware of each and every provision of the Companies Act. The intent was not to be rude but it was an irrational expectation for a young lawyer to be familiar with more than 500 provisions of the Companies Act. I do believe that this response got me the scholarship.  

     

    How was your experience at College of Law, York?

    We were a group of twelve lawyers from all over India who were sent to the College of Law, York. Most of us were travelling outside India for the very first time and we were indeed an excited bunch of young lawyers who landed in York. The course was very thoughtfully conceived with an amazing faculty. We forged new friendships, not only within the group but with other law students at the College and with our faculty. The friendships have continued and we also continue to be referral partners for each other.

    What made our days at the College of law most memorable and fun filled is the fact that we were all practicing law already and had the security of having a job waiting for us back home. That sense of security eased the pressures and made the entire programme a huge learning experience. We got an opportunity to work with some of the biggest law firms in London.

     

    Which is the ideal time to do an L.L.M?

    From my personal experience,  I would recommend pursuing LL.M. only after having gained some work experience. I believe a LL.M. programme will be far more beneficial and focused if pursued after a few years of practice.

     

    Please elaborate on your work experience at Clifford Chance.

    The scholarship offered by the Foreign Commonwealth Office comprised two sections. First was a programme at the College of Law, York and second was a work stint at the law firms selected and allotted by them. I was sent to Clifford Chance as part of that programme. Working in a huge law firm like Clifford Chance, which at that time was the biggest law firm globally, was an experience in itself. It gave me the confidence to be able to stand on my own in the midst of an ocean of lawyers. Although I was offered a role in the firm, I longed to return to ALA and declined the offer. I have not regretted my decision ever as I do not think I would have evolved into a risk taking lawyer that I am today if I had worked in the secure confines of a large law firm as opposed to a small boutique firm like ALA.

     

    What or who motivated you to take the leap of faith to found your own law firm?

    DGS Associates owes its existence to ALA and the work culture that we imbibed there. The sense of self sufficiency and independence instilled by Mr. Bhardwaj and Lira gave me the courage to move out and start my own firm. Having worked with ALA since the days when the ALA office was being first set up, I was already familiar with the grind that setting up of a law office entailed. However, the thrill of starting one’s own practice is unparalleled.  

    Although I moved out of ALA with another lawyer there, Niti Sudhakar, we never really severed our ties with ALA. This was easy since we did not try and leave with any existing client of ALA. We moved out without any announcements and started afresh. Admittedly, those were challenging times as we had no continuing client. However, our friendship gave each of us the strength to persevere and that friendship continues to be the central pillar on which DGS stands even today.

     

    With regard to DGS Associates, what is your vision for the firm?

    At DGS, we pride ourselves for being completely relationship driven, be it with our staff, colleagues or clients. We are a small firm with a very congenial atmosphere. We would want to continue with that. We see ourselves as a well entrenched boutique law firm where the client comes never to leave. Our clients treat us as part of their management and we are happy to be in that space. We work with huge corporates as well as mid to small sized companies and individuals. We promote start ups and have always advised them basis the understanding that if they ever get funding they will pay our legal fees. The virtues of strict timelines and economies are deeply entrenched in our work culture and we never miss our deadlines. DGS has a very different work culture where associates are expected to act responsibly and independently. The stress is on timely delivery and quality output rather than the number of hours that they put in at work.

     

    Give us a brief capsule of the life of a partner and your average working day experience.

    True to the spirit of DGS, we try and maintain a balance between our work and personal lives. While we are at work, the office functions almost like a library with very focused work but we try and shut office in good time so that we all can head back home to spend time with our families. Without compromising on our work commitments, the partners also ensure time out together. Increasingly, there is lesser time available with our travel and work commitments but we always make an effort to optimise our time off. The firm has a policy of all lawyers lunching together so as to be able to get to know each other at a personal level.

     

    Is there any other suggestion you would like to give to our budding lawyers?

    I can only say that as budding lawyers give your profession all you have as this is the time when you have the energy and enthusiasm to focus entirely on work. Be open to doing all kinds of work at your work place. It gives you a better appreciation of the work that is happening around you. Most importantly, I always encourage budding lawyers to gain some experience in litigation since you cannot be a complete lawyer  without knowing how your judicial system works and how the judges think when dealing with a given dispute.

     

  • Fred Rooney, Attorney-at-Law, on being Fulbright Specialist and Global Advocate for Justice

    Fred Rooney, Attorney-at-Law, on being Fulbright Specialist and Global Advocate for Justice

    Fred earned his J.D. from the City University of New York’s (CUNY) School of Law in 1986.  In 1998 he returned to CUNY Law to direct a “unique public/private partnership” that offered a network of support and resources for CUNY Law graduates committed to increasing access to justice through their solo and small firm practices. The New York Law Journal, New York Times, Legal Times and American Bar Association Journal have highlighted Fred’s successes and bar associations and law school faculty and administrators across the US rely on Fred’s work when designing their own post-graduate programs.

    In January 2010, Fred was awarded the 2010 Father Robert Drinan Award by the American Association of Law School’s (AALS) and on February 5, 2010, he accepted the American Bar Association (ABA) Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services’ 2010 Louis M. Brown Award for Legal Access, which was awarded to CLRN. The Brown Award recognizes innovative programs that meet the legal needs of those who do not qualify for legal aid yet still aren’t able to afford typical legal fees.

    In June 2013, Fred completed a ten-month Fulbright in the Dominican Republic where he launched the first law school incubator outside of the United States.  Three months later, the American Bar Journal named Fred a “2013 Legal Rebel” and recognized him as “the Father of Incubators”.

    On February 5, 2014, the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) and the Institute of International Education’s Council for International Exchange of Scholars (CIES) added Fred to its roster of Fulbright Specialists.  Since October 2014, he has traveled to Pakistan on four occasions to conceptualize an incubator for recent Pakistani law graduates.  Fred was in Islamabad on April 26, 2016 to take part in the formal launching of the first incubator for lawyers in Asia.  He is currently an adjunct faculty member at Texas A&M University School of Law.

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • Being Commissioner of the ABA’s Commission on Hispanic Legal Rights & Responsibilities
    • His engagement with Community Legal Resource Network (CLRN)
    • His experience thus far and plans for the future

    Why did you choose to pursue a degree in law, amidst the many options that you had?

    After graduating from college, I was employed as a social worker and English instructor for immigrants.  During my years working with immigrants, I was able to see how difficult life is in a foreign country where immigrants are not always welcome.  Many of my clients/students were victimized by discrimination and racism.  I realized that to be more effective as an advocate for the most marginalized and vulnerable members of my community, I needed to become a lawyer.

     

    Tell us a little about your days in law school, at City University of New York School of Law.

    I was delighted to be accepted to the City University of New York’s inaugural class in 1983.  Many of the reasons I chose CUNY Law are stated on its website.  For example, “CUNY Law students bring a passion to make a difference in their communities”. CUNY Law gives them the tools to make that change. As the nation’s premier public interest law school, we are driven by a mission to enhance the diversity of the legal profession and graduate outstanding attorneys intent on creating change for the better. A CUNY Law education prepares lawyers who are ready to right the wrongs, stand up for the underserved and fight for social justice.

    I thoroughly enjoyed my three years of legal education since as a student, I was able to travel to Latin America, work on issues related to equality in public education, teach juveniles housed in a New York City detention center and  develop the skills I would eventually need to practice law in accordance with CUNY Law mission to further “law in the service of human needs.”

     

    What are the subjects that you took particular interest in, during your law school days?

    I enjoyed CUNY Law’s clinical approach to learning and courses I took in constitutional law, legal reasoning and writing and a course titled “Liberty, Justice & Equality.”

     

    What were your initial years after graduation like?

    Because I chose to practice public service law, my first years after graduation were challenging because my income was so low and I had a family to support.  There were times when I was tempted to enter a corporate firm, but I’m glad that I was able to stay true to my deep commitment to using my education, training and privilege in society to help clients of moderate to low incomes.  I also learned the value of pro bono service and tried to provide either pro bono or reduced-fee services whenever possible.  I learned that to do good in one’s community, you had to do well.  Doing well to do good are not mutually exclusive goals.

     

    Tell us more about Community Legal Resource Network (CLRN) and the kind of activities that it engages in.

    Thirteen years after graduating from CUNY Law, I returned to launch a network for CUNY graduates who, like myself years before, need a helping hand to start law practices with a strong social justice component.  We developed CLRN as a way of supporting our graduates as they opened solo or small firm practices and offered around-the-clock mentoring in how to create economically viable law practices and how to develop one’s professional lawyering skills.

     

    You’ve been designated the “Father of Incubators”. Kindly explain the concept of legal incubators, for the benefit of our readers.

    In response to a crisis in access to civil justice in and around New York City, CUNY Law launched the first program in the nation to train recent law school graduates. Begun in 2007, CUNY’s Incubator for Justice was designed to assist CUNY Law graduates to develop the skills needed to set up and sustain economically viable small legal practices. Special emphasis was placed on developing solo and small-firm practices equipped to address the ever-growing unmet legal needs of moderate to low-income New Yorkers living in legally underserved neighborhoods. The incubator was modeled on similar programs around the nation for small business owners. Business incubators in general aim to assist start-up business owners by providing the training participants need to enhance their professional and business skills.

    The goal of the CUNY incubator was to offer its participants the same sort of training that new associates receive when they join law firms, corporations and governmental or legal services organizations. Once hired, associates receive immediate access to professional training and support, and they have mentors to help with almost every aspect of their professional development. CUNY Law wanted to ensure that its graduates venturing into solo or small-firm practice had the same sort of access to quality training and mentorship as new associates.

    Since the Incubator for Justice was crafted as a stand-alone project for a maximum of ten lawyers, at no point in its development or implementation did anyone imagine that the new initiative would take on a life of its own and turn into a movement in the United States—and eventually abroad. The expansion of incubator programs was due, in large part, to the economic chaos that began in 2008. As law schools, and eventually bar associations, were faced with a severe lack of job opportunities for law graduates and newly admitted lawyers, the idea of creating incubator programs became increasingly more attractive. Additionally, the economic downturn left greater numbers of people in the U.S., already ineligible for publicly funded legal services, without the resources to retain private counsel. In many ways a perfect storm led legal institutions to consider incubator development to fill a sorely needed gap in opportunities for new lawyers and access to competent and affordable representation for people of modest means.

    What legal incubators are doing:

    According to the 2016 Comprehensive Survey of Lawyer Incubators, published by the ABA Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services and the Lawyer Incubator Directory, more than 60 incubator programs exist today. Additionally, the survey indicates the following:

    • Although the first incubator emerged in 2007, three-fourths of them that responded to the survey have been created since 2014. Some of them have very recently “graduated” their first class of incubator participants, and a few have not even reached that point.
    • The nature, structure and design of incubators vary greatly from one program to another. The survey demonstrates that the development of incubators has been organic. There is no template for their design and operations. While many are sponsored by law schools, several are collaborative efforts, and some are sponsored by other entities such as bar associations and foundations, legal aid programs, law firms and nonprofit organizations. The services offered by incubators, the funding sources and the range of legal services provided by the participating lawyers to their clients all vary considerably from one program to another. The ABA and the Consortium for Access to Justice have provided resources to help incubators share information but, nevertheless, programs tend to reflect the needs of both their communities and their participating lawyers in unique and varied ways.
    • Incubators are aggressively advancing social responsibility through pro bono services and orientations to low- and moderate-income populations. The common denominator running through most incubators is their dual mission to prepare recently admitted lawyers to develop and launch new practices while at the same time providing services to underserved populations. Pro bono is a fixture in seven out of every ten programs.
    • Incubators are providing their participating lawyers with an array of educational and practice management tools. In-kind support from legal service vendors enable incubator participants to test-drive a wide variety of resources designed to support their practices, create efficiencies and enable the delivery of services at lower costs.
    • Innovation is stressed in many programs but has room to grow in others. Several of the programs are introducing concepts such as unbundled legal services, niche markets and alternative billing structures, but some focus on more traditional practice methods. This points to an opportunity for the larger community of incubator programs to draw from the resources of one another and suggests that some level of peer-to-peer technical assistance can expand an environment of experimentation.

     

    What motivates you?

    My parents and other family members taught me the value of “giving back” to the community many of the blessings that had been bestowed on me.  When I was young, I always believed that I could change the world.  As I got older, I realized that changing the world wasn’t a realistic goal but helping to change the lives of individuals so that their lives were more rewarding and fruitful was a more achievable goal.  Once I became a lawyer, I quickly found out that lawyers can be catalysts for social change, brokers for justice and equality and valuable members of society when they use their knowledge and skills to ensure the rights of each individual in our community are respected and protected.

     

    Is there something you’d change about the legal education system, if you had the opportunity?

    I believe that law schools have an obligation to do more that simply confer law degrees.  Given the astronomical cost of legal education in the US, law schools should continue to provide education, training and support to its graduates. The Carnegie Foundation’s Report on Educating Lawyers will lend perspective. Law school provides the beginning, not the full development, of students’ professional competence and identity. At present, what most students get as a beginning is insufficient. Students need a dynamic curriculum that moves them back and forth between understanding and enactment, experience and analysis. Law schools face an increasingly urgent need to bridge the gap between analytical and practical knowledge, and a demand for more robust professional integrity. Appeals and demands for change, from both within academic law and without, pose a new challenge to legal education. At the same time, they open to legal education a historic opportunity to advance both legal knowledge—theoretical and practical—and the capacities of the profession. Legal education needs to be responsive to both the needs of our time and recent knowledge about how learning takes place; it needs to combine the elements of legal professionalism—conceptual knowledge, skill and moral discernment—into the capacity for judgment guided by a sense of professional responsibility. Legal education should seek to unite the two sides of legal knowledge: formal knowledge and experience of practice. In particular, legal education should use more effectively the second two years of law school and more fully complement the teaching and learning of legal doctrine with the teaching and learning of practice. Legal education should also give more focused attention to the actual and potential effects of the law school experience on the formation of future legal professionals.

     

    From your experience in legal writing, please share with our readers the kind of topics that one must write on if they hope to gain recognition for their ideas.

    One should write on a topic for which the writer feels a sense of passion.  Writing to help advance one’s passion or commitment to a particular idea or ideal makes writing so much more enjoyable.  An article that I wrote for an American Bar Association publication on how pro bono work produces good karma was easy to do because the contents of the article flowed from my life experiences and from my heart.  The written word, when used for the right purpose, can be a powerful tool to espouse one’s beliefs, as seen through social media, and to advance the idea of using law as a tool to advance liberty, justice and equality in any society.

     

    What do your responsibilities involve, as Commissioner of the ABA’s Commission on Hispanic Legal Rights & Responsibilities?

    The mission of the ABA’s Commission on Hispanic Rights and Responsibilities to address the challenges and responsibilities facing Hispanics in and within the legal system of the United States.  It strives to accomplish the following:

    1. To provide expertise and resources to develop partnerships among internal and external constituencies of the ABA in order to address the legal issues, that are common to other underserved populations, but within the context of the experiences of Hispanics throughout the United States.
    2. Propose solutions and approaches for the legal profession to meet the opportunities and challenges of the Hispanic community that are exacerbated by such factors as, but not limited to, rapid population growth; language; citizenship and immigration constraints.
    3. Monitor and promote policies that address the unique legal challenges and responsibilities facing Hispanics in the United States.
    4. Develop and support community education efforts, in both English and Spanish, to inform Hispanics about their legal rights and responsibilities on key legal issues such as employment, housing, education, health care, criminal justice, voting rights, and immigration.
    5. Create and advance models through the development of tool kits, social media and communication methodology to transform judicial constructs, legal structures and infrastructures to better address the needs of Hispanic communities, particularly in the areas of language and access to education, employment, and improved public images.

     

    Is there any other suggestion you would like to give to our budding lawyers?

    As the Quaker missionary Stephen Grellet once said, “I expect to pass through this world but once; any good thing therefore that I can do or any kindness I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now. Let me not defer or neglect it for I shall not pass this way again.”

    As lawyers, we have the potential to engage in the ongoing creation of a world that truly strives to embrace the notion that all men and women are created equal and therefore deserve to be treated as such.  Helping to improve the lives of the most vulnerable members of our community, while also ensuring that we are able to adequately support ourselves and our families, will make the practice of law more analogous to a vocation than to a profession and will inevitably make that world a better place in which to live.

     

  • Devesh Juvekar, Partner, Rajani Associates, on litigation, ADR, and his diverse experience

    Devesh Juvekar, Partner, Rajani Associates, on litigation, ADR, and his diverse experience

    Devesh Juvekar graduated from K C Law College, Mumbai University, in 1995. Devesh Juvekar started his career with M/s Gagrat & Co in 1995 and went on to work with Hariani & Co, Dua Associates, Khaitan & Co and Kalpataru Ltd prior to joining Rajani Associates. He has an experience of twenty years at the Bar in traditional and alternate dispute resolution. He has handled, a wide array of matters such as Commercial Arbitrations, Recovery proceedings, Intellectual Property issues, Conflict of Laws, Product Liability cases, Writ Petitions and General Commercial Litigation. Devesh has appeared as well as briefed Senior Counsels, in numerous fora including at the Supreme Court of India, High Court of Bombay (Original and Appellate Side), various High Courts in India, City Civil Court, Small Causes Court, Sessions Court, Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Company Law Board, Securities Appellate Tribunal and various other tribunals and quasi judicial authorities.

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • His current role as Partner
    • The evolution of the legal industry from then to now
    • His experience in litigation and ADR

     

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I always perceived myself as a social creature first, lawyer next. I believed, and still believe in dealing directly with the person, rather than the facts and figures – it just makes more sense to me.

    Though my days in law college is a chapter best left unexplored, I do still fondly think back to those stray occasions where I attended classes and enjoyed subjects like contracts and constitutional law. It was a different world for our profession when I was still in law college – a world without seven figure salaries for fresher (articled clerks used to vie for stipends of ninety rupees), or competition among firms for poaching talent. While we didn’t wend our way through law college worrying about internships and letters of recommendation, we had our own worries. For one, it was difficult enough finding a job back then, much less a “paying” job! 

    Even without the scores of technological advances in communication, we made our connections with batch mates and stayed in touch with them during and after law college and those contacts helped.

    Presently, I am a partner at Rajani Associates, Mumbai based law firm and head its dispute resolution practice. 

     

    What  propelled you to pursue law as a career?

    In my days as a law student, law as a major was almost taboo – a major reserved for the trouble-makers, chronic flunkers and the aimless. It took a considerable bit of haranguing and begging back home to even get in. But law was something I knew I wanted to do, simply because I did not want to be a run-of-the-mill engineer or doctor or a chartered accountant that everyone else was looking to be. I guess it was more a choice from negation than an active preference, in that sense.

     

    What was the legal profession like back in the day?

    Like I said before, it was a very different profession back when I was in law college. National law schools were yet to make a mark and create the hiring heaven for law graduates that it has now. I had my heart set on becoming a Solicitor, and had even signed my articles with erstwhile Gagrat & Co., under the tutelage of Mr. P. A. Jani and started working towards it. A series of unexpected personal setbacks, however, compelled me to discontinue it. I do not regret the decision, however – it was an experience that enriched me while it lasted.

    Law practice in Bombay (as it then was), was steeped in traditions dating back to the nineteenth century – you slog in underpaid anonymity to become a Solicitor and earn the respect of your peers, or you slog it in unpaid anonymity as a Counsel till you find a sure footing in the Courts.

     

    What type of skills should a law student strive to develop while in a law school?

    Learn as much law as you can. But bear in mind that for every hour you put in law college, you will still need to put in an additional hundred once you get into the profession, simply into learning. I think reading is the most important skill for a law student which one should strive to develop while in law college. It makes the understanding of law easy and helps one in drafting too, both of which are immensely important for a lawyer. 

    Do not listen to those hundreds of people saying litigation is the way to go for bright students; it isn’t necessarily so. Litigation is something that requires hard work, commitment, and a willingness to emulate the Counsels – slogging away in unpaid anonymity. A lawyer who wishes to litigate would need to develop a lot of resilience – against irate clients, obdurate opponents, and (more often than not) a well intentioned judge who just won’t get your point. It is a long term commitment – one that cannot be taken idly and one that cannot be given up so easily.

     

    What were the difficulties you faced in the early days of your practice?

    Finances, of course, are the biggest difficulty that any budding lawyer would face in the early days and my case was no different. Articled clerkship was especially notorious for the stipends (or lack thereof) that came with it. My experience, even otherwise, was not very different from what you would normally hear from any lawyer growing up in the nineties – finding work, finding a good senior to guide you, making a mark with (and at) the bar, and trying to keep your head afloat through all this.

    I come from an era where internet was a luxury and mobile phones were only for the opulent. Research meant book/commentary unlike today where one has plethora of options on the internet and the information is just a click away.

    Building and maintaining a client both require hard work and utmost care towards them. Beside work of precision, maintaining harmony between good work and good relation is quite vital. Thus, I think, its good work alongwith being updated on various laws and not number of years is which bring in good clientele. Besides, good recommendation also adds to one’s list of client.

     

    Could you tell us about the atmosphere in each of the places you have worked at?

    (Erstwhile) Gagrat & Co.–As one knows,to get a breakthrough in Gagrat was extremely difficult. For me, beginning my journey with such a reputed law firm was indeed special. Gagrat was an old school firm which gave me a very strong foundation with the help of supportive colleagues and superiors.

    Due to the old school style working of Gagrat, the court clerks also played a vital role in each matter. I still remember taking guidance from court clerks on the technical aspects for which they guided me swiftly.

    Hariani& Co.: Even though Hariani, was then, a mid-size law firm, it gave me tremendous exposure in variety of litigation. Besides free hand in various assignments, working under strict timelines was essential at Hariani. This gave me immense confidence in my field.

    Dua Associates.: It was during Dua that I started concentrating more on dispute resolution and arbitration. It was a leap towards next level in my career.  

    Khaitan & Co.: I worked in Khaitan & Co for more than six years. Thus, one can imagine how pleasing it was to be associated with Khaitan & Co for such a long time. I grew along with Khaitan, which gave me the key to handling various top notch clients.

    Rajani Associates: My present work place, Rajani Associates has a very homely environment with every one closely bonded to each other. I think this makes Rajani Associates a comfortable place to work, which, I must add, has a positive effect on the work. I have dedicated team members and each one of them are hard working.

    Different law firms have different style of working and so does the environment vary.  Work environment plays a very vital role for ones success at any work place. I think one should analysis how compatible one would be with the environment he/she is about to enter. Nonetheless, monetary consideration and nature of work one wishes to pursue also requires to be kept in mind.

    Please tell us a bit about your work profile Rajani Associates?

    As I said, I head the dispute resolution practice of Rajani Associates and you can find me in courts/tribunal or in arbitration, more than in office. My profile also includes lot of advisory work where corporates are apprehending or proposing litigation. Beside, we even do a lot of opinion oriented work.

     

    How was your work at Khaitan and Co.?

    I joined Khaitan & Co as a senior associate of their dispute resolution practice and was soon promoted to rank of a principal associate. I was involved in various types of litigation at Khaitan& Co be it property, commercial, admiralty or company court matters.

    Since Khaitan was involved in variety of corporate transactions, it also had challenging company related matter. I was involved in quite a number of company scheme matters which were complex and time bound.

    How has your transition from litigation to alternate dispute resolution been?

    It could hardly be said to be a transition – it is but the same institution in just a different container. Litigation and ADR (alternate dispute resolution) have always been interpolated and connected with each other.

    Of course, in the past ten years there has been a shift from court to ADR, corporates or for the matter, even individuals, off lately, are getting inclined towards arbitration as a method for dispute resolution. One can see, each agreement containing an arbitration agreement which speaks volume of the transition. Though we doubtless enter ADR with a markedly different mindset – with a focus on brevity in proceedings – it can hardly be said that the shift was so considerable as to consider it a transition. It was more a matter of re-alignment – of thought, strategy, focus, and endgame.

    ADR is making its mark – especially with the Government making a big push for it now, with the amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. But let us be clear on this: any litigator who is worth his salt in court should handle the shift comfortably enough.

     

    Is mediation a better option than litigation in India?

    Mediation is definitely an option to explore before initiating any litigation. It cannot, however, be regarded as an alternative to litigation per se – certainly not in every case. The idea behind mediation is to attempt to find a middle ground between the parties, and save everyone the resource outlay needed for a long drawn litigation. One rarely finds this in commercial litigation – where strategies are often fine tuned for multiple eventualities arising during an ad-interim hearing. 

    I must, however, add that the institutionalisation of mediation is definitely a step in the right direction – in terms of the statute. All that is left is for us to wait for the institution itself to catch up in terms of infrastructure, penetration and training the mediators. Even though, parties in India engage themselves in mediation process, thanks to the contract or the court intervention, personally speaking, it seldom ends on a positive note. I also believe for a mediation to become successful, parties have to be open-minded and should not remain adamant on their demand. Only then can the entire process of mediation succeed.  

     

    What are your comments on the current state of Arbitration Law in India? 

    I think with the amendments in the arbitration law, particularly the 2015 amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it has come at par with the international arbitration laws. I have seen the shift from the 1940 act to the 1996 act and it is a whole new era for the Indian arbitration. Court interference, in an arbitration, has become less, while earlier courts used to, or if in can say, was required to intervene considering the structure of the prevailing extant laws.

    However, I think there is still scope for further smoothing the process of arbitration. Few of the examples which still require better clarity are as follows:-

    • Whether the 2015 amendment applies to all the on-going proceeding (arbitral proceeding or proceeding related to arbitration) or only to arbitration proceeding initiated after October 23, 2015? This controversy is pending before the Apex Court and presently different High Courts have had divergent views.
    • Execution of foreign awards are still halted for technical reasons.
    • The schedule of fees prescribed for the arbitrator in the 2015 amendment is strictly not followed.

     

    What advice would you have for law students who wish to take up Arbitration as a career option?

    Arbitration and conventional litigation go hand in hand, so don’t assume you’re going to evade one by choosing the other. Attend as many internships while in law school/college – the experience matters a lot for yourself (and not necessarily to your recruiter, I’m sorry!). Read judgements – as many of them as you can. Master the art of reading judgements, because you’ll need to do it a lot, and fast, especially in your foundational years. If at all possible, learn patience, for you’ll need a lot.

     

    What are you recommendations for making alternate dispute resolution more popular and common in India?

    More institutionalised arbitrations, better infrastructures for the institutions, and a greater impetus from the Government is definitely the way to go. I think arbitration is already quite popular in India with certain caveats.

    One cannot ignore the role to be played by lawyers in advising their clients to opt for ADRs, but I believe it would certainly follow once a certain assurance can be had that costs, time schedules and issues won’t escalate. The 2015 Amendments are definitely a step in the right direction for that, but one now needs to see how the implementation occurs. As ironic as it may sound, the Courts will be key in safeguarding ADR laws!

    I also think mediation particularly needs a shot in the arm to become as popular as arbitration. I believe mediation process has great potential. However, as said earlier, the perception about mediation of individuals/corporates need to change in order for mediation to become a success.

     

    Certain international commentators have seen and argued that the host state should keep an eye on functioning of the judiciary. What are your views?

    Courts in India have held that the executive, the legislature and the judiciary are required to function independently without each other overstepping their limits. In fact, Judiciary even has the power to declare laws made by legislature as unconstitutional or ultra vires if they are in conflict with the fundamental rights of a citizen. I believe it is very important that Judiciary is left independent and the function whereof should not be interfered by the state.

     

    Is there any skill or secret you picked up over the years that you believe is critical to a lawyers success?

    Patience. I see youngsters itching for a promotion barely two years into a team – sometimes actively campaigning for it. It was unthinkable of, in my early days, to even ask our boss whether we’ll be paid for working in his chamber. A lawyer’s retainer is something that he commands, not demands and that will take its time arriving, one needs to be patient for that.

     

    What would be your parting message to all the law students?

    Don’t miss the wood for the trees in this profession; it is all about the people. Facts, figures, precedents, legal acumen, an eidetic memory – these will get you far, don’t get me wrong but, connect with the persons you meet along the way. Listen, empathise, be eager to learn, develop contacts and make your impression. That’ll take you much further than just the skills.

  • Thayananthan Baskaran, Partner, Zul Rafique & Partners, on ADR, and practice in Malaysia

    Thayananthan Baskaran, Partner, Zul Rafique & Partners, on ADR, and practice in Malaysia

    Thayananthan Baskaran graduated in law from King’s College, London, in 1998. Presently, is a Partner with Baskaran, Kuala Lumpur, and an associate member of Crown Office Chambers, London.

    Thaya’s primary area of practice is construction law. He drafts various building and engineering contracts, advises on disputes arising from such contracts and appears as Counsel to resolve these disputes.

    Thaya is a co-author of The Belt and Road Initiative: Legal Risks and Opportunities Facing Chinese Engineering Contractors Operating Overseas published by Kluwer Law International in 2019. Thaya is an editor of Construction Law International, the magazine of the International Bar Association’s International Construction Projects Committee. Thaya was also the President of the Society of Construction Law Malaysia (2016-2017).

    In this interview we speak to him about:

    • Practice in Malaysia
    • His experience in arbitration
    • His expertise in construction law

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I am an advocate and solicitor based in Kuala Lumpur with chambers in London.  My primary area of practice is construction law. I draft various building and engineering contracts, advise on disputes arising from such contracts and appear as Counsel to resolve these disputes.  I also sit as an adjudicator, arbitrator and mediator.

     

    Share with us some of your experiences as a student of law at King’s College, London.

    I read law at King’s College, London, almost twenty years ago.  I enjoyed studying criminal law and jurisprudence in College and particularly recall writing an essay on how rape should be regarded as a form of heinous assault or bodily injury.  I would like to have studied human rights law but was wary as there was no textbook on the subject at the time.  Apart from the College, I very much enjoyed my time in London.  London remains one of the great cities of the world, and I spent a lot of time at the bookshops, galleries and theatre.

     

    What advice would you give students about avoiding a decision paralysis?

    My advice would be to start practice after completing the bachelors degree and being called to the Bar.  Once you have started practice and decided on the area you would like to specialise in you can consider doing your masters in that area.  Practice is quite different from theory, so it is perhaps best to practise first before deciding to specialise in an area.

     

    Have you always been keen on a career in contract and ADR?

    When I started practice in 2000, the metro rail was being completed in Kuala Lumpur.  I was involved in advising on disputes arising from this project.  Like most construction lawyers, one project leads to another, and before you know it you have specialised in the area without actually having consciously decided to do so.

    The standard form construction contracts used in Malaysia and internationally provide for the resolution of disputes by arbitration.  So, from advising on these disputes, it was a natural progression to appearing as Counsel in arbitration.

    Later, I was appointed as an adjudicator, arbitrator or mediator to determine these types of disputes, as well as more general commercial disputes.

     

    What was your path to being empanelled on several prestigious arbitration centres like? 

    As mentioned above, my area of practice to some extent naturally led to my sitting as an adjudicator, arbitrator or mediator.  There are certain key persons who have encouraged me to pursue this.  Firstly, I must mention Datuk Professor Sundra Rajoo, the Director of the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration, who encouraged me to sit for the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators examinations and be empanelled with the KLRCA.  Once I had become a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, been empanelled with the KLRCA and sat as an arbitrator in Kuala Lumpur I was able to apply for and be accepted at various international arbitration centres.  I must also mention Dr Cyril Chern, a barrister at my chambers, Crown Office Chambers, and the author of Chern on Dispute Boards, who encouraged me to pursue contractual adjudication and was instrumental in having me elected a Fellow of the Dispute Board Federation Geneva, which led to my being on their Expert Panel.  

    It has always surprised me to some extent, from my experience as an arbitrator, that people, disputes and the basic principles of law are the same around the world.  Despite the apparent divide between the civil and common law traditions, I believe there is more in common in principle than there are differences.

     

    Could you please share with us some of the key nuances of good drafting and how rookie mistakes can be avoided?

    The key to drafting construction contracts is to firstly thoroughly understand the model that the client intends to use.  There are many models in the construction industry, such as conventional contracts, design and build contracts, design build operate contracts, and so on.  There are also the newer and more innovative models such as partnering and alliance type contracts.  Secondly, once the model has been understood, it is perhaps always best in the construction industry to start with a standard form contract that suits the selected model and the division of risks between the parties.  The standard form may then be amended to reflect the particular needs of the client.  These amendments should be of a minimally invasive nature so as to prevent affecting the structure of the standard form.

     

    What are the key attributes that one must develop in order to excel in the field of arbitration and mediation? 

    I would highly recommend doing the Diploma in International Commercial Arbitration offered by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.  This provides a solid theoretical basis for future practice.  In terms of practice, one should set aside sufficient time before the hearing to read the papers thoroughly, to enable clarification of matters during the hearing.  Most arbitrations are decided on the facts, which are, in turn, largely reflected in the documents.

    As to mediation, again it is best to start with some formal training.  I was trained at the Singapore Mediation Centre, which offers an excellent course in Asia.  Loong Seng Onn, the Executive Director of SMC, plays a leading role in the training, which provides an understanding of the skills required of a mediator.  These skills are quite different from those of an arbitrator.  Here, the key really is to keep an open mind and determine the common interests of the parties that will facilitate a settlement.  Once these interests are identified, from my experience, even if a settlement is not reached at the mediation it is likely to be achieved soon after.

     

    Having worked in Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and London, what are the cultural differences that you find in the legal environments of these countries? 

    There is more in common between us than there are differences.  English and the common law system are used in all these jurisdictions, which helps.  Having said that, there is always much to learn from other jurisdiction.  The skilful cross examination of barristers in England is a pleasure to attend and may be adapted in Kuala Lumpur.  The efficiency of solicitors in Singapore is well known and can serve us as a benchmark for practice.

     

    As a Partner at Zul Rafique & Partners, what does a typical work day look like for you?

    I’m afraid I don’t really have a typical work day, as my work is so varied.  It depends whether I’m in court or at an adjudication, arbitration or mediation or whether I’m in Kuala Lumpur or overseas.  Much of the pleasure of my practice is the varied nature of the work and the travel it involves.

     

    In your opinion, has Alternate Dispute Resolution fulfilled the role of administering speedy justice while ameliorating the heavy backlog of cases in the courts?

    Again, I’m sorry, or rather, I’m delighted to say that there are no backlogs in the courts in Malaysia after the reforms initiated by The Right Honourable Chief Justice of Malaysia Tun Zaki Tun Azmi.  Cases in the High Court are disposed of within six to nine months and appeals are disposed of within three months.  The challenge now is to justify arbitration to clients.  In international contracts, arbitration is more easily justified as the award may be enforced almost globally under the 1958 New York Convention.  In purely domestic contracts, arbitration is now justified more in terms of the expertise of the arbitrator, the confidentiality of the proceedings and the relative informality of arbitration, as compared to the courts.  However, domestic arbitration will have to keep up with the speed of the courts.  Parties will have to explore more innovative forms of arbitration such as, documents only arbitrations and chess clock hearings to reduce time and cost.  These innovations are becoming more common in practice.

    Apart from arbitration, statutory construction adjudication in Malaysia does have an advantage in terms of time and cost over court proceedings.  Generally, these adjudications only take three months and are determined solely on documents.  They have proved very popular.  However, the adjudication decisions are only temporarily binding.

     

    Could you tell us a little about your upcoming book? 

    My book is essentially a commentary on the Malaysian Arbitration Act 2005, which is based on the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.  The commentary includes judgments by the courts of Malaysia on the Act as well as reports and analysis by the UNCITRAL.  Writing the book, while being in active practice, has involved managing my time I try to write every night after work.  I have a substantial library in my house, which I am able to refer to and work from.  Writing the book has been one of the greatest pleasures of my practice and I look forward to its publication later this year.

     

    What books, judgements that you have read, have played an integral role in shaping your legal philosophy as a lawyer?

    In terms of arbitration, I have very much enjoyed reading the works of Professor Emmanuel Gaillard, in particular the Legal Theory of International Arbitration.  Professor Gaillard’s ability to transform what is essentially a very dry subject into compelling reading is really incomparable.  

    In terms of judgments, the ground breaking and yet simple and lucid judgment of Lord Atkin in Donoghue v. Stevenson never fails to amaze me.  It should be read and reread in terms of how to be quietly revolutionary.

     

    How do you manage to maintain a work-life balance as a busy legal professional?

    I don’t attempt to maintain a balance, as I do not see a distinction.  I enjoy my work very much and do not, in that sense, see it as work.  The words of the Bhagavad Gita on duty come to mind in this regard:

    It is better to do thine own duty, however lacking in merit, than to do that of another, even though efficiently.  It is better to die doing one’s own duty, for to do the duty of another is fraught with danger.

     

    How do you keep yourself abreast with all the daily news, happenings and legal developments in the world?

    I read journals.  Recently, I have discovered that the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has some important judgments read out and recorded.  These recordings are available on their website and have become my favourite ‘movies’.

     

    What advice would you like to give our readers, who are mostly law students and young lawyers?

    Enjoy your work, it will be much of your life.

     

     

    LAST UPDATE MADE ON 28.07.2021 BY ISAM KABIR  AND THE SUPER LAWYER TEAM

     

  • Iqbal Khan, Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, on his time in LSE, his diverse experience, and plans for the future

    Iqbal Khan, Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, on his time in LSE, his diverse experience, and plans for the future

    Iqbal Khan graduated in law From London School of Economics and Political Science in 2006. Prior to that he had attended DePaul University, where he pursued his Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science. Following his graduation in law, he went on to pursue his JD from Columbia School of Law as a GradeHarlan Fiske Stone Scholar. He is currently Partner at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, where he is member of the Private Equity and Mergers & Acquisitions Practice Group. He advises some of the largest sovereign wealth funds, global private equity funds and strategic corporates, and specializes in private equity investments, mergers and acquisitions (both domestic and cross-border), joint ventures, advisory on foreign investment laws and corporate and commercial laws. His experience also includes advising on franchising and restructuring laws.

    In this interview we talk to him about:

    • Transitioning from science to law
    • Working for international and Indian firms
    • Striking a work-life balance

    How would you like to introduce yourself to our readers?

    I can best describe myself as an M&A / PE deal junkie with a passion for cricket, food and Bollywood films. I am currently an equity partner at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas. My work primarily focuses on M&A and PE investments.

     

    What motivated you to switch from science to law?

    (Iqbal transitioned to law after completing his B.Sc. in Computer Science from DePaul University.)

    At DePaul, which then had one of the best computer sciences programmes in the U.S., I completed my four year degree in less than three years and then started consulting for Cambridge Technology Partners and Microsoft, respectively. While on a flight to a client’s office, I found a book, Barbarians at the Gate – The Fall of RJR Nabisco in my seat cover. This book changed my life. Barbarians at the Gate details the story of the leveraged buy-out of RJR Nabisco (a must read for every aspiring M&A / PE lawyer).  This book was a turning point in my career and inspired me to change direction, and pursue a career in law with a focus on mergers and acquisitions and private equity investments.

    In fact for all their many differences, law and computer science are surprisingly similar disciplines. They both train you to make decisions and to articulate a framework for managing exceptions. My background in computer sciences had given me solid analytical skills and these were indispensable in my study of the law. Hence, my biggest challenge, as we lawyers like to say, was not substantive, but procedural.

    Pursuing a law degree also meant placing on hold other opportunities for career development.  So I declined several promising roles with start-ups and consulting firms; and in retrospect I am happy with the decisions I made. Law school also meant a significant financial commitment and at the time this was challenging though I was fortunate to have a great deal of moral support in pursuing the degree in spite of the fact that it seemed more attractive to continue working at the time.

     

    Tell us a bit about your time studying law at LSE. 

    The LSE, in my opinion, is one of the best educational institutions in the world.  If we ever have kids and if they ever decide to study abroad, I would recommend that they go to the LSE.  Its teaching philosophy is modelled after its moto — rerum cognoscere causas, a line taken from Virgil’s Georgics meaning “to know the causes of things.”  I have fostered relationships at the LSE, both with academics and students, each of which I value deeply, and hopefully, when I am even more established and successful, I would like to give back to the LSE – both financially and with my time.

    In terms of activities, while I was a student at the LSE, I was on a very tight budget because I was self-funding my education then. So I enjoyed London – a colloquial for I walked everywhere and ate what I could afford.  And this helped me, at in my view, become a more humble man.  And therefore, I believe the LSE gave me a great education in law, and life at the LSE, gave me a great education in life!

     

    What are the parameters that must be considered in deciding what the next step should be after graduation?

    I place a great deal of value on work experience at a law firm and I would consider this to be the best step to pursue after graduation.  Joining a law firm helps young graduates develop and refine their own logical framework of addressing legal issues and this is critical in the practice of law.

    As a young associate, students also have the opportunity to work with multiple Partners and across a range of complex transactions. This builds important skill sets, including the ability to manage clients, your immediate boss and to prioritize competing deadlines.  As a young associate you’ll learn a great deal from each transaction, and each experience is an important building block in informing your strategy for your next deal. Law firms also tend to be less bureaucratic for young associates. If you’re willing to work hard, you can navigate your way across different types of transactions so you make the most of your experience.

     

    Do you try to consciously build a specific body of work?

    Over the past few years the role of senior lawyers has changed.  We are no longer called on only to execute an agreed upon term sheet.  Instead we are seen as critical collaborators for our clients when the deal is in its most nascent stage.  Clients frequently bring me in to advise on the strategy for the transaction and not just its execution.

    For me, my transactions give me an opportunity to extend the firm’s relationship with the client; new or vintage. This is a business where reputation matters, and it is always a moment of pride for us at SAM when our existing clients bring in new clients to the firm.  It’s a testament of how much they value the advice, expertise and trustworthy relationship that we bring to the table. I have a clinical approach to choosing transactions. I tend to work on deals where I can best leverage my expertise in advising on strategy for complex transactions. I also enjoy working on deals, which allow me to draw on my international experience to find new and creative ways to structure a transaction. This has been my approach to building my practice.

     

    Tell us about your early professional experiences at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and Kirkland & Ellis LLP?

    My wife used to call Paul, Weiss my first love, because I spent more time at work, then at home with her.  Both Paul, Weiss and Kirkland are exceptional legal institutions, and instilled in me the work ethic and the commitment to clients; both of which are essential to a successful legal career.  Beyond the deals (and both firms have been at the helm of major transactions) and the 2 am sushi dinners at work, both firms introduced me to a formidable set of mentors and collaborators, and I am privileged to count them among my most trusted friends and colleagues.

    The sheer breadth of experience and diversity of transactions at both firms was a key strength for me in my early years as a lawyer.  While at Paul, Weiss, I was part of the team that represented Apollo in what has been designated as one of the key material adverse change cases – Huntsman v. Hexion.  At Kirkland, I what part of the team that did the largest leverage buy-out transaction in India – Apax’s PIPE in iGate for acquisition of Patni.

    All in all, I have been very fortunate for these opportunities, and my own practice in India is modelled after the ethical values I learned at these institutions – that of respect and of immaculate client service.

     

    How did you come to work with Khaitan & Co.? 

    I moved to India in 2013 on account of family reasons.  When I left Kirkland in New York, I had just worked on the Apax-iGate-Patni transaction with Khaitan, as the Indian counsel on the transaction.  Therefore, even though I had offers from some of the top Indian law firms then, I decided to move with Khaitan because of my comfort level with the team there.

    At Khaitan, I fostered some very good relationships, but the ones which I value the most are with RBJ, Sid, Bijal, Bhatta, Moin, Niren, Jean, Chemburkar and Vaishali (now at Agram, and my rakhi sister) – all very good lawyers (except for Jean and Chemburkar – they are exceptional BD professionals) in addition to being wonderful friends. Also, a special shout out to Shankar – the cafeteria manager – for amazing unda pav and missal pav!

     

    How did you make the transition from working at international law firms to an Indian one? 

    There is great deal of a difference between international law firms and Indian ones, and then among Indian law firms.  I can probably write a book on this topic, so let me talk about one or two key difference.  International law firms, at least the ones I have worked for, are very particular about the kind of transactions / cases they choose from and they do not shy away from declining a matter for any number of reasons, including when it comes to fees.  In addition, lawyers at international firms – from a first level associate to the senior most of partners – are always accessible 24×7 to their clients.  Also, I remember my Paul, Weiss induction course till this date where every member of the incoming class was taught by the senior leadership to never compromise on your ethical value systems and to never disrespect your colleagues – ever!  Finally, another element that I miss the most are the support services at some of these firms.  For e.g., from subsidized gourmet cafeterias and gym memberships to 24×7 word processing services.

    SAM is modeled after a top-tier international firm (minus the gourmet cafeteria and free gym memberships).  For e.g., even when I travel, I am always reachable thanks to SAM’s technology and infrastructure team.  Further, neither do we encourage nor do we tolerate disrespectful behaviour at the firm.  Finally, Shardul sir, Pallavi ma’am and Akshay have been very clear regarding maintaining the integrity of the firm and regarding never diluting the value of our letter head.

     

    As Partner at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, what does a typical working day look like for you? 

    Law is a demanding career, and the long hours are a common feature irrespective of seniority. Regardless of how busy my days are I try and keep a balanced schedule, which includes an hour of meditation at 4:30 am and a late night walk on marine drive. Irrespective of my schedule these two components add stability (and sanity) to my days and are an indispensable source of strength and peace of mind.

    I am an early bird, and I like to get into work by 7:30-8:30 AM before the calls and the meetings start, as I do most of my drafting and reviewing work in the morning.

    Between noon and early evenings on most of my day, I am either on calls or in meetings – with my team on various matters or client meetings. My days usually end at 10:30 PM on average though hours are deal sensitive and when we have a signing / closing, there really isn’t a hard stop to my day.  I am not a believer in face time, so unless there is a live deal, my teams don’t work crazy hours and can work from home late at night depending on the pace of each transaction. I have seen a number of associates burn out early in their career, so it’s important for me, and I also encourage my team, to retain a balance and sense of perspective.

     

    What advice would you give to lawyers who aspire to develop a proficiency in Corporate and Commercial Laws?

    Just one – read, read and read, and when you are tired of reading, read some more.  Reading case laws, transaction documents, statutes and scholarly articles will help you grow your repertoire, and then will come a time, when this will become second nature!

     

    Did you have a mentor or guide during the formative years of your career?

    Mentors have a formative role across careers, and law is no exception. I have been fortunate to have benefited from the guidance of a formidable set of mentors, including professors at the LSE and at Columbia, senior partners at Paul, Weiss and Kirkland and of course Shardul sir and Pallavi ma’am at SAM.  My own view is that while there is a lot of attention devoted to finding mentors, there is much less attention focused on making yourself mentor-worthy.  Mentors are great sources of collaboration and advice, but engaging and retaining a mentor is hard work and requires discipline, focus and a commitment to excellence in your field.  If you bring this to the table, you will find mentors happy to encourage, advise and even collaborate with you.

    At the LSE, Professor Martin Loughlin played a very important role in my development as a law student.  Followed by Igor Kirkman and Tervor Norwiz (both partners at Watchell) at Columbia who taught me how to dissect an M&A agreement at lightning speed and how to negotiate – a key skill set for every M&A lawyer.

    I am also very grateful for the mentorship and friendship of Ariel Deckelbaum at Paul Weiss.  The same credit extends to Sri Kaushik at Kirkland.  In addition, a special shout out to Bob Schumer, Tarun Stewart and Justin Hamill at Paul, Weiss for teaching me, by example, the qualities of an exceptional lawyer, and to Leo Greenberg for the same at Kirkland.

    I honestly believe that as lawyers we continue to learn from our mentors, and even today at Shardul Amarchand, I am floored by the humility and the legal acumen of Shardul sir and Pallavi ma’am. I consider them both as my mentors as well.

     

    What are the key attributes that one must develop in order to excel in this industry?

    There are two types of attributes: those based on aptitude and another set, based on attitude. So all lawyers need to check off the boxes in terms of knowledge of the law and adherence to the cardinal principle of attorney-client privilege. But these are simply the attributes of a good lawyer.

    Good lawyers are defined by knowledge. Great lawyers are measured by the trust their clients have in them; and trust is a function of excellence and personal integrity. These two attributes define success in law (as they do in most other fields as well).

    As a lawyer, it is also critical to appreciate your client’s requirements while addressing complex and challenging issues and to build your relationship with each client. At the end of the day clients need to know that their case has your individual and personal attention. In terms of my own practice, I have built it on both depth and breadth, i.e., working on new matters with existing clients as well as taking on new matters from new clients. Both in my view are critical to building out a Michelin 3-star type practice.

     

    How do you manage your time between your professional and personal interests? 

    I am a very religious man – if you, like me, designate cricket as a religion.  Besides watching cricket (and doing the Govinda dance every time Virat slams the ball across the boundary) and tennis (go Federer!), I enjoy watching Bollywood movies.  I have deep affinity for everything Indian – from the Indian Cricket team to my favourite cuisine – Indian; and much of this is based on the fact that I have spent a better part of my life outside India. So the connect to all things Indian has been strong.

    I also have an interest in cars (vintage rules), art (both Renaissance and modern) and architecture. Volunteering is a passion and both my wife and I are actively involved in voluntary capacity with the institutions and agencies of the Aga Khan Development Network.

     

    Where would you like your career to take you five years down the line?

    At the end of the day, career trajectories are all about excellence. The notion that you’ve “arrived” or “made it” is misleading because when you reach what used to be your milestone, another one appears over the horizon. I would say simply this that I wish to build my career in pursuit of excellence and that means continuing to have one of the best M&A / PE practices in the country and ensuring that SAM continues to be one of the most well respected firms in the field.

    Given the dynamic nature of the field you practice in, how do you keep yourself updated about the latest developments in the law?

    Law and perhaps medicine are two fields where continuing education is critical to survival. Because law doesn’t function in a vacuum (and depends on political, social and economic context, among other factors), advising clients on structure and interpretation can be complex in a rapidly changing environment. SAM is fortunate to benefit from an amazing CLE team that provides daily deal and regulatory updates.

    Within my team we are also required to write articles (which therefore means we need to stay updated) and discuss key issues each week.

    For e.g., we’ve discussed everything from arbitration provisions (and the issues involved from a private equity investor point of view) to various transaction structures and their implications.  To attend and to be part of the CLE curriculum – at a firm level and at a team level – is an absolute requirement for all my team members.

     

    What advice would you like to give our readers, who are mostly law students and young lawyers?

    My advice would be to twofold: the first that students invest in quality education and target only the best possible schools for their law degree.  

    The second that they invest in continuing education as well. Law is a complex and rapidly evolving field and frequent changes both in substance and interpretation require that students invest in continuing education throughout the course of their career.

    Overall, neither of these are possible unless you love the field of law. Good lawyers are defined by knowledge but great lawyers have a passion for the law. Pursuits based on passion bring success!

  • Siboney Sagar, Founder, Resolve, on studying in NLSIU, qualifying the NY Bar, and her diverse experience

    Siboney Sagar, Founder, Resolve, on studying in NLSIU, qualifying the NY Bar, and her diverse experience

    Siboney Sagar graduated from NLSIU, Bangalore, in 1998. She then went on to pursue her Master’s degree from Columbia Law School, with a focus on Corporate Law, International Law and International Affairs. She has worked in the Chambers of (then) Attorney General of India, Advocate Soli J. Sorabjee. Since then she has worked with AMSS as Associate, GE Consumer and Industrial as General Counsel and later as Vice President-Legal and Compliance. In 2015, she founded her own firm, Resolve, a dispute resolution forum, where she’s Managing Partner.

    In this interview we speak to her about:

    • Working under Advocate Soli J. Sorabjee
    • Her illustrious career and diverse experience
    • Founding and managing Resolve

    How much of your success would you owe to your alma mater, NLSIU?

    The education curriculum and delivery at NLSIU has been geared for understanding and experiencing the rigors and breadth of lawyering. I benefited from the tight schedules and deliverables but most of all from the fraternity and the size and comfort of the community.

     

    Did you moot, or engage in any extra curricular activities? 

    I engaged in the legal services clinic, on the editorial team for publication and was very active in the Sports and Cultural Committees. Extra-curricular of both, related to law and otherwise, are most relevant. The legally oriented activities open a window to the world ahead and the non-legal activities allow us to engage and collaborate with persons other than our immediate peers.

     

    Tell us about pursuing your Masters from New York’s Columbia University. 

    Columbia has been a very defining experience. I used the opportunity to engage in many different courses and also expanded my view of the legal profession.

     

    Can you give us some clarity on the application process?

    I applied to the universities that had separate LLM classes along with options to study with complementary schools and courses. The university looks at grades, statements and experiences that realistically define your personality to fit with their goals and aspirations for their graduates.

     

    How did you prepare for the New York State Bar?

    The New York (NY) Bar is a rigorous exam and there are professional companies for preparation of the same. I attended BAR BRI and had a wonderful group of frats for study work. The NY Bar is one of the most challenging exams for the sheer size of the material.

     

    What did your role at Soli Sorabjee’s entail?

    When I joined the chambers of Soli J. Sorabjee, he was the Attorney General for India and the work was very diverse. While working with the counsel representing important matters for the Union of India, the teaching in Soli J. Sorabjee Chambers has helped not only the formative years but until today the great lessons of research, organisation and approach to an issue are invaluable and useful in different ways.

     

    How was your stint at AMSS? 

    I loved my stint at AMSS. I worked with the Infrastructure Corporate Team during my time there. The quality of clients as well as the resources were very relevant to support my venture being a commercial attorney.

     

    Tell us about what makes a good lawyer in a corporate setting.

    (Siboney was the General Counsel at GE Consumer & Industrial (India), and has been duly recognized for your efforts.)

    A good lawyer in a corporate setting is benefited by using their client-counselling skills along with always expanding their commercial and service their understanding.

     

    How would you say work as an in-house counsel was different than that of a law firm?

    An in-house counsel carries the responsibility for the execution of the legal advice further than an attorney advising or assisting from a law firm. In addition, an in-house counsel is required to almost always extend their capacity and creativity to manage commercial expectations while balancing the rigor of compliance.

     

    Can you elucidate further on the in-house options for law students? 

    Today in-house lawyers function like large law firms which gives lawyers many opportunities after graduating. In case you plan on working in-house, it is a good opportunity as it creates and develops subject area expertise along with the position and designation of legal skills.

     

    What motivated you to start ‘Resolve’?

    (Siboney has founded ‘Resolve’ which is an initiative geared towards encouraging and catering to private mediation in India.)

    Resolve is a forum for developing conflict resolution and conflict negotiation capacities as the backdrop to panels of practioners of mediation, conciliation and arbitration. A whole series of serendipitous events have led to the evolution of Resolve. My experience as a General Counsel with the status of execution, implementation and the viability of litigation and the balance with commercial realities have shaped my perspective so much. Further, the personal learning toward productive, creative and viable solutions, with the tendency to look for the most utilitarian and commensurate options, shaped my negotiation style in conflicts. Also, the skills discovered and developed really allowed me to appreciate the varied uses of the legal, analytical and creative process. The result has been the development of Resolve which is in its initial years of finding the appropriate space.

    I truly believe in advancing stages of negotiation, collaboration and mediation which will be most relevant as the world shrinks.

     

    How do you manage a work-life balance?

    If life takes a back-seat then that’s where we will find ourselves. In the back seat!

    I practise yoga and teach when possible, travel to discover myself and others, and try to keep myself in the front seat as far as my breath and brain go!

     

    Being eligible to practice both in India, and in New York, what are the notable differences of being a lawyer in both these jurisidictions?

    I have worked as a commercial lawyer in different jurisdictions. As I have not practiced before the courts in New York, I cannot comment.

    As commercial lawyers, counsel from different cultures bring that nuance to their style and approach, while the commerce dictates the functional attributes of the lawyering at any court.

     

    What are you currently working on?

    Nurturing and providing direction to Resolve has been the mainstay while developing personal practise as mediator, conflict speacialist, coach and counsel.

    I am teaching a course on negotiation and conflict at NLSIU, Bangalore this year. I have also taught at ISB, Hyderabad to train corporate leaders as well as counsel in adavanced negotiation, conflict management and effective dispute resolution.

    It’s an exciting and daunting time to develop some ideas, curriculum and skill enhancement workshops for us at Resolve.

     

    Would you have some words of advice for our readers, who are mostly prospective lawyers themselves?

    Practice! Practice! Practice! Whatever it is you are doing at this time, put your energy to it even it is devastatingly boring. Anything you do with intent gives you a lesson that is useful anytime especially in the diverse practice of law.

    Allow the creative streak to develop as it’s a misnomer that lawyers are only intellectually inclined. You have many avenues to best use lawyering skills (so spare the friends and family from arguments)!